What can we learn from Newark?: Public Policy and Anti-Gentrification Efforts
October 25, 2017
Just last month, the City of Newark, New Jersey voted against a housing law that aimed to curb gentrification in the city. The law sought to “mandate 20 percent of large residential projects to be set aside for low and moderate income residents.”  The law did not pass, but it was an attempt nonetheless by the city’s legislators to try and find a balance between, “development and affordability.” 
By Mona Hagmagid
SAS Class of 2020
Wharton PPI Intern 2017
Institute for Social Policy and Understanding
Although Newark is only one city and the proposed law was only one potential solution presented to help address the growing issue of gentrification, it is an excellent example of conversations that are happening all across the country. Such conversations cut across fields such as urban studies and africana studies, public policy and economics, engaging different people, both residents of gentrifying neighborhoods and policy makers and shapers themselves.
Growing up in Northern Virginia, I have watched the city of Washington D.C. change and shift significantly over the past decade. Neighborhoods like Shaw and Howard have seen shifts in the demographics moving in and have been witnessing rising rates of eviction of poorer tenants. Richer people are moving into what used to be seen as poorer neighborhoods, previously struggling with crime and other social difficulties, those of which are now brimming over with expensive cafes and bakeries.  The money of the rich brings better resources to communities, such as libraries, grocery stores stocking fresh produce, and community programming. Neighborhoods become safer, schools produce higher performing students, and more businesses move into old spaces. But at what cost?
From an economics standpoint, the numbers look good for many gentrified neighborhoods. The average household income is higher, and the overall economic health of the neighborhood has improved. In DC alone, the average neighborhood shift in average income level witnessed only a 17% increase, but in special neighborhoods more prone to gentrification, average income increased by 147% and 138% from 1999-2010. However, in many cases there is a very racial, and very real cost to that change: the residents of those neighborhood, generally predominantly African-American and low income, sometimes can no longer afford to live in the neighborhoods where they once resided.  In a sense, gentrification does not make a poor neighborhood rich. Instead, it moves the poorer neighborhood into other poorer neighborhoods and replaces it with a wealthier one. The populations who were poor and underserved at the beginning of the gentrification process tend to still be poor decades later, just moved into another space or neighborhood.
Some might say, that gentrification is simply an effect of capitalism at work, and that the benefits that gentrification brings (lower crime rates and better access to health and educational resources) can positively impact all residents who can afford them, regardless of race or ethnicity. However, in communities across America, urban spaces included race and poverty are closely tied together for a number of historical and political reasons. Additionally, in the case of Washington D.C., the numbers show a clear decrease in the population of African Americans in neighborhoods over the past decade.  However, other studies argue that black low income families are not more likely to move out of their homes in a gentrified neighborhood as compared to a non-gentrified one. But the reality still insists however, that even if that is the case, when low income residents move out of their neighborhoods, they are often not moving to higher income areas but lower ones, further crippled by crime, drug trade, poor schools, and other issues.
Public policy serves many purposes, but a key one is to develop policy that protects and advocates for the betterment of the public. In a sense it can be viewed as an attempted system to protect American citizens and residents from the possible downfalls or harms from political, economic, and social phenomena. Urban residents, particularly poorer, older, black and Hispanic residents, deserve to feel as protected and benefited by policy as the richer and often whiter residents that move into the same neighborhoods.
It is also critical to look at gentrification seriously because of how it furthers cycles of poverty. Policy aimed at preserving income diversity in neighborhoods benefits all residents. Just as stated previously, many of the benefits of gentrification are not just benefits but things that former residents have been wanting, demanding, and working towards for decades in some cases: more jobs, better schools, safer streets, more access to healthy foods, etc. All of those resources can help people rise out of poverty especially access to better education, which helps to make the city a healthier place for families of multiple backgrounds. Diversity is important not just to minorities and disaffected populations, but it can and should be important to the majority of the population as well. In any cases those moving into gentrified neighborhoods are younger, single, white residents who make more money and have few dependents Gentrification not only changes the racial landscape and economic landscape of a neighborhood but also changes the age of the neighborhood, not just in terms of historic buildings (some of which are torn down or renovated) but in terms of the population’s age.  Having communities that are more diverse in age brings stability to a neighborhood’s older residents who are now less likely to move out, switch careers, etc. Families tend to have children who are sent to schools and in turn can offer students a more diverse set of students to go to school with, collaborate with, and communicate with as well. Additionally, community is important in gauging the health of a neighborhood as well: the feeling of creating a home with cultural spirit and story. Neighborhoods and homes are not just commodities but places where people live. They are special, personal, and hold deep emotional, familial, and historical ties. If maintaining that vibrancy is important to people living in those communities, then policy should respond to that need for residents.
