DOWNLOAD PDF

The Peri-Urban Gentrification Process in Cisauk Subdistrict, Tangerang Regency, Indonesia

Myla Dyan Andini, Forina Lestari^*, M Medtry, Anna Karenina

Urban and Regional Planning Study Program, Indonesian Institute of Technology, Jl. Raya Puspitek, Kec. Serpong, Kota Tangerang Selatan, Banten 15314, Indonesia

^*) Correspondence: forina.lestari@iti.ac.id

Gentrification is a phenomenon that occurs in many regions. Gentrification is characterized by the influx of more affluent residents into initially low-value areas. This influx increases the value of these areas, potentially leading to the displacement of people who cannot afford to remain in the neighborhood. This study aims to examine the cause and impacts of peri-urban gentrification in Cisauk District, Tangerang Regency. This study uses qualitative and remote sensing-based analysis to investigate gentrification's impact on six Cisauk sub-district villages. We used primary and secondary data for the analysis. The primary data was collected from observations, interviews, questionnaires, and Google Earth Engine data catalog to get Landsat 7 and 8 imageries. The secondary was collected from the Central Bureau of Statistics. The Landsat data was used to identify the change on the physical aspect, while the others were used to analyze the non-physical aspect. Afterward, positive and negative effects were explored, emphasizing residents' responses and adaptations. The results showed that Cisauk Subdistrict faced a gentrification process driven by locational factors (i.e., proximity to toll road) and local government policies (i.e., spatial planning policy designating it as a high-density residential area). The positive impact of the gentrified area is that the region is developing economically much better, and many areas function better economically and so benefit the region and its people. On the other hand, the negative impacts of gentrified areas are that indigenous people are threatened with being forced to leave their villages, there are significant increases in land prices, and changes in people's social lives occur. To minimize the negative impact of gentrification, the government should promote the capacity of low-income households to access its benefits.

1. Introduction

A city is continuously changing, either in planned or unplanned areas. Urban change can be seen from physical, non-physical, social, cultural, and economic aspects. Change in the city has occurred through a process influenced by differences in time, history, and people's behaviors (Maloutas, 2012). The city's development cannot be separated from various social impacts, one of which is the phenomenon of gentrification (Shin et al., 2016). Gentrification has been debated for the past 50 years or more in Western countries. At the beginning of this period, urban centers' growth and the increasing value of the land there led to the out-migration of low-income residents (Zuk, et al., 2018). This process has reached a different stage now. Gentrification has developed into a tool, goal, result, and even a consequence of urban revitalization due to problems such as slums and poverty (Maloutas, 2012). The causes of this gentrification can vary and may include some or all of different political, economic, and cultural factors. Gentrification has developed into the 'global urban strategy' with differences depending on time, location, and conditions (Shin et al., 2016). Thus, studies have emerged focusing on gentrification in many contexts (Martin & Beck, 2018).

Gentrification is a process in which more affluent and economically privileged residents enter into areas that were initially low-value and inhabited by underprivileged residents. This stage usually leads to the revitalization of the area, which causes changes in land values and social and economic structures (Arini et al., 2022). Gentrification is currently developing rapidly in many countries around the world. However, the costs and benefits of this phenomenon have been debated among academics. It is important to consider the extent to which gentrification can positively impact low-income people, especially when considering factors such as displacement, segregation, and social polarization (Aune et al., 2020). However, the current debate focuses on how gentrification can lead to a more sustainable society through cultural acculturation by increasing social capital or social cohesion in the community. It has been acknowledged that the implementation of gentrification must go through a democratic process to avoid inflicting trauma on affected communities (Goossens et al., 2020). Therefore, nowadays, the debate is no longer about whether or not gentrification is necessary but about how gentrification can be part of policies that encourage sustainable acculturation (social mixing and social cohesion) (Alroy et al., 2023).

Gentrification can occur in the city center, the suburbs (peri-urban areas), infrastructure development corridors, and transit areas (Shaw et al., 2020). It can be influenced by different policies and public recommendations, including those concerning urban redevelopment, open space revitalization,  infrastructure construction, and other indirect policy actions (land assembly, subsidies, and zoning) (Martin & Beck, 2018; Zuk et al., 2018). In Shanghai, China, for example, gentrification is used on a massive scale in urban rejuvenation efforts and "beautification" projects. In order to alleviate the negative impacts, especially for previous residents, relocation to public housing provided by the local government is crucial (Chou et al., 2021). However, gentrification may have different impacts depending on many factors, such as public policy and a community's location and socio-culture (Zuk et al., 2018).

