The paradox of policy-led commercial gentrification in Amsterdam

The Paradox of Policy-Led

Commercial Gentrification in

Amsterdam

MSc Human Geography

Introduction

Gentrification is described by Atkinson (in Smith 2012, 269) as ‘the migration of affluent households to neighbourhoods containing poorer households and generally lower-value property in both urban and rural settlements” and is “one of the biggest forces affecting contemporary cities and neighbourhoods” (Ernst and Doucet; 2013, 189). Inner-city gentrification is by no means a new concept, but one that is evolving with the changing tastes and demands of city life. Doucet (2013, 125) is correct in stating “gentrification is a process of social and spatial change, but it is also a changing process.”

Thus far, the majority of gentrification studies address (the actors involved in and affected by) residential gentrification (Jeong, Heo and Jung; 2015, 147) rather than commercial gentrification which is described as “the emergence of certain kinds of stylish restaurant, bars, cafes and stores in a formerly disinvested neighbourhood” whereby their standout contributions, aesthetics and atmosphere create an attractive neighbourhood with a ‘creative cultural distinction’ and is recognised as a positive cause and outcome of urban regeneration. Amsterdam is an interesting case as the importance of a ‘creative cultural distinction’ has been recognised by the Municipality of Amsterdam and established the Art Factories policy to assist and support the creative economy, social cohesion and urban regeneration. This policy has caused divide between the creative entrepreneurs in Amsterdam who support and oppose its existence, with some who believe this policy actually destroys bottom-up creative spaces rather than encouraging the development of small-scale creative spaces, thus creating a paradox. The aim of this study is to investigate to what extent has policy created a paradox of the commercial gentrification of creative spaces in Amsterdam?

Commercial gentrification is described as “the gentrification of business premises, which leads to consumption spaces for the middle classes” (Ernst and Doucet; 2013, 190). Sassen (1991 in Kloosterman and Van Der Leun; 2010, 663) however, describes the demand for niche markets as a counter-response to larger firms which coincides with Ernst and Doucet (2013, 190) whereby bottom-up start-up spaces “denotes a rejection of mass consumerism” and commercial gentrification. Examples of which include the bottom-up alternative creative spaces such as The Tobacco Properties and NDSM Wharf (see page 9). Such urban social protest coincides with various right-to-the-city literature (Harvey; 1989) which argue that social movements and mobilisations occur in cities as a reaction to ‘neoliberal urbanisation’ (Uitermark, Nichols and Loopmans; 2012, 2547). However, “commercial gentrification represents the lifestyle and values of its users” according to Zukin (2008 in Doucet; 2013, 127), thus residents are taking action to address what is missing or what is wanted in their neighbourhood. Ernst and Docet (2013, 191) concur with this as “the new supply of amenities and services in commercial gentrification tend to represent the tastes (and) values” of the gentrifying middle-classes which can be seen through various bottom-up developments such as Roest (see page 9) and collaborations like the Volkshotel (see page 10).

Zukin (1995) states contemporary cities can be conceptualized as landscapes of consumption, however, the city as a place of consumption is becoming an outdated notion. Although the consumption of facilities and amenities still occurs in the city, there has been an increasing amount of residents getting involved with production in cities. This can be seen in cities such as Amsterdam, where this shift is recognised as “an identifiable urban process” (Atkinson in Smith; 2012, 269) whereby actors, local residents and upcoming entrepreneurs are taking it upon themselves to redevelop their neighbourhoods and amenities to best suit their wants. Typically this occurrence has been the result of those in the middle classes, including artists, urban professionals and students.

Gentrification is typically made up of two elements, “the first is a class-income colonisation and migration by the affluent to cheaper residential neighbourhoods, and second, a reinvestment in the physical housing stock” (Atkinson in Smith; 2012, 270). The majority of existing literature on gentrification discusses housing, social exclusion and the displacement of those in lower income groups. Consequently there has been an underwhelming amount of research on the non-housing aspects of gentrification such as commercial gentrification, specifically the commercial gentrification of creative spaces. In addition to this, Kloosterman and Van Der Leun (2010, 664) identify that in Amsterdam and the rest of The Netherlands the number of entrepreneurs in the working population is on the rise, which suggests a rise in bottom-up initiatives (e.g. Karsten; 2014) occasionally assisted by the Municipality of Amsterdam and initiatives such as Breeding Places Amsterdam.