But this discussion begs the question, what is there that public policy can do to both bring economic development to underdeveloped neighborhoods and ensuring that those benefits are made accessible to a diverse and wide community of residents?
Newark, New Jersey is a case example of a city that attempted to pass legislation that could better regulate the housing market and opportunities for Newark residents. However, anti-gentrification laws could also focus on addressing the businesses moving into neighborhoods to decrease the cost of living, allowing more residents to afford to stay in their homes. Or, on the other hand, policy could go a different route and instead of regulating the economy, it can work harder to make sure that basic resources that any community needs to flourish, libraries, good schools etc., are being provided to neighborhoods across the board regardless of average income. Community programming and offering opportunities for dialogue and intergenerational conversation allows for neighborhoods to be able to create their own solutions and means to help those who live within them to feel as though their needs are being met.
Some might say that my vision is idealistic, that I have not accounted enough for the hard and fast facts about economic development, poverty, and corporate greed . Of course there will be no complete solution for gentrification as cities shift and change all the time. That is the nature of human settlement and as the economy shifts and changes so do the ways in which, and the places where, people live. However, I do believe public policy can aid in making sure that more than just wealthier, younger, and single urban residents can share the benefits of anti-gentrification policy, and that the costs will not continue to disproportionately affect African American and poorer residents.
Newark’s law might not have passed and it arguably might not have been what was best for the city, but it is clear that the pressure is mounting for lawmakers to begin to investigate real and significant solutions, both short term and long term, to address America’s changing cities, and the people who are being left behind.
Student Blog Disclaimer
The views expressed on the Student Blog are the author’s opinions and don’t necessarily represent the Penn Wharton Public Policy Initiative’s strategies, recommendations, or opinions.
 Yi , Karen. “Newark Law Intended to Curb Gentrification Fails.” NJ.com, NJ.com, 12 July 2017, www.nj.com/essex/index.ssf/2017/07/affordable_housing_law_fails_in_newark_on_annivers.html
 Kate Rabinowitz, “DC Gentrification by the Numbers,” DataLensDC, September 14, 2015, , accessed August 06, 2017, https://www.datalensdc.com/gentrification-by-numbers.html
 Gringlas, Sam. “Old Confronts New In A Gentrifying D.C. Neighborhood.” NPR. January 16, 2017. Accessed August 07, 2017. http://www.npr.org/2017/01/16/505606317/d-c-s-gentrifying-neighborhoods-a-careful-mix-of-newcomers-and-old-timers.
 Billingham, Chase M. “THE BROADENING CONCEPTION OF GENTRIFICATION: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AND AVENUES FOR FUTURE INQUIRY IN THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF URBAN CHANGE.” Michigan Sociological Review, vol. 29, 1 Oct. 2015, pp. 75–102. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/43630965?ref=search-gateway:61a2caead9798afb282819cf09997fbf.
Community success is predicated on the support of education, housing, health, and safety. In other words, to make a community successful, one must look for solutions and programs that create cooperation across a variety of stakeholders. Complex problems originating from multiple sectors can most effectively be solved by using cross-sector collaborations. Ultimately, these cross-sector collaborations and collective impact initiatives can yield better results than isolated impact approaches. The term “Collective Impact” was first coined by John Kania and Mark Kramer in an article published in 2011 in the Stanford Social Innovation Review. Collective impact is defined as “the commitment of a group of important actors from different sectors to a common agenda for solving a specific social problem.” The five conditions for successful collective impact initiatives are: a common agenda, shared measurement systems, mutually reinforcing activities, continuous communication, and backbone support organizations.
Scientists and researchers agree: ocean levels are rising as ice from the polar caps melts. Rising sea levels will affect major cities within the United States in the next half-century, many of which are already struggling with infrastructure problems. Rising tides are expected to put parts of South Florida, New Orleans, and many other metropolitan areas underwater, especially San Francisco. As tides already brush up against roads and freeways in the region, Bay Area infrastructure is prone to flooding, with two major arteries experiencing seasonal flooding: California State Route 37 (SR 37) in the North Bay between Vallejo and Sonoma County, and Interstate 80 in the East Bay north of Berkeley. Furthermore, San Francisco International Airport, surrounding areas in San Mateo County and Treasure Island are at risk.
