English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The concept of gentrification has been extensively used in post-socialist context in association with neighbourhood renewal processes, despite the exact meaning of the term and its social effects not always being sufficiently clarified. This paper builds upon empirical research from downtown Budapest. Our investigation primarily focused on the interplay of three groups of stakeholders involved in urban renewal: politicians, investors and residents. On the basis of our multi-dimensional analysis, we could identify three main types of upgrading: classical gentrification (with two sub-types), as well as incumbent upgrading and soft forms of revitalisation. In the studied neighbourhoods, a mixture of these forms of upgrading could be identified, reflecting a diversified rejuvenation. Gentrification was spatially limited to poverty ridden neighbourhoods subject to local government organised regeneration programmes. The predominance of soft forms of revitalisation is a function of housing market mechanisms as well as the planning control of local districts, which in general together create a healthy social mix despite pervasive regeneration activities.

Beyond gentrification: Diversified neighbourhood upgrading in the inner city of Budapest