Cities are described as places where “social movement activity unfolds” (Uitermark, Nichols and Loopmans; 2012, 2546). Fainstain (2010, 164) claims “in relation to the three criteria of diversity, democracy and equity Amsterdam remains exemplary” as democratic participation is encouraged. Amsterdam is a prime example of a city which has undergone substantial, socially-led change and resistance as democratic participation is encouraged and there is evidence of the success of squatter and resident movements against modernist neoliberal renewal plans at Nieuwmarkt and recent protests against the eviction and development of the Tobacco Properties. Harvey (1989) too recognises cities as “indispensable for

motivation and for action. Outrage at injustice and alternative ideas have long animated the quest for social change.”

Shaw (2009, 150) recognises that “state expenditure for the purposes of public ownership is declining in political viability” due to market competition and the influence of private, wealthy developers, she later adds that an aim is to prevent “an all-encompassing middle class colonization” of the city, despite trying to attract international investment. As a result of this, cities are trying compete in the new world economy by trying to gain an alternative and edgy identity through the growth and promotion of the alternative culture and scene (such as in Amsterdam and Berlin). Governmental figures and planners incidentally recognise that cultural diversity and vibrancy are to elements that are key pull factors for attracting investment, economic growth and employment. Consequently, the Breeding Places Amsterdam (BPA) project was introduced in 1999 to encourage the production of workspaces and living-working spaces for artists and cultural entrepreneurs (NDSM Wharf for example). The importance of cultural capital is of such importance and enforced to such an extent that the “official recognition of alternative culture (can be seen as) the ‘kiss of death’” (Shaw; 2009, 150) whereby a controlled and planned approach may stifle suitable existing spaces. Thus, there is seemingly a double paradox as cities are wanting to promote themselves as ‘cultural’ and ‘alternative,’ yet existing cultural spaces are being removed for neoliberal purposes.

Research Questions

This study aims to make a positive contribution to the lacking field of research of commercial gentrification and will focus on how the Art Factories policy has affected the commercial gentrification of creative spaces in Amsterdam by investigating four key case studies (Snakehouse, NDSM Wharf, Roest and Volkshotel). The aim of this research project is to investigate “to what extent has policy created a paradox of the commercial gentrification of creative spaces in Amsterdam?” In order to answer this question a number of sub-research questions have been formulated to give direction to this study. The sub-questions are:

1. Who are the main actors responsible for initiating the development of Amsterdam’s (top-down and bottom-up) creative workspaces?

2. How do the motivations and goals of bottom-up creative spaces and top-down creative spaces differ?

3. Why has the Municipality of Amsterdam removed existing creative spaces and what are the motivations behind this?

4. How (if at all) has the development of creative spaces experienced resistance? 5. What does the Art Factories policy hope to achieve?

Geographical and Societal Relevance of Case Selection

Human Geography looks at the relationship between people and the environment. Geographically this research area is highly relevant as it will investigate local case studies of specific places in Amsterdam, alongside the causes and effects different actors have with these places. The societal relevance of this study will be the research into commercial gentrification and the influence policy has had on resistance, displacement and redevelopment which are all occurrences which are experienced within society, (specifically among those involved with the creative and alternative scene in Amsterdam).

Amsterdam has a history of grass-roots urban social movements and is unique in that urban social

movements have (and continue) to influence municipal policy as democratic planning is based around the needs of its citizens (Pruijt; 2004, 701) and that “democratic participation is encouraged” (Fainstein; 2010, 164). A recent urban social movement in the form of a student occupation on Spuistraat has brought attention to the existing contested space of the Tobacco Properties occupied by creative entrepreneurs in living-working squats against eviction and redevelopment. Despite much protest from the local community and a great number of other citizens, very recently the creative spaces and squats that compromise of the Tobacco Properties were evicted and redeveloped after an ongoing battle to retain the buildings and their creative uses.

Contestation over space is a highly relevant topic which is open to debate due to ongoing issues of

planning, policies and competition over (urban) spaces, an example of which is the Slagenpand building and the other Tobacco properties on Spuistraat which have been purchased by housing association De Key to develop luxury apartments and car parking facilities. Shaw (2009, 153) recognises that there are “cheap or free inner-city places are breeding grounds for the alternative scene,” but these are becoming increasingly difficult to obtain because of their limited availability of such spaces due to an imbalance of supply and demand dominated by the acquisition and purchasing power of neoliberal companies such as De Key. Shaw (2009), Florida (2003), Harvey (1989) have all recognised the contradictions of such developments that would be classed as part of alternative culture. Furthermore, to add to the contradiction of commercial gentrification, Breeding Places Amsterdam project (BPA), ran by the Municipality, have previously invested in new alternative-creative spaces, similar to those that have been removed, which will also soon be shut down for further commercial gentrification, an example of which being the art studios at NDSM Wharf which are soon to be replaced by a Starbucks cafe.

