Rural gentrification, touristification, and displacement: Analysing evidence from Mexico

The phenomenon of displacement has been at the centre of fierce debates in the literature on urban gentrification. On one side, a group of authors has argued that residential displacement is not always a key component of gentrification. On the other side, another group of researchers has defended the centrality of gentrification induced displacement by explaining that it is embodied in different forms, including direct residential displacement, displacement pressures, exclusionary displacement, socio-cultural displacement, and commercial displacement. This paper builds on those debates in the urban gentrification literature by incorporating evidence from studies on rural gentrification. I summarize various case studies from the United Kingdom, North America, and Latin America, before turning to my own work on rural gentrification and touristification in the Mexican state of Morelos. A central argument is that direct residential displacement is not a predominant impact of rural gentrification, although it is closely connected to other forms of displacement, including exclusionary displacement, socio-cultural displacement, commercial displacement, and the displacement of other animal and plant species. The article concludes with a reflection on how research on rural gentrification contributes to the wider literature and discussion on gentrification and displacement by offering a more nuanced and complex vision of the link between these phenomena, which is important for the very definition of gentrification.

Automated summary

This paper delves into the debate on displacement in urban gentrification literature, incorporating evidence from studies on rural gentrification. The author argues that direct residential displacement is not the predominant impact of rural gentrification, but is closely connected to other forms of displacement.