Greening Gentrification: Exploring the Social and Environmental Impacts of Green Space Development on Minority Populations in Boston
by Paige Hemingson
Introduction
Boston is seeing the flight of many of its long-time residents as gentrification and a lack of affordable housing displaces thousands, while students and wealthy new residents displace and gentrify lower-income Bostonians in a fight for housing. Gentrification is a multi-pronged issue with many causes and cycles that worsen the impacts. One significant factor is green gentrification, which refers to the process by which neighborhood environmental improvements or sustainability initiatives lead to an influx of wealthier residents, often worsening or resulting in the displacement of lower-income residents and changes to the neighborhood's character.
Areas with limited greenery, often characterized by dense urban development and industrialization, bear the brunt of heat-related impacts, including heat-related illnesses, energy consumption, and decreased air quality. Conversely, neighborhoods with ample green spaces enjoy cooler temperatures, improved air quality, and enhanced quality of life. This environment presents a dilemma: while new green development has the potential to alleviate the hardships faced by lower-income communities, it also carries the risk of triggering gentrification, which could further disadvantage these populations. This project seeks to investigate the intersection of environmental justice, gentrification, and policy implications in Boston's urban green space development. Through this understanding, a comprehensive review will be developed to understand the tradeoff of environmental and social outcomes linked to gentrification while incorporating GIS analysis and policy recommendations.
The issue of affordable housing in Boston extends beyond mere urban development concerns—it touches on broader public salience and raises clear justice arguments. As gentrification and the lack of affordable housing drive the flight of long-time residents, the displacement becomes emblematic of systemic inequalities perpetuated by urban policies. By thoroughly examining the tradeoffs between environmental and social outcomes associated with gentrification, this project will answer the question: How do the development and promotion of green spaces in Boston contribute to gentrification, and what are the resulting social and environmental outcomes, particularly in terms of access and impact for minority populations? Through GIS analysis and qualitative data collection through conversations, the project aims to advocate for housing justice and equitable urban development practices that prioritize the needs of marginalized communities.
Research Methods/Research Design
To understand how greening can be a cycle that both causes and worsens gentrification, the focus is narrowed from the broader metropolitan area to specifically East Boston as the primary research site, with additional attention being paid to wealthier regions like Beacon Hill and Seaport as a contrasting comparison. Focus on East Boston is motivated by the area's unique socio-economic dynamics and ongoing urban development, providing context for examining the intersection of environmental justice, gentrification, and urban green space initiatives. Additionally, the research contrasts this site to the affluent Beacon Hill and Seaport. This comparative approach allows for a more comprehensive analysis, shedding light on potential disparities in green space development, gentrification patterns, and community engagement strategies across different socio-economic contexts within the city.
The policy component of this research project includes an examination of urban planning policies, zoning regulations, and initiatives related to green space development and gentrification in Boston. The paper identifies strengths and areas for improvement in current regulations through an in-depth policy analysis. Additionally, the paper gathers local perspectives and fosters a collaborative approach to policy formulation that aligns with the needs and aspirations of residents in each targeted area. Through a comprehensive policy analysis, this research seeks to contribute actionable recommendations that promote sustainable and equitable urban development in the studied regions.
Data sources include city planning departments, census data, community surveys, and publicly available reports. Through utilizing GIS, spatial analysis is conducted to identify correlations between green space development and gentrification patterns, accompanied by regression analysis to explore socio-economic factors. Qualitative analysis of community engagement data and policy evaluation contributes to forming a holistic understanding of all aspects of the study. Ethical considerations include obtaining informed consent, privacy protection, and prioritizing the community in all research phases. The multifaceted approach aims to provide evidence-based insights for sustainable and equitable urban planning in Boston.
Literature Review
Recent studies on green gentrification reveal complex relationships between urban greening projects and socio-economic impacts on marginalized communities. Rigolon and Németh (2020) emphasize that large park developments often drive up housing costs and displace low-income residents, suggesting a 'just green enough' approach, with small parks and affordable housing, as a potential mitigation strategy. Similarly, Connolly et al. (2023) examine green gentrification’s broader social and economic effects, highlighting how municipal greening initiatives, initially aimed at environmental justice, can inadvertently drive displacement. Their research underscores the need for policies that prioritize community engagement and equitable urban development.
Other scholars like Anguelovski et al. (2019) and Black and Richards (2020) analyze how iconic green projects, like NYC’s High Line, raise property values and pressure existing communities, underscoring the need to balance economic benefits with housing affordability. Ha et al. (2021) and Cole et al. (2017) further investigate green space's impact on mental health and well-being, advocating for carefully distributing green areas to benefit all residents without driving health inequities through gentrification. Finally, Rigolon and Németh (2018) explore the role of nonprofits and public officials in "green growth" initiatives, highlighting the importance of integrated planning between parks and housing to ensure equitable urban green development.