Gentrification also presents a different picture in countries of the Global North and the Global South (Phillips & Smith, 2018; Shin et al., 2016). Even a study comparing Vietnam and Indonesia shows that the definition of gentrification cannot be generalized in all places due to people's different institutional, geographical, and socio-cultural contexts (Potter & Labbé, 2020; Shin et al., 2016). Peri-Urban landscapes in developing countries, especially those in Asia, such as Indonesia and Vietnam, are shaped by land-use transformation as a form of expansion from urban centers to suburban areas, crossing administrative boundaries (Potter & Labbé, 2020). In Indonesia, the development of megapolitan areas with the expansion of city areas to suburban areas has encouraged the rise of new cities in peri-urban areas, which are inseparable from gentrification. The gentrification in Indonesia is caused by the accumulation of capital in the middle and upper-class markets, which encourages land transformation, which has social implications due to evictions (Hudalah et al., 2016). It can be concluded that gentrification is a process of socio-economic change caused by changes in the land that was previously of low value leading to higher value due to the land being put to various purposes such as urban realignment, commercial development, and infrastructure development (Hudalah et al., 2016; Shaw et al., 2020). In this case, the leading actor can be the owner of capital or the government (Zuk et al., 2018).

The phenomenon of gentrification must be recognized, especially by the city government, as an inseparable part of the urban development process (John et al., 2020). In peri-urban areas, this is evident from the emergence of new cities around the core city. For example, in Hanoi, a new city of 20 ha emerged due to the increasing number of middle and upper-income expatriates. The discussion of the last decade has led to a shift away from the context of a particular instance of gentrification to the extent to which this process can benefit all circles (Zuk et al., 2018).

Gentrification has been increasingly common in peri-urban areas, suburban communities, or areas with a mixture of traits typical of villages and cities (Shaw et al., 2020). Shaw et al. (2020) also explained that such transitional areas are related to land-use changes and social and demographic characteristics. These peri-urban areas appear because of a city's development on the outskirts (Marchal, Stébé, & Weber, 2019). When viewed spatially, the development of built-up land that occurs in peri-urban areas is not limited by administrative boundaries but is based on how the characteristics of built-up land change (Hersperger et al., 2018). This development is either an extension of the city center or a new growth center in empty or agricultural areas (Sutherland, 2019).

Gentrification in peri-urban areas cannot be separated from suburbanization due to the expansion of cities to surrounding areas, which also occurs with ever-greater frequency in China and India. The establishment of new towns has tended to come about to maintain capital accumulation rather than in response to changing residential preferences (Shin et al., 2016). In the case of China, gentrification is even an integral part of the government-run urban renewal process and is known as "state-led gentrification"(He, 2019). This is related to the institutional system, which also impacts land management. The situation has particular characteristics in China due to the country's particular political, social, and economic conditions. No matter where we look, gentrification is almost always part of the dynamic between a country's political system, social and economic conditions, and land management systems. Certainly, be different in each country (Shin et al., 2016). Gentrification in China aimed not only to provide land for low-income households but also to increase the value of the land sold by the city government as an additional source of income (He, 2019). The US state of Florida is another example. The state provides an amenity-rich urban environment that suits the needs of the creative class (Graham, 2023).

Both positive and negative impacts of gentrification can be considered from physical aspects, including changes in land use and prices, and non-physical aspects, including economic and social conditions. The positive impact means that gentrification can benefit several parties, such as real estate entrepreneurs, investors, the government (economic benefits from tax levies), and some resident communities (Zuk et al., 2018). In addition to the positive impact of the gentrification process, there are also negative impacts, which generally afflict low-income communities and commonly result in displacement (Maloutas, 2012). Evictions have become closely related to gentrification in a negative way.

The concern about gentrification is that people can be displaced from their homes, culture, and livelihoods (Yang & Loopmans, 2023). It has been argued that the government's vital role is encouraging urban development while still paying attention to marginalized groups (Zhu et al, 2022). It is not always possible to achieve both aims. It has been found that large-scale investment has often not benefited local communities. Although local people may be provided with jobs in new places, often, few choose to move out of the area where they have been living. Likewise, the selection of new locations and its success or failure as a new home is influenced by the preferences and tolerance of the people living there for the type of community group which will be settling there - its racial and ethnic identities and its class in the new place (Zuk et al., 2018). However, it may be possible to minimize the negative impact of gentrification. Ghaffari, Klein, and Angulo Baudin (2018) outlined three mitigation strategies: tenants' protection, controlling ownership and development, and community empowerment.

