Using Metro Manila as a case study, this paper investigates whether and how its current urban form and pattern of transformation can be explained by the theories of gentrification developed within the cities of the Global North. Two core features of gentrification are examined: the production of exclusive spaces and the related displacement of the poor or low-income households. The uneven development across the metropolis is discussed in terms of the longstanding tension between the weak city-state and the dominance of the landed elites. Falling through the gap are the urban poor, who arrange their housing within informal settlements and are exposed to multiple vulnerabilities, including the risk of displacement. Drawing on an empirical study of the displacement impacts of a public transportation project, this paper provides useful insights into how gentrification-induced displacement may unfold if land-based development takes place in a densely populated metropolis such as Metro Manila.
AtkinsonRBridgeG (2005) Gentrification in a Global Context: The New Urban Colonialism. London: Routledge.
3.
BeallJFoxS (2009) Cities and Development. London: Routledge.
4.
BelloWFDe GuzmanMMaligML. (2005) The Anti-development State: The Political Economy of Permanent Crisis in the Philippines. London: Zed.
5.
BernerE (2000) Poverty alleviation and the eviction of the poorest: Towards urban land reform in the Philippines. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research24(3): 536–553.
6.
BernerEPhillipsB (2005) Left to their own devices? Community self-help between alternative development and neo-liberalism. Community Development Journal40(1): 17–29.
7.
BunnellTDrummondLBWHoKC (2002) Critical reflections on cities in Southeast Asia. In: BunnellTDrummondLBWHoKC (eds) Critical Reflections on Cities in Southeast Asia. Singapore: Times Academic Press, pp. 1–30.
8.
ButlerTLeesL (2006) Super-gentrification in Barnsbury, London: Globalization and gentrifying global elites at the neighbourhood level. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers31(4): 467–487.
9.
CambaA (2011) Private-led suburbanization: Capital accumulation and real estate development in postwar Greater Manila, 1945–1960. Philippine Social Sciences Review63(2): 1–29.
10.
CaoiliMA (1988) The Origins of Metropolitan Manila: A Political and Social Analysis. Quezon City: New Day.
11.
ChikiamcoCFabellaRV (2011) Property rights reform in the Philippines: The Residential Free Patent Act. In: The Asia Foundation (ed.) Built on Dreams, Grounded in Reality: Economic Policy Reform in the Philippines. Makati City: The Asia Foundation – Philippines, pp. 128–150.
12.
ChoiN (2008) Putting ‘relationships’ into the impoverishment risks and reconstruction (IRR) model: A case study of the Metro Manila railway project in the Philippines. Master of Philosophy (MPhil) Thesis, University of Oxford.
13.
ChoiN (2013) Impacts of development-induced displacement on urban locality and settlers: A case study of the railway upgrading project in Metro Manila. Doctor of Philosophy (DPhil) Thesis, University of Oxford.
14.
ConnellJ (1999) Beyond Manila: Walls, malls, and private spaces. Environment and Planning A31: 417–439.
15.
DavidsonMLeesL (2010) New-build gentrification: Its histories, trajectories, and critical geographies. Population, Space and Place16(5): 395–411.
16.
GarridoM (2013) The ideology of the dual city: The modernist ethic in the corporate development of Makati City, Metro Manila. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research37(1): 165–185.
17.
GuazonT (2012) Public art, urban renewal, and the construction of a national history: The Revive Manila Program and the New Manileno Campaign. In: PererNTangW-S (eds) Transforming Asian Cities: Intellectual Impasse, Asianizing Space, and Emerging Translocalities. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 51–64.
18.
HackworthJ (2002) Postrecession gentrification in New York City. Urban Affairs Review37(6): 815–843.
19.
HarrisA (2008) From London to Mumbai and back again: Gentrification and public policy in comparative perspective. Urban Studies45(12): 2407–2428
20.
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (2012) World Disasters Report 2012: Focus on Forced Migration and Displacement. Lyon: IFRC.
LeesL (2003) Visions of ‘urban renaissance’: The Urban Task Force report and the Urban White Paper. In: ImrieRRacoM (eds) Urban Renaissance? New Labour, Community and Urban Policy. Bristol: Policy, 294 pp.
23.
LeesL (2012) The geography of gentrification: Thinking through comparative urbanism. Progress in Human Geography36(2): 155–171.
24.
LeesL (2013) The urban injustices of New Labour’s ‘New Urban Renewal’: The case of the Aylesbury estate in London. Antipode DOI: 10.1111/anti.12020.
25.
LeesLSlaterTWylyEK (2008) Gentrification. New York, NY; London: Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group.
26.
LeitnerHSheppardESSziartoK. (2007) Contesting urban futures: Decentering neoliberalism. In: LeitnerHPeckJSheppardES (eds) Contesting Neoliberalism: Urban Frontiers. New York: Guilford Press, 340 pp.