Results
Through GIS-based mapping, spatial analysis, and conversations with two East Boston Environmental Justice community members, data was collected to inform and address the larger question guiding this project. By mapping median household income, tree canopy cover, improving urban heat, open spaces, and demographics of Boston, the visual data works to gain a holistic understanding of the environmental landscape and the intersections that influence it. Additionally, through dialogues with community members deeply involved in environmental justice activism, invaluable insights were gained into residents' lived experiences, concerns, and aspirations. These conversations enriched the understanding of the local context and provided essential qualitative data to complement the quantitative information obtained through mapping. Ultimately, the combination of mapping exercises and community engagement endeavors formed a robust foundation for the research, enabling a deeper understanding of the complexities of environmental justice issues in East Boston.
In addition to mapping, another key aspect of this project was establishing a dialogue with the communities involved. This culminated in conversations held with a member of the Cooperative Center for Development and Solidarity (CCDS) and a board member of GreenRoots. The first was with CCDS, a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting cooperative and solidarity economies, with a focus on supporting worker-owned cooperatives in the immigrant community of East Boston. Led primarily by Latina immigrants residing in East Boston and neighboring areas, CCDS addresses economic inequality and the challenges posed by rapid gentrification. Decision-making is decentralized, with immigrants comprising the work team and steering committee actively involved in shaping social and economic solutions to address community challenges.
GreenRoots is also a non-profit organization with a focus on achieving environmental justice and enhancing the quality of life in Chelsea and East Boston. Their work is achieved through collective action, education, and youth leadership across diverse neighborhoods and communities. GreenRoots’ vision entails vibrant communities with access to open spaces, parks, and clean waterfronts, aiming to reverse years of environmental degradation. Over the past three decades, GreenRoots has spearheaded initiatives such as restoring urban salt marshes, establishing new parks, enhancing waterfront access, and improving water quality in Chelsea Creek. Their organizing model emphasizes community engagement and empowerment, and they rely on contributions to strengthen their impact in Chelsea and East Boston to foster a sustainable future for these communities.
The interviews highlight key themes of empowering low-income immigrant communities through worker-owned cooperatives and fostering economic freedom amid exploitative conditions. CCDS offers comprehensive support for cooperative establishment, emphasizing economic stability and community resilience. Collaboration with grassroots organizations is integral to CCDS's approach, driven by a mission to counter gentrification through Latinx immigrant ownership of the economy. In discussion with GreenRoots, themes of community advocacy and cooperative action were explored further. GreenRoots emphasizes environmental initiatives but also stresses the importance of land-use partnerships with the city. Despite efforts, gentrification remains a regional challenge, extending beyond housing to land issues. Questions persist about land ownership and development benefits, compounded by NIMBYism at the state level. The interview underscores the need for collaborative regional strategies to address gentrification comprehensively.
Both discussions with CCDS and GreenRoots demonstrated several common themes while also highlighting distinct emphases within each organization's mission and work. Both CCDS and GreenRoots prioritize community empowerment and advocacy, particularly focusing on marginalized immigrant populations in East Boston and surrounding areas. CCDS's emphasis lies in economic empowerment through the development of worker-owned cooperatives, providing comprehensive support to navigate the process and foster economic stability. Conversely, GreenRoots places a stronger emphasis on environmental initiatives, yet still recognizes the interconnectedness of social and economic factors in community development.
Analysis
The analysis of maps and interview data shows that the development and promotion of green spaces can have complex implications for gentrification and its resulting social and environmental outcomes, particularly concerning access and impact for minority populations. Through the maps, the data displays not only a disproportionate distribution of green spaces in Boston, but also the rapidly changing economic state of the city (as displayed below in Figures 1, 2, and 3) with lower-income households being replaced by far wealthier residents. Given Boston's nearly 10 percent population growth in these years—coupled with escalating property values—it is more likely that lower-income households are experiencing displacement rather than substantial increases in wealth. Data collection has revealed that affordable housing is clustered and not evenly distributed amongst the cities, further sequestering wealthy areas and reducing accessibility. These disparities are consistent with broader discussions on environmental justice, indicating that socioeconomic factors significantly influence access not only to natural environments, but also to resources that can enhance economic independence.
Figure 1
Median Household Income 2010 - 2014
Figure 2
Median Household Income 2015 - 2020
To establish a primary understanding of the economic landscape of Boston, two maps were created displaying the median household income change over a decade. Displaying central/downtown Boston, the maps demonstrate how household income has increased dramatically across the area, with the most change occurring in East Boston. This map data is from the American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year data and contains estimates and margins of error. Median income and income source are based on income in the past 12 months of the survey.