The gentrification process cannot be separated from the dynamics of urban growth, which is influenced by public policies and impacts the socioeconomics of the community (Janoschka, 2016; Maloutas, 2012). One of the characteristics of society which can help it to deal with this phenomenon is resilience, the capacity of social, economic, and environmental systems to cope with harmful events and to respond or reorganize by maintaining functions, identities, structures, capacities for adaptation, learning, and transformation of IPCC 2014. Resilience also means the system's ability to maintain its identity in the face of internal changes and external shocks.

The debate over gentrification is developing even as massive investment is taking place mainly in Global South states such as Asia and Africa. Open land is being converted into suburbs. This conversion is due to the tendency for urban populations to increase (The urban population is predicted to reach 70% of the global population by 2050). This conversion also causes 'slum gentrification', which is increasingly dominant in the countries of the Global South (Shin et al., 2016; Wu, 2016). Eventually, suburban land becomes the target of new settlement locations. However, it is increasingly obvious that there are not enough studies on the impact of land conversion in the suburbs, especially land used for middle- and upper-income settlements (real estate) (Abdullahi, Pradhan, & Mojaddadi, 2018; Chen et al., 2021; Feltynowski et al., 2018).

The transformations of land use in peri-urban (suburban) areas show the random growth of cities leading to the formation of megapolitan urban corridors (Shaw et al., 2020; Xia, et al., 2020). For example, more than half of poor Americans now live in the suburbs, a common destination for immigrants (Hepburn, Rutan, & Desmond, 2023). That is why the New Urban Agenda (NUA) mandate needs to serve urbanization by providing these suburbs with new residential areas. Often, compensation for gentrification only considers the loss of land and housing without paying attention to other factors, such as the possibility of livelihoods for affected communities in new places. In Indonesia, this occurs due to the lack of control over the relationship between cities and surrounding areas (Hudalah et al., 2016).

In addition to suburban areas, new infrastructure development areas may cause gentrification. Gentrification is common in global southern states that use corridor development as regional economic generators but pay little attention to environmental and socio-economic impacts on local communities (Shin et al., 2016). Critical attention needs to be paid to protecting land for low-income communities. The land available in the corridor will attract development investors with a profit orientation. They do not tend to consider the justice aspects of the developments for affected communities (Wu, 2020).

Therefore, studies on the impact of peri-urban dynamics and new-city development in suburban areas are necessary. These studies are specifically important for formulating mechanisms needed to overcome the impacts of displacement or resettlement on affected communities (Larsen & Hansen, 2008; Zuk et al., 2018), especially in a Global South country such as Indonesia. This study aims to understand the dynamic of gentrification in peri-urban areas, with the case study of Cisauk District in Tangerang Regency. Physical impacts include land use changes and changes in land prices. Non-physical impacts include the changing livelihoods and social structures of the community.

2. Research Methods

2.1. Study Area

The case study below will look at the process of change that occurs in peri-urban areas in terms of physical and non-physical characteristics. One example of the impact of gentrification dynamics on physical aspects can be seen in Cisauk District, Tangerang Regency. This district has an area of ±26,914 km² or about 2.89% of the area of Tangerang Regency. This area has a strategic position in Tangerang Regency as a buffer for the capital city of DKI Jakarta, separating it from part of the Jabodetabek Megapolitan area (Jakarta, Bogor, Depok, Tangerang, and Bekasi), making this area a center of industry, trade, and services. Many large-scale settlements have grown up in this area, and it has developed into a new city in Tangerang Regency. Six villages that have been observed in Cisauk District are: Mekarwangi, Dandang, Suradita, Sampora, Cibogo, and Ciasuk. The study location is depicted in Figure 1.

Figure 1. The Areas of Study.

This area is peri-urban with high accessibility, as it is equipped with toll roads, railways, and regional road networks. In Tangerang Regency Regional Regulation Number 13 of 2011 concerning the Tangerang Regency Regional Spatial Plan, land use in Cisauk District, Tangerang Regency is included in the land use group with medium-density and high-density settlements. In addition to functioning as a settlement, Cisauk District is a place for educational activities, trade, and services that affect the surrounding area's growth.