The selected case studies consist of redeveloped (industrial) workspaces such as the NDSM Wharf’s ship yard and Roest’s cold gas building, these redevelopments all add a certain aesthetic and ambience to each space. By no means is redeveloping former workspaces a new trend, but one that Shaw (2009, 150)

believes has recently been identified by local politicians whereby “cities trying to compete in the new world economy are seeking the character that will give them an ‘edge’, and a coincidence of interests is emerging between cities with strong alternative cultures and the alternative scene themselves.” Shaw’s theory fits in with the emergence of the localised Breeding Places Amsterdam project and the broader European

Creative Industries Alliance. Cities, such as Amsterdam, are striving to compete nationally and

internationally with one another to attract and maintain creative entrepreneurs and rebrand themselves to a certain extent.

Following the eviction of the Snakehouse on the Tobacco Properties along Spuistraat, and the power of the Breeding Places policy and the Municipality of Amsterdam, this study is vital for addressing the differences in motivations and approaches to producing creative spaces and businesses. Addressing the differences between successful bottom-up creative spaces and businesses and Municipality of Amsterdam and policy-led developments are important to ensure both can survive alongside each other without the latter entirely commercialising and monopolising the creative and alternative scene in Amsterdam.

This study is an important study which will identify the specific motivations and goals are behind these developments and who the main actors involved in pushing these policies and projects are. “Gentrification is one of the biggest forces affecting contemporary cities and neighbourhoods” (Ernst and Doucet; 2003, 189) but there is currently an underwhelming amount of research completed on commercial gentrification in comparison to residential gentrification and the displacement of those in lower classes. This study will address commercial gentrification, the involved actors and the policies behind the process, and contribute to a somewhat underdeveloped research area.

Case Selection

Amsterdam has a history of grass-roots urban social movements and is unique in that urban movements have, and continue to influence municipal policy as democratic planning is based around the needs of its citizens (Pruijt; 2004, 701) and “democratic participation is encouraged” (Fainstein; 2010, 164). Breeding Places Amsterdam is a prime example of this as there is co-operation between the artists and creative entrepreneurs with the Municipality of Amsterdam and the various partners involved with Breeding Places Amsterdam.

Urban social movements are described by Novy and Colomb (2013, 1819) as ‘type of social movement rooted in collectives with a communal base and/ or with the local state as their target of action.’ Castell outlines three types of urban social movements: defending the cultural/ social identity of a place; to gain control of space and to address issues of collective consumption. This can be seen through the squatting of the Tobacco Buildings along Spuistraat by artists who had been occupied for 32 years before eviction. Harvey would describe this as a ‘space of hope’ because of the role of cultural producers who have created a living-working space. Florida (2002) would label the squatters as the ‘creative class,’ comprising of well-educated, middle-class cultural professionals and artists and described as "a class is a cluster of people who have common interests and tend to think, feel and behave similarly, but these similarities are

fundamentally determined by economic function- by the kind of work they do for a living" (Florida; 2002, 8).

The cases that will be investigated in this study compromise of the Tobacco Properties, NDSM Wharf, Roest and Volkshotel. They have been selected as they are prime examples of creative spaces in Amsterdam with similar roles in that they aim to be creative hubs, but have different origins and actors involved. For instance, Tobacco Properties was a bottom-up living-working space which was evicted; whereas NDSM Wharf was formerly a bottom-up living-working space which has now been legalised and has great involvement with the Municipality of Amsterdam and the Breeding Places policy. Similarly, the creative

spaces and studios at Volkshotel began off as a bottom-up space but then had some involvement with the Municipality of Amsterdam and the Art Factories for a period before the rest of the Volkstrant building was turned into a hotel. Roest too is a mixed-use space and creative hub with a bottom-up business orientated. “Case studies involve studying a phenomenon within its real life setting” (Kitchin and Tate; 2000, 225) allowing for a particular issue to be studied in depth from different perspectives, in this case from a humanistic perspective and alongside the Right to the City theme. Furthermore, looking at a set of individual case studies with related accounts will “provide valuable insight into the structures and

mechanisms of socio-spatial thinking and practice” (Kitchin and Tate; 2000, 227) which too will link in with the humanistic stance and prove useful for understanding the decision making process of the Municipality and understanding the motivations and long term goals.