Figures 3 and 4 below seek to expand upon Boston’s environmental issues. The entire metropolitan region experiences elevated temperatures due to insufficient greenery and an excess of heat-aggravating concrete and asphalt surfaces throughout the city. However, East Boston has significantly less tree coverage, and with Logan Airport emitting thousands of pounds of pollution daily, the region faces additional environmental challenges that impact air quality and public health. This is when the valuable work of organizations like GreenRoots works to create community-guided solutions to lessen climate and pollution-related harm.
Figure 3
Tree canopy cover progression from 2011 - 2024
In Figure 3, the map demonstrates the change in tree coverage in East Boston over 13 years. Centering primarily on East Boston, the darker green represents denser tree canopy cover. The map displays the percent tree canopy cover of land surfaces. This layer is produced by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (MRLC) for the National Land Cover Database (NLCD).
Figure 4
Tree planting to improve urban heat health
This map uses data developed in collaboration with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and UC Davis to identify areas most in need of interventions like tree planting to mitigate heat-related risks. Higher percentages entail areas that would receive the most benefit from urban tree planting.
Figure 5 below depicts an unexpected trend. East Boston has ample green spaces while Beacon Hill and the Seaport district do not. This may seem unexpected, but when analyzed in tandem with the rest of the data, the conclusion becomes logical. Beacon Hill, an affluent and historic neighborhood, has relatively less green space. Being one of the oldest areas in the city, it has undergone significant development over time, contributing to its reduced greenery compared to other neighborhoods. Additionally, the industrialized Seaport district became developed with more recently revitalized green spaces for the neighborhood that has become the epitome of Boston’s promises to become the equitable, just city it aims to be. Green spaces become a symptom of the larger issue and with new green development, can be a harbinger of gentrification.
Figure 5
Median household income and open spaces
This map uses the same, most recent ACS median household income layer as Figure 2, but overlaid with green spaces in Boston. This visualization better displays the relationship between open spaces and the economic state of those living nearby.
GreenRoots' efforts to enhance environmental quality and access to green spaces in East Boston are intended to have a positive impact on these communities. The presence of newly established parks and improved waterfront access in these areas suggests that targeted interventions can mitigate the effects of unequal green space distribution. The dialogues with CCDS and GreenRoots shed light on the intertwined nature of social, economic, and environmental issues in community development. A representative from GreenRoots emphasized that neighborhoods grappling with the effects of gentrification often bear the burden of addressing the issue themselves, rather than receiving intervention from state or federal authorities. Because of this, these communities are taking proactive measures to ensure that residents have equitable access to resources like green spaces that such nonprofit groups could provide. Addressing the root of the issue cannot reasonably be addressed by such organizations, so instead they prioritize community development.
The absence of public housing offices and public housing itself in Beacon Hill and Seaport, as illustrated below in Figure 6, underscores a glaring disparity in access to affordable housing options in these affluent neighborhoods. Not only are there no facilities dedicated to administering public housing programs, but the very concept of public housing appears to be conspicuously absent from these areas. The location of the offices poses an issue as those who may need to seek housing the most could have to travel across the city to access assistance. Additionally, the placement of these housing facilities is entirely absent from Beacon Hill and Seaport. This dearth not only highlights the failure of urban planning initiatives to address the housing needs of diverse socio-economic groups but also raises questions about the prioritization of profit-driven development over social equity and inclusivity. Seaport is an area that could have become a fresh, diverse development interspersed with affordable and public housing. Instead, the cycle of housing insecurity and socio-economic exclusion will persist, further exacerbating gentrification into areas like East Boston and undermining the city's commitment to social justice and equitable development.
Figure 6
Public housing buildings and public housing offices
This map displays Public Housing Authority (PHA) offices and locations of public housing development buildings. Public Housing, established to offer safe and decent rental housing for low-income families, the elderly, and individuals with disabilities, varies in size and type, from single-family homes to high-rise apartments.
The analysis of GIS mapping and qualitative data reveals the intricate link between Boston's green space development and its impact on gentrification, social equity, and environmental justice—suggesting potential exacerbation of gentrification due to these green initiatives. The disparity in green space distribution across the city, highlighted by Figures 1, and 2, reflects broader socio-economic dynamics and underscores the urgent need for inclusive urban planning initiatives. Moreover, the environmental challenges facing East Boston, as outlined in Figures 3 and 4, underscore the importance of community-led efforts, exemplified by organizations like GreenRoots and CCDS, in addressing gentrification-related harm and promoting environmental resilience. However, the unexpected trend observed in Figure 5, where East Boston boasts ample green spaces while affluent neighborhoods like Beacon Hill and the Seaport district do not, serves as a poignant reminder of the deep-seated inequalities perpetuated by urban development patterns. The absence of public housing infrastructure in these affluent neighborhoods, as depicted in Figure 6, further highlights the failure of urban planning initiatives to prioritize social equity and inclusivity. Moving forward, policymakers, community organizations, and residents must work collaboratively to address these systemic disparities and create more just and equitable cities for all residents.