2.2. Research Framework

Figure 2 shows the research framework. This study first identifies the physical and non-physical changes in six villages of the Cisauk sub-district, where gentrification occurs. The method in this study is a qualitative descriptive analysis, an approach that can be used to examine people's lifestyles, history, behavior, organizational functionalization, social movements, or kinship relationships. In addition, it accommodates many circumstances with a broad focus, describes controlled phenomena for theoretical testing, linear data tests, and data sources from respondents, and offers clear hypotheses (Gissendanner, 2003; Krippendorff, 2018). This study's primary data sources were observation, interviews, documentation, and questionnaire data. Community leaders, heads of neighborhood and community associations, village heads, and sub-district staff were involved in this study. There were 17 informants involved.

The secondary data was obtained from the Central Bureau of Statistics and Google Earth. Data Catalog (Landsat 7 ETM+ and Landsat 8 OLI collection) were gathered from 2000, 2010, and 2020. These datasets were compared to see the chronological development of land use and land price changes in the Cisauk District (including six villages). Among the villages in Cisauk District, Sampora village is the most significantly impacted village regarding land use change. Next, we analyzed the most gentrified village in terms of both positive and negative impacts due to gentrification. In particular, focus was given to the response and adaptation process undertaken by the residents. Data analysis in this study uses the method of descriptive analysis of the interview results.

Figure 2. Research Framework.

3. Results and Discussion

 3.1. Dynamics of Physical and Non-physical Characteristics in Cisauk District

The rapid development of Tangerang Regency is inseparable from the development of new towns such as Summarecon Serpong and Citra Raya. After noting its great potential, summarecon officials finally decided to develop the Summarecon Serpong area about 21 km west of Jakarta. It is located in the Serpong area, Tangerang. Summarecon was founded in 1975, and 10 hectares of land were developed first. Summarecon officials developed this area with a permit covering 750 hectares, previously known as Gading Serpong.

In addition to Summarecon, Citra Raya is an independent city supporting development in Tangerang Regency. Citra Raya is the largest independent city development undertaken by the Ciputra Group in Tangerang. Citra Raya's development began in 1994 in an area with a size of 2,760 hectares. It then experienced very rapid growth, with the completion of public and retail facilities needed to meet all elements of the needs of residents. Citra Raya has now become a solid regional and business center. The Summarecon and Citra Raya areas have been equipped with various independent city-scale facilities.

The rapid development of the Tangerang Regency is also inseparable from the influence of another one of the planned new cities in Indonesia, Bumi Serpong Damai (BSD), located in Serpong District, South Tangerang. A consortium led by Ciputra started to build the BSD area in 1989. BSD City is one of Jakarta's satellite cities, originally intended to become an independent city with all its own facilities, including industrial estates, offices, education infrastructure, tourism facilities, and residential areas. BSD City is a planned city project with the largest total land area of 6,000 hectares. Its development was divided into three stages involving the entire designated land area.

BSD City has now begun to develop further, reaching Cisauk District. Thus, the Cisauk Area has now become one of the areas that have begun to be modern. Rapid population development has had both positive and negative impacts on Cisauk District. A map and explanation of area development in the study can be seen below.

In 2000, Cisauk District was mostly agricultural land and plantations, with very few residential or commercial buildings (Figure 3). In 2010, a difference began to be seen in Cisauk District, and rapid development dominated this area with large-scale evictions taking place in Sampora Village. These changes began the first phase of the development of Cisauk District, which had previously been mostly undeveloped, into built-up areas. In 2010, officials realised that only a few of its areas had experienced development. 

Figure 3. Land Cover Map of Cisauk District Area in 2000, 2010, and 2020 .

"Farmer as an occupation has decreased significantly. In particular, nowadays farmers only consist of the elderly. Younger people tend to work in the private sector or start their businesses. In this village, residents are eager to participate in training and workshops organized by the government. These are conducted to improve the capability of the people." (Cisauk Head of Village, 2020)

 

By 2020, Cisauk District had changed rapidly due to the increased number of investors who wanted to put money into developing the area. Further, the access road created by Sinarmas Land increasingly opened up regional opportunities, so the area continued to be a target for property developers. Cisauk Station was renovated, and Cisauk became an officially Transit Oriented Development (TOD) area (Herawati et al., 2023). Various supporting facilities will thus be built and integrated with train and bus services and the surrounding area.