The following cases will be investigated:

Snakehouse, Tobacco Properties- Living and workspace compromised of 10 residents squatted since March 6th 1983 until recent eviction on March 22nd 2015. This creative and communal space was the epitome of alternative Amsterdam bourn with a strong historical, cultural and social background forged by artists and the community in the city centre. These attributes form the Dutch ideals which have been described and praised by Fainstein and predicted by Harvey and Sassen. This case study has been selected because of its alternative bottom-up nature and roots with urban social movements and its attempted resistance to commercial gentrification before being accumulated by housing corporation De Key. This is an important case for addressing the primary research question (to what extent has policy created a paradox of the commercial gentrification of creative spaces in Amsterdam?) as the Snakehouse is a prime example of a creative space which has fallen victim to top-down neo-liberal commercial gentrification and was unable to secure the assistance of the Art Factories policy. Former residents of the Snakehouse believe that there needs to be stronger resistance to the “far-reaching dulling of the city, destroying everything of real value” (De Slang; 2015). Additionally, the investigation into the Snakehouse has been useful for answering the sub-questions who are the main actors responsible for initiating the development of Amsterdam’s creative spaces?; How do the motivations and end goals of bottom-up creative spaces and top-down creative spaces differ? ; Why has the Municipality of Amsterdam removed existing cultural spaces and what are the

NDSM Wharf- A former shipyard, now a popular creative workspace located in Amsterdam North. After the shipyard went bankrupt and soon after abandoned, the shipyard was then occupied by living/working squatters prior to legalisation and involvement with the Art Factories policy. Now NDSM Wharf is a mix of creative, cultural and commercial collaborations. This is an interesting case as this former squat has become commercially gentrified whereby the bottom-up grassroots beginnings have merged with legalisation and the influence of the Art Factories policy implemented by the Municipality of Amsterdam. Despite the unplanned beginnings of the site and the growing involvement of the Municipality of

Amsterdam and commercial investment, NDSM Wharf still seems to have maintained its soul and core creativity. Examining the case of NDSM Wharf has been vital for understanding how commercial

gentrification has affected the existing creative spaces on sight and the impact of the Art Factories policy, thus helping to answer who are the main actors responsible for initiating the development of Amsterdam’s creative spaces? How (if at all) has the development of creative spaces experienced resistance? What does the Art Factories policy hope to achieve? NDSM Wharf is a good case to compare to Volkshotel because of the bottom-up origins of the mixed-use space and involvement with the Art Factories policy. Additionally because of the bottom-up beginnings of NDSM Wharf, this case study was a good comparison to have alongside the Snakehouse.

Roest- ‘A creative oasis, café and bar, beach and cultural sanctuary’ based in a former cold gas building at Oostenburgereiland since June 17th 2011. This space is similar to NDSM Wharf as it too is a creative haven, hosting a number of alternative events such as film showings, theatre productions, festivals and markets. This relatively young bottom-up space is also highly relevant as it is similar in terms of its role to NDSM Wharf and its outer-city location, yet has managed to succeed independently without the involvement of the Municipality of Amsterdam and Breeding Places Amsterdam. This case has been selected for its independent, bottom-up beginnings, and booming success as a business too, attracting investment to the previously run down surrounding area. This independently run mixed-use creative space has a similar function to Volkshotel and NDSM Wharf, so they are both comparable; particularly when answering the sub-question how do the motivations and goals of bottom-up development and top-down development differ? as Roest has been able to succeed without the use of the Art Factories policy.

Volkshotel- This hotel was formerly the offices of De Volkskrant newspaper, the building has since been revitalised as a vibrant and stylish new life as an affordable hotel, compromising of a club, restaurant, and all manner of creative ventures (including artists-in-residence) in place. As with all the Art Factory spaces, Volkshotel was initially going to be a creative space on a temporary 5 year basis and the entire building was leased by Urban Resort to artists and those working in the creative industry between 2007 and 2013; however in 2012 the building was purchased by an entrepreneur who turned the building into a cultural hotel for ‘‘stockbrokers and punk rockers, dandies and poets.’ Now, the artists and creatives have taken up residence at the back of the building in a 3200m2 space with 84 studios, offices and music studios.