Conclusion and Recommendations
The complex interplay between gentrification, environmental justice, and housing policy in Boston underscores the urgent need for equitable and community-driven urban development strategies. The gentrification, exacerbated by factors such as green gentrification and the lack of affordable housing, has far-reaching social, economic, and environmental implications for the city and its residents. While the development and promotion of green spaces hold the potential to enhance environmental quality and community well-being, it also carries the risk of exacerbating socio-economic disparities and displacing vulnerable populations.
Through the examination of visual representations, qualitative data, and community dialogues, this project sheds light on the interconnected nature of these issues and provides insights into potential pathways for addressing them. Green gentrification is seen to be a symptom of rapidly evolving urban landscapes, where the focus on wealth and lucrative projects takes precedence over the well-being of established communities. Both Boston and federal agencies need to implement financing and zoning regulations to protect existing housing and develop new affordable housing. Affordable and public housing, inclusionary zoning, and development taxes are crucial anti-displacement tools. Inclusive green development, including socially-oriented green spaces and community input, is essential to adequately address climate change impacts and injustice. However, without strong civic organization and bold policy measures, green spaces serve to only worsen disparities.
Subsequent studies should delve into the temporal dynamics of economic and social transformations following the introduction of modernized parks equipped with various amenities in a given area. With mapping and more qualitative data, specifically with those who have experienced the change firsthand, future grassroots organizations like GrassRoots and CCDS can improve their ability to predict the onset and timeline of landscape changes subsequent to the implementation of environmentally conscious infrastructure in neighborhoods.
By prioritizing community-led solutions, advocating for housing justice, and incorporating targeted policy recommendations, stakeholders can work towards creating more inclusive and sustainable urban environments that prioritize the needs of marginalized communities. Moving forward, policymakers, nonprofit organizations, and residents need to collaborate effectively in addressing systemic inequalities and fostering greater social justice and equity in Boston.
References:
Anguelovski, I., Connolly, J. J. T., Pearsall, H., Shokry, G., Checker, M., Maantay, J., Gould, K., Lewis, T., Maroko, A., & Roberts, J. T. (2019). Why green “climate gentrification” threatens poor and vulnerable populations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(52), 26139–26143. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26897069
Black, K. J., & Richards, M. (2020). Eco-gentrification and who benefits from urban green amenities: NYC’s high Line. Landscape and Urban Planning, 204, 103900–103900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103900
Cole, H. V. S., Lamarca, M. G., Connolly, J. J. T., & Anguelovski, I. (2017). Are green cities healthy and equitable? Unpacking the relationship between health, green space and gentrification. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health (1979-), 71(11), 1118–1121. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26383998.pdf?refreqid=fastly-default%3A5602a7286ed1f2d74e6c17098ec14c40&ab_segments=&origin=&initiator=&acceptTC=1
Connolly, J. J. T., Anguelovski, I., & Oscilowicz, E. (2023). Greening without displacement. In Toward the Next Mode of Practice for Climate Urbanism: Understanding and Preventing Greening-Induced Displacement (p. Page 24-Page 32). Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep53637.7
Connolly, J. J. T., Anguelovski, I., & Oscilowicz, E. (2023). What Have We Learned about Greening and Gentrification? In Toward the Next Mode of Practice for Climate Urbanism: Understanding and Preventing Greening-Induced Displacement (p. Page 6-Page 20). Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep53637.5
The Cooperative Center for Development and Solidarity. Email with Maria from CCDS. 29 Mar. 2024.
Ha, J., Kim, H., & With, K. (2022). Urban green space alone is not enough: A landscape analysis linking the spatial distribution of urban green space to mental health in the city of Chicago. Landscape and Urban Planning, 218, 104309–104309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2021.104309
Németh, J., & Rigolon, A. (2020). Green gentrification or “just green enough”: Do park location, size and function affect whether a place gentrifies or not? - Alessandro Rigolon, Jeremy Németh, 2020. Urban Studies. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0042098019849380
Rigolon, A., & Németh, J. (2018). “We’re not in the business of housing:” Environmental gentrification and the nonprofitization of green infrastructure projects. Cities, 81, 71–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2018.03.016
Valinch, John. Phone Call about GreenRoots. 29 Mar. 2024.