Gentrification also has implications for changes in land prices (Table 1). Sampora Village, Cibogo Village, and Cisauk Village all experienced significant changes in land prices caused by the impact of the development of new areas in the Cisauk District. This change was due to the strategic location of the area, its accessibility, and the availability of adequate infrastructure. This village's land price is the highest among the villages in the area that experienced gentrification. This phenomenon is because Sampora Village is very close to the business centers of the BSD area.

Table 1. Changes in Land Prices (Indonesian Rupiahs).

Sampora Village, Cibogo Village, and Cisauk Village have all experienced social and economic impacts caused by developing new areas in the Cisauk District. Areas in these three villages experienced land use changing from agriculture to trade and services. This was caused by the area's economic development, which led to the development of housing, offices, and other commercial structures. A shift occurred from agricultural to non-agricultural land use.

The economic impact of these changes can be seen in the increase in per capita income. Historically, the residents of Cisauk District were predominantly farmers and ranchers. Now, most of them are office and construction workers. Agriculture and animal husbandry outputs have not been optimal because agricultural land has tended to be sold off due to the community's lack of interest in farming. However, the residents of some areas in Cisauk are still farmers, especially in the villages that are unaffected by the new urban development trend, such as Mekarwangi, Dandang Village, and Suradita Village.

The social characteristics of this area have also changed as it has become multi-ethnic. Sundanese, Javanese, Sumatranese, and Chinese people settled in the area. The culture of cooperation and family values has decreased in importance due less to population changes than to the area's considerable economic changes. From this analysis, it can be concluded that gentrification has significantly influenced many aspects (Figure 5). The positive and negative influences of the gentrification process's physical and non-physical aspects have changed the Cisauk District. These influences are highlighted in social aspects (population and community interaction), economic activity, land prices, and physical land use. Based on the interview, it can be concluded that the Sampora Village community has responded in two different ways to gentrification: surviving and moving. People who survive are trying to adapt by taking advantage of existing conditions; people with high economic strength are trying to make the most of the changes through initiatives such as opening a restaurant or a boarding house for apartment workers. Meanwhile, people with low economic power can only open small food stalls and workshops to try to survive. The remainder of the population, older people, can only rely on pensions and assistance from relatives.

Figure 5. Recapitulation of Non-physical Impacts in Gentrified Regions.

People choose to move due to the demands of socio-economic conditions, such as the increasingly high cost of living, changing community culture, and land prices. The land acquisition can be carried out in stages by developers. Land ownership occurs with land acquisition, and owners have less incentive to sell if significant compensation is unavailable. This condition illustrates a phenomenon of urban fairy gentrification that differs from what is observed in the city center. Where the land acquisition processes are based on negotiation, not coercion, the actors in the development process are private parties with enough capital to pay compensation costs, which are crucial.

The process of land acquisition in Sampora Village is depicted in Figure 6. Apartment blocks and commercial buildings have replaced neighborhoods in Sampora Village which used to be made up of smaller houses. Land acquisition in Sampora Village has been implemented in many stages and facilitated by the local government. The process was initiated by a meeting in 1997 at which the private developer approached each individual and household to propose a specific financial compensation package.

People in the village with economic strength and business opportunities will survive in their villages by opening businesses to keep up with changing conditions that increasingly favor the entry of upper-class people who live or work in Sampora Village. Some people who cannot adapt to the new economic environment will be forced to move out of Sampora Village, while others will choose to move because they strike a deal with property developers. The process of community adaptation is shown in Figure 7.

 

Figure 6. Land Acquisition in Sampora Village.

Figure 7. Community Adaptation of Sampora Village.

3.2. Discussion

Based on the study's findings, it could be concluded that displacement in Sampora Village, one of the villages most affected by gentrification in the Cisauk District, was unavoidable. This displacement is because of people's need or desire to move to a new area. The influx of wealthier people moving to the village, which increased land and property values and living costs, pushed poorer residents out of the area. On the other hand, some other residents who managed to cope with the higher living costs opted to stay.

The policies moving society toward greater social mixing must address this phenomenon, namely the acculturation of people from various ethnicities and groups in one region (Kusumaningrum et al., 2020). The long-time residents who have opted to stay have to co-exist with new residents from the economy's middle and upper classes. The areas inhabited by these two groups are separated. New residents tend to stay in residential clusters. On the other hand, long-time residents stay in the "pinched" village between those residential clusters.