The United States is on the cusp of a technological revolution. Innovation within our borders is accelerating at a break-neck pace, and companies are about to roll out a myriad of new tech over the next decade. Research and development in artificial intelligence, autonomous vehicles, drones, and fully-automated assembly lines have the potential to boost the productivity of the United States, improve the quality of living for countless Americans, and fundamentally change the way the global economy functions. However, this economic change will also fundamentally restructure our labor markets.
Postsecondary Institution Accreditation: The Tension Between Consumer Protection and Higher Education InnovationAccreditation provides a vital role in allocating federal student aid to postsecondary institutions of higher education (IHEs). As gatekeepers of the Higher Education Act’s (HEA) Title IV funds, accrediting agencies are expected to be “reliable authorities on the quality of education being offered.” For this reason, the United States Department of Education’s (ED) use of accreditation facilitates its decision-making on which IHEs receive funds. However, with more than $14 trillion in outstanding federal student loan debt, the accreditation process has come under scrutiny.
Resilience. It’s the new buzzword going around the U.S. electricity sector, and it’s defined by an electrical grid’s ability to recover from major disturbances (read: cyberattacks and natural disasters). President Trump and Secretary of Energy Rick Perry have accordingly introduced plans to support struggling coal and nuclear plants because of their ability to store backup fuel on-site.
In what was supposed to be one of the largest acquisitions of all time, Broadcom tried to purchase rival tech company, Qualcomm in a $117 billion transaction. The deal would have consolidated the already-small chip making industry and helped Singapore-based Broadcom to challenge Intel more easily. However, this merger fell through when the Trump administration stepped in and blocked the deal. Interestingly, instead of stopping the transaction under the auspices of anti-trust issues, the White House claimed that it posed a grave danger to “national security.”  
2009 Pittsburgh G20 Summit: A Look Back at its Impact on Derivatives Markets and Challenges that RemainIn the wake of the financial crisis, G20 Leaders gathered in Pittsburgh in 2009 with two chief goals: stabilize the global economy and begin the work of preventing future crises. Because attendees knew that improving derivatives regulation was essential to accomplishing those goals, they provided a blueprint for reform at the summit’s close focused on four key aspects of derivatives markets: trading, clearing, reporting, and capital requirements. That blueprint influenced a range of post-crisis laws that made global markets more stable and transparent. But there is still work to do. Regulators now must focus on fine-tuning reforms, particularly by (i) remaining watchful for new, emerging risks, and (ii) preserving systems of cooperation and recognition so that global regulators can work together to safeguard interconnected financial markets.
Through 5,000 community based organizations, the Meals on Wheels America program delivers over 1 million meals every day, reaching over 2 million individuals each year. Through the work of 2 million staff members and volunteers, seniors who are homebound are able to receive meals they may not have had access to previously. While donations are accepted, Meals on Wheels does not require its recipients to pay for meals and therefore requires funding to maintain its services. In addition to meals, staff and volunteers help provide social interaction, conduct safety checks, and “keep(ing) Seniors home, where they want to be.”
The collapse of Rana Plaza, killing more than 1,100 garment workers in Dakha, Bangladesh in April 2013, brought attention to the dire working conditions of the Bangladeshi people. Bangladesh’s textile industry is the 2nd largest in the world, with annual export earnings upwards of $28 billion in 2016 yet in contrast, the workers have the lowest wages of the garment manufacturing countries. An estimated 31% of its population lives below the national poverty line, which is defined as $2 per day. A report by Oxfam showed that “a top fashion industry CEO earned in four days the lifetime pay of a factory worker.” Ultimately, the fashion industry relies on cheap labor, quick turnaround time, and export oriented industrialization and those brands which exploit the working conditions for these reasons in Bangladesh include, but are not limited to: Hugo Boss, GAP, Zara, and H&M. This article will demonstrate how the responsibility to ensure improved working conditions in countries such as Bangladesh is at the intersection between private, public, and consumer based initiatives.
Reading the temperature on a mercury thermometer. Understanding product reviews. Navigating online job search sites. These all seem simple enough, but many U.S. adults struggle to complete daily tasks such as these. Results from the Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC), a multi-country survey of adults conducted by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), showed that large shares of the U.S. population lacked proficiency in a range of core competencies including literacy, numeracy, and problem-solving.