Urban renewal known as gentrification that leads to higher housing costs has winners and losers but everyone in Spain seems to agree that it’s a bad thing, conveniently forgetting that urban decay is often the alternative.

Gentrification, or gentrificación in Spanish, is a contentious topic in urban discussions. It refers to the process by which rundown city districts experience renewal and investment, often attracting wealthier residents and businesses, which in turn drives up property values. While gentrification has its positives, such as improving living conditions, the housing stock, and boosting local economies, it is increasingly viewed as a dirty word in Spain. In the media and among politicians, nearly all urban renewal efforts are labeled as gentrification, and the term is often used in a pejorative sense.

This negative framing may overshadow the fact that not all forms of urban renewal are inherently harmful. Historically, gentrification tends to occur in well-located districts near city centers, which developed as working-class neighborhoods during the industrialisation of the 19th and 20th centuries. Other affected areas may have been primarily commercial districts that fell into disuse. These districts became neglected over time, particularly in the wake of deindustrialisation in the 1970s and beyond, as the economies of Western societies shifted away from manufacturing. The deterioration was further exacerbated by rent controls, which discouraged investment in building maintenance and repairs.

By the 1980s, many of these once-thriving districts had fallen into a state of disrepair, yet they retained a key asset: their prime location. Their proximity to city centers made them attractive to a growing middle and upper-middle class that sought central living spaces. The idea of moving into a dilapidated but well-located neighborhood also became a trend among young, middle-class adults, who found the mix of affordable property and “shabby chic” appealing. When hipsters and creative types start moving into these areas, investment follows.

Cheap properties are bought, renovated, and transformed. Trendy businesses like coffee shops, fashion boutiques, and modern brunch spots pop up, further drawing in new residents. As more affluent buyers enter the market, the increased demand drives up property prices. This economic shift often prices out the working-class residents who have lived there for generations, leading to accusations of displacement. This is the central critique of gentrification.

However, it’s important to recognise that many of these areas weren’t in a great state before gentrification. The housing stock might have been in poor condition, but the underlying structures were often appealing. Old but architecturally interesting buildings gained new life through investment, resulting in better-maintained streets and properties. Rising demand means higher housing costs, but that is an expected result of increased investment, as investors naturally seek a return.

Critics, particularly on the left, often use gentrification as a smear against any form of urban renewal, but what’s the alternative? Should districts remain in a state of decay? Ideally, urban renewal through gentrification would come with public policies that ensure affordable housing and maintain the character of the neighborhood, preventing the displacement of original residents. However, such enlightened policy is often lacking.

A Case Study: The Raval District of Barcelona

The case of the Raval district in Barcelona is a stark example of what happens when gentrification is actively discouraged. The Raval has long been a working-class and immigrant neighborhood in a prime location in the heart of the city. Despite its low socioeconomic profile, the housing stock in the district is relatively solid, and many streets have a distinct architectural character beneath the layers of neglect. In the lead-up to the 2008 financial crisis, the Raval was on the path to gentrification, as investors flocked to the area. However, this process was abruptly halted by the crash, and later by local government policies under Mayor Ada Colau, which aimed to resist gentrification.

Today, the Raval faces a deepening urban crisis. The halt in investment and urban renewal has led to marked decline going on for years. An article in the local paper La Vanguardia over two years ago reported on the protest by around 300 Raval residents expressing their frustration with the degradation of the Raval district, which they blamed on indifference by the city government. If anything, the situation is even worse today.

The residents lament that the district has been neglected, left to deteriorate as politicians shirk responsibility. Many no longer feel safe taking their children to public play areas for fear of discarded syringes, while others are too afraid to leave their homes at night due to the risk of assault. The once-bustling neighborhood now has streets filled with vulnerable populations living in squalor. Local businesses are languishing, and families are fleeing the neighborhood altogether.

“The shouting, fights, and arguments are frequent. Everything is a mess, businesses are fading, families are leaving the neighborhood, and people are fed up with everything…” complains a local resident, quoted in La Vanguardia.

While there is no consensus among residents on the best solution, some advocate for increased policing, while others call for more social services to address the root causes of the neighborhood’s decline. The problems in the Raval district underscore the dangers of avoiding urban renewal altogether. Without investment, the area has spiraled downwards.

The Balance Between Renewal and Preservation

Gentrification, as a process, is neither inherently good nor bad. The key lies in how it is managed. Spain’s cities need urban renewal to revitalise neglected neighborhoods, but this must be balanced with policies that protect long-standing residents and preserve the unique character of each district. When done right, gentrification can bring about positive changes without forcing out those who have called these areas home for decades. However, without proactive public policy, the transformation of neighborhoods will continue to spark controversy, as the benefits of urban renewal are unevenly distributed.