The phenomenon of gentrification cannot be separated from the dynamic urban process or the public policy and political factors that influence it (Shin et al., 2016). In the beginning, to answer the arguments of Zuk et al. (2018) regarding the need for in-depth studies of gentrification in various contexts, this study provides an overview of gentrification that occurs in the suburbs (peri-urban areas) around Jakarta. The finding of this study shows that gentrification in peri-urban areas, spurred by private sector initiatives, has not included affordable housing for low-income households. As a result, the "pinched" village has emerged as a solution. Ideally, in a residential area, there is supposed to be acculturation of different economic groups and ethnicity (Lees, 2008). This has an economic as well as a social rationale. Upper-and-middle-income groups need lower-income groups for manual and menial work.

 

"... higher levels of social mixing, and thus conceivably also of social capital and cohesion, are more likely to be achieved in socially homogeneous, rather than socially mixed, areas (Lees, 2008)

 

Another result of gentrification is the development of this new city with its facilities (Tang, 2017), which will attract people to live in the area, thus encouraging the emergence of small housing clusters (Amen & Nia, 2020). The government also needs to manage the availability of infrastructure capable of serving the rapidly increasing population. Since the private sector only focuses on middle and upper-class people in the construction of settlements, housing for lower-income families remains the government's responsibility.

The impact of peri-urban gentrification is not the same (Shaw et al., 2020; Martin & Beck, 2018). In the case of the study site, the land price was based on negotiations, and the population enjoyed multiple benefits, such as increases in income and land prices. However, policymakers and budget-holders must consider how local governments make room for low-income households (He, 2019). Moreover, as Ghaffari et al. (2018) argued, community empowerment is crucial and should be supported through the use of several strategies, such as encouraging citizens' participation and social movements, incentivizing local job creation, educating the local population, offering legal assistance, implementing community benefits agreements, and managing the social functioning of the area. These strategies will encourage better-organized communities, and they should be able to help mitigate negative impacts (John et al., 2020).

One of the main limitations of this study is the relatively small sample size of 17 informants involved. This small sample might not accurately reflect the varied viewpoints and experiences of all residents in the six villages impacted by gentrification. The study's emphasis on qualitative descriptive analysis can restrict the findings' statistical generalizability and quantitative insights. Future studies should consider increasing the sample size and including a wider range of individuals to solve the constraints and ensure a full grasp of gentrification's effects. A mixed-methods technique, combining qualitative data with quantitative measurements to provide a more thorough examination of the changes noticed (Maheshwari et al., 2022; Thackway et al., 2023), could be used to supplement the qualitative study. Incorporating participatory techniques, such as focus groups and community workshops, would also promote increased community involvement and give locals a forum to express their issues and experiences. Additionally, exploring the long-term effects of gentrification on livelihoods, cultural preservation, and community dynamics would deepen our understanding of the phenomenon's implications. Lastly, future research could expand the geographic scope to include more regions and explore the potential policy implications of gentrification to develop strategies that mitigate negative impacts and promote equitable development.

4. Conclusion

Significant physical development has taken place in Cisauk District due to gentrification. The district was dominated by agricultural land, which has now been transformed into a residential area. This change led to changes in people's livelihoods, with employment moving from farming to retail construction work. The price of land in Sampora Village has experienced the largest increase of the five villages in the Cisauk District impacted by gentrification. This increase is because the village's location is the most strategic. It is close to the business centers in Bumi Serpong Damai and equipped with good public transportation. On the other hand, this study also observes that there has been a decline in cooperation (gotong royong) between residents in Sampora Village compared to other villages in Cisauk District. This, to some extent, is due to the changing social values triggered by massive physical development.

In the gentrification of Sampora Village, land acquisition is carried out by individuals or households. After an agreement on land prices, the residents move out. However, some opted to stay because no agreement was reached or they still had houses. Those who opted to stay had to adapt and cope with the new economic environment—some of the residents who stayed decided to open food stalls or shops.

The gentrification process has had more negative than positive impacts on long-time residents. Some of the positive impacts are the improvement of infrastructure and transportation networks. On the other hand, the negative impacts are the increasing living costs and the changing social values that often lead to long-time residents moving out.