27.
LemanskiC (2014) Hybrid gentrification in South Africa: Theorising across southern and northern cities. Urban Studies51(14): 2943–2960.
28.
Lopez-MoralesE (2010) Gentrification by ground rent dispossession: The shadows cast by large-scale urban renewal in Santiago de Chile. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research35(2): 330–357.
29.
LützelerR (2008) Population increase and ‘new-build gentrification’ in central Tokyo. Erdkunde62(4): 287–299.
30.
McGregorA (2008) Southeast Asian Development. Abingdon; New York, NY: Routledge.
31.
Magno-BallesterosM (2000) Land Use Planning in Metro Manila and the Urban Fringe: Implications on the Land and Real Estate Market. Discussion Paper Series No. 2000–20. Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
32.
Pacheco-RaguzJ (2010) Assessing the impacts of Light Rail Transit on urban land in Manila. Journal of Transport and Land Use3(1): 113–138.
33.
ParkB-G (1998) Where do tigers sleep at night? The state’s role in housing policy in South Korea and Singapore. Economic Geography74(3): 272–288.
34.
PenzPDrydykJBosePS (2011) Displacement by Development: Ethics, Rights and Responsibilities. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
35.
PorioE (2012) Decentralisation, power and networked governance practices in Metro Manila. Space and Polity16(1): 7–27.
36.
PorioECrisolC (2004) Property rights, security of tenure and the urban poor in Metro Manila. Habitat International28(2): 203–219.
37.
PorterLShawK (2009) Whose Urban Renaissance? An International Comparison of Urban Regeneration Strategies. London: Routledge.
38.
PwC and Urban Land Institute (2012) Emerging Trends in Real Estate Asia Pacific 2013. Washington, DC: PwC and the Urban Land Institute.
39.
RofeMW (2003) ‘I want to be global’: Theorising the gentrifying class as an emergent elite global community. Urban Studies40(12): 2511–2526.
40.
SassenS (2000) Cities in a World Economy (2nd edn). Thousand Oaks, CA; London: Pine Forge Press.
41.
ShatkinG (2004) Planning to forget: Informal settlements as ‘forgotten places’ in globalising Metro Manila. Urban Studies41(12): 2469–2484.
42.
ShatkinG (2008) The city and the bottom line: Urban megaprojects and the privatization of planning in Southeast Asia. Environment and Planning A40: 383–401.
43.
ShawK (2008) A response to ‘The eviction of critical perspectives from gentrification research’. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research32(1): 192–194.
44.
ShinHB (2009a) Property-based redevelopment and gentrification: The case of Seoul. Geoforum40(5): 906–917.
45.
ShinHB (2009b) Residential redevelopment and entrepreneurial local state: The implications of Beijing’s shifting emphasis on urban redevelopment policies. Urban Studies46(13): 2815–2839.
46.
SlaterT (2006) The eviction of critical perspectives from gentrification research. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research30(4): 737–757.
47.
TeodoroJIECoJCR (2009) Community-driven land tenure strategies: The experiences of the Homeless People’s Federation of the Philippines. Environment and Urbanization21(2): 415–441.
48.
United Nations (2012) World Urbanization Prospects, the 2011 Revision. New York: United Nations.
49.
United Nations Human Settlements Programme (2008a) Country Programme Document 2008–2009: Philippines. Nairobi: UN-HABITAT.
50.
United Nations Human Settlements Programme (2008b) State of the World’s Cities 2008/2009: Harmonious Cities. London: Earthscan.
51.
United Nations Human Settlements Programme (2011) Losing Your Home: Assessing the Impact of Eviction. Nairobi: UN-HABITAT.
52.
United Nations Human Settlements Programme (2012) Innovative Urban Tenure in the Philippines: Challenges, Approaches and Institutionalization (Summary Report). Nairobi: UN-HABITAT.
53.
van den MuijzenbergOvan NaerssenT (2005) Metro Manila: Designers or directors of urban development? In: NasP (ed.) Directors of Urban Change in Asia. London: Routledge, 269 pp.
54.
WangSW-H (2011) Commercial gentrification and entrepreneurial governance in Shanghai: A case study of Taikang Road Creative Cluster. Urban Policy and Research29(4): 363–380.
55.
WilliamsB (1997) Double Jeopardy: The Link between Transport and Evictions. Bangkok: Asian Coalition for Housing Rights.
56.
World Bank (1994) Resettlement and Development: The Bankwide Review of Projects Involving Involuntary Resettlement 1986–1993. Washington, DC: World Bank.
57.
ZetterR (2004) Market enablement and the urban sector. In: ZetterRHamzaM (eds) Market Economy and Urban Change: Impacts in the Developing WorldLondon: Earthscan, 210 pp.