Future policies on gentrification need to address these negative physical and non-physical impacts. Some of the policies that could be implemented include providing training and capacity development to help long-time residents to adapt to the new work opportunities in the area and ensuring that long-time residents are accommodated in the labor force of the gentrified area. This is important as a way to avoid the marginalization of long-time residents and the social segregation of different economic classes of residents. It is also important to establish a community-based organization to help households sell their land to potential investors at an appropriate and fair price.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the reviewers for the feedbacks and suggestions to this study.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: Forina Lestari, Medtry; methodology: Anna Karenina, Myla Dyan Andini; investigation: Myla Dyan Andini,  Medtry; writing—original draft preparation: Myla Dyan Andini, Forina Lestari; writing—review and editing: Anna Karenina, Forina Lestari; visualization: Myla Dyan Andini , Medtry . All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

References

Abdullahi, S., Pradhan, B., & Mojaddadi, H. (2018). City Compactness: Assessing the Influence of the Growth of Residential Land Use. Journal of Urban Technology, 25(1), 21-46. doi:10.1080/10630732.2017.1390299

Amen, M. A., & Nia, H. A. (2020). The effect of centrality values in urban gentrification development: A case study of erbil city. Civil Engineering and Architecture, 8(5), 916-928.doi: 10.13189/cea.2020.080519

Alroy, K. A., Cavalier, H., Crossa, A., Wang, S. M., Liu, S. Y., Norman, C., Sanderson, M., Gould, L. H., Lim, S. W. (2023). Can changing neighborhoods influence mental health? An ecological analysis of gentrification and neighborhood-level serious psychological distress—New York City, 2002–2015. Plos One, 18(4), e0283191. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0283191

Ariani, N. M., Priambudi, B. N., & Wijaya, M. I. H. (2022). Land use change as one of the indicators to formulate the gentrification phase at the diponegoro university semarang. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1089 (1), 012040. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/1089/1/012040

Aune, K. T., Gesch, D., & Smith, G. S. (2020). A spatial analysis of climate gentrification in Orleans Parish, Louisiana post-Hurricane Katrina. Environmental research, 185, 109384. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2020.109384

Chen, Y., Yao, M., Zhao, Q., Chen, Z., Jiang, P., Li, M., & Chen, D. (2021). Delineation of a basic farmland protection zone based on spatial connectivity and comprehensive quality evaluation: A case study of Changsha City, China. Land Use Policy, 101, 105145. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105145

Chou, W., & Dancygier, R. (2021). Why parties displace their voters: Gentrification, coalitional change, and the demise of public housing. American political science review, 115(2), 429-449. doi:10.1017/S0003055421000058

>Feltynowski, M., Kronenberg, J., Bergier, T., Kabisch, N., Łaszkiewicz, E., & Strohbach, M. W. (2018). Challenges of urban green space management in the face of using inadequate data. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 31, 56-66. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2017.12.003

Ghaffari, L., Klein, J.-L., & Angulo Baudin, W. (2018). Toward a socially acceptable gentrification: A review of strategies and practices against displacement. 12(2), e12355. doi: 10.1111/gec3.12355

Gissendanner, S. (2003). Methodology Problems in Urban Governance Studies. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 21(5), 663-685. doi:10.1068/c0224

Goossens, C., Oosterlynck, S., & Bradt, L. (2020). Livable streets? Green gentrification and the displacement of long-time residents in Ghent, Belgium. Urban Geography, 41(4), 550-572. doi: 10.1080/02723638.2019.1686307

Graham, R. (2023). Calgary and the 'creative class': The interface between public policy and gentrification. City, Culture and Society, 32, 100489. doi: 10.1016/j.ccs.2022.100489

He, S. (2019). Three waves of state‐led gentrification in China. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie, 110(1), 26-34. doi: 10.1111/tesg.12334

Hepburn, P., Rutan, D. Q., & Desmond, M. (2023). Beyond Urban Displacement: Suburban Poverty and Eviction. Urban Affairs Review, 59(3), 759-792. doi:10.1177/10780874221085676

Herawati, E., Suparjo, S., & Lestarini, R. (2023). Housing Regulations for Low-Income People in Indonesia. International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Science, 4(1), 240-249. doi: 10.38142/ijesss.v4i1.499

Hersperger, A. M., Oliveira, E., Pagliarin, S., Palka, G., Verburg, P., Bolliger, J., & Grădinaru, S. (2018). Urban land-use change: The role of strategic spatial planning. Global Environmental Change, 51, 32-42. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.05.001

Hudalah, D., Winarso, H., & Woltjer, J. (2016). Gentrifying the peri-urban: Land use conflicts and institutional dynamics at the frontier of an Indonesian metropolis. Urban Studies, 53(3), 593-608. doi: 10.1177/0042098014557208

Janoschka, M. (2016). Gentrification-displacement-dispossession: Key urban processes in Latin American cities. Revista INVI, 31(88), 27-71. doi:10.4067/S0718-83582016000300002

John, S., McGranahan, G., Mkanga, M., Ndezi, T., Stephen, S., & Tacoli, C. (2020). The churn of the land nexus and contrasting gentrification processes in Dar es Salaam and Mwanza, Tanzania. Environment and Urbanization, 32(2), 429-446. doi:10.1177/0956247820938348

Kusumaningrum, D., Anuraga, J. L. Y., & Hafsari, T. A. (2020). The Rise of Exclusive Boarding Houses: Gentrifying Kampung Through New Wave of Urbanization in Jakarta. Journal of Indonesian Social Sciences and Humanities, 10(2), 85-96. doi: 10.14203/jissh.v10i2.179

Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology: Sage publications.

Larsen, H. G., & Hansen, A. L. (2008). Gentrification—gentle or traumatic? Urban renewal policies and socio-economic transformations in Copenhagen. Urban Studies, 45(12), 2429-2448. doi: 10.1177/0042098008097101

Lees, L. (2008). Gentrification and social mixing: towards an inclusive urban renaissance?. Urban Studies, 45(12), 2449-2470. doi: 10.1177/0042098008097099

Maheshwari, R., Grigolon, A., & Brussel, M. (2022). Evaluating TOD in the context of local area planning using mixed-methods. Case studies on transport policy, 10(2), 1015-1025. doi: 10.1016/j.cstp.2022.03.013

Maloutas, T. (2012). Contextual diversity in gentrification research. Critical Sociology, 38(1), 33-48. doi: 10.1177/0896920510380950

Marchal, H., Stébé, J.-M., & Weber, F. (2019). (2019). Gentrification of peri-urban spaces in France–the surroundings of Nancy. Raumforschung und Raumordnung| Spatial Research and Planning, 77(3), 257-271. doi: 10.2478/rara-2019-0013

Martin, I. W., & Beck, K. (2018). Gentrification, property tax limitation, and displacement. Urban Affairs Review, 54(1), 33-73. doi: 10.1177/1078087416666959

Phillips, M., & Smith, D. P. (2018). Comparative approaches to gentrification: Lessons from the rural. Dialogues in human geography, 8(1), 3-25. doi: 10.1177/2043820617752009

Potter, C., & Labbé, D. (2020). Gentrification or…? Injustice in large-scale residential projects in Hanoi. Urban Studies, 0042098020949035. doi: 10.1177/0042098020949035

Shaw, B. J., van Vliet, J., & Verburg, P. H. (2020). The peri-urbanization of Europe: A systematic review of a multifaceted process. Landscape Urban Planning, 196, 103733. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2019.103733

Shin, H. B., Lees, L., & López-Morales, E. (2016). Introduction: Locating gentrification in the global east. Urban Studies, 53(3), 455-470. doi: 10.1177/0042098015620337

Sutherland, L.-A. (2019). Agriculture and inequalities: Gentrification in a Scottish parish. Journal of Rural Studies, 68, 240-250. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.09.009

Thackway, W., Ng, M., Lee, C. L., & Pettit, C. (2023). Implementing a deep-learning model using Google street view to combine social and physical indicators of gentrification. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 102, 101970. doi: 10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2023.101970

Tang, W. S. (2017). Beyond gentrification: hegemonic redevelopment in Hong Kong. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 41(3), 487-499. doi: 10.1111/1468-2427.12496

Wu, F. (2020). Scripting Indian and Chinese urban spatial transformation: Adding new narratives to gentrification and suburbanisation research. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 38(6), 980-997. doi:10.1177/2399654420912539

Xia, C., Zhang, A., Wang, H., & Liu, J. (2020). Delineating early warning zones in rapidly growing metropolitan areas by integrating a multiscale urban growth model with biogeography-based optimization. Land Use Policy, 90, 104332. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104332

Yang, R., & Loopmans, M. (2023). Land dispossession, rural gentrification and displacement: Blurring the rural-urban boundary in Chengdu, China. Journal of Rural Studies, 97, 22-33. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2022.11.017

Zuk, M., Bierbaum, A. H., Chapple, K., Gorska, K., & Loukaitou-Sideris, A. (2018). Gentrification, displacement, and the role of public investment. Journal of Planning Literature, 33(1), 31-44. doi: 10.1177/0885412217716

Zhu trification in China. Cities, 131, 103926. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2022.103926