Volkshotel is a prime example of the use of creativity triggering and co-existing alongside commercialisation as “Urban Resort sees the new cooperation between the hatchery with anticipation of starting in May 2014, the new hotel, desks, club, restaurant, cafe and various rooms” (Urban Resort; 2015). This case study is important for understanding how the Art Factories policy has helped with the establishment of the creative spaces at Volkshotel, supporting an already existing bottom-up space, but successfully collaborating with the Municipality of Amsterdam and utilising the Art Factories policy. This mixed use space is particularly comparable to NDSM Wharf because of its bottom-up origins. Investigating Volkshotel has assisted with answering the main research question and understanding what does the Art Factories policy hope to achieve?; Who are the main actors responsible for initiating the development of Amsterdam’s creative workspaces?; How do the motivations and goals of bottom-up creative spaces and top-down creative spaces differ?

Core Concepts

Gentrification: Simply, gentrification is “the rebuilding, renewing and rehabilitation of depressed areas of the inner city as more affluent families seek to live near to the city” (Mayhew; 2009, 205). Doucet (2013, 125) too describes gentrification as ‘a process of social and spatial change, but it is also a changing

process.” Although the majority of gentrification studies tend to focus on the residential aspect and discuss social exclusion, this study will explore the commercialisation of new, existing and former creative spaces and how their development may have been resisted through urban social movements. This will be done through interviewing and the involved and effected actors; by interviewing the decision-makers of the Municipality of Amsterdam which should highlight the motivations and end goals for gentrification in the city. The effected actors too will be interviewed, consisting of the artists and creative entrepreneurs of the Snakehouse, Volkshotel, Roest and NDSM Wharf to gain a humanistic perspective of how policies seemingly encouraging the development of creative spaces have affected them. Understanding gentrification is a core concept to fully understand just how this process and outcome has been affected by (specifically the Art Factories) policy in Amsterdam.

Commercial Gentrification: Commercial gentrification is a term that was coined by McDonald (1986 in Kloosterman and Van der Leun; 2010, 661) and is described by (Ernst and Doucet; 2013, 190) “as the gentrification of business premises, which leads to consumption spaces for the middle classes.” Commercial gentrification can be recognised by “the emergence of certain kinds of stylish restaurants, bars, cafes and tores in a formerly disinvested neighbourhood has marked powerful signs of gentrification” (Wang; 2011, 364). This branch of gentrification is lesser discussed and has been researched less than its residential counterpart. However, it is thought that “the social implications of commercial gentrification may be as diverse as residential gentrification” (Wang; 2011, 367) thus it is important to fill the void on commercial gentrification research and this will be achieved by investigating the causes and effects of policies which both influence and impact different actors (particularly artists, creative entrepreneurs and squatters in this case). For this study commercial gentrification will be identified by the change in the use of space,

‘yuppification’ and the aesthetics. Specific case studies will be investigated, consisting of the Tobacco Properties, NDSM Wharf, Volkshotel and Roest which has helped gain clarity on how “the attitudes towards the trend can vary depending on the extent of gentrification and demographic makeup of the area” (Jeong, Heo and Jung; 2015, 148) which can be a prompt for resistance and urban social movements. Additionally

the Art Factories policy has been analysed to establish the aims and facts set out for the projects and how commercial gentrification

Urban Social Movements: Mamadouh (1992, 309) discusses urban social movements and provides an empirical study of specific movements. She describes the purpose of urban social movements as “aimed at urban social change, which articulate alternative ideas about the political, economic, socio-cultural and spatial organization of the city” which coincides with Fainstein and Fainstein’s (2001, 401) description of “the type of social movement rooted in collectives with a communal base and/or with the local state as their target of action.” Urban social movements such as the squatting of the Snakehouse have been explored to understand the reasoning behind such methods of resistance and the goals of those involved which will be achieved through interviewing the creative entrepreneurs and artists who have squatted those buildings. These interviews address the reasoning behind the resistance to commercial gentrification. Alternative Culture: Shaw (2009, 150) describes alternative cultures as “innovative, experimental,

challenging and devoted to the overthrow of orthodoxies” building upon this by discussing the peculiar relationship with place. Typically places of the alternative culture are found in the interstices of urban form (such as derelict buildings, under-used docks and unregulated, un-policed ‘no-man’s land). Brownfield developments are making such interstices more difficult to find due to their limited nature. The alternative culture escribed by Shaw fits in with Knox and Pinch’s (2010, 341) sub-culture description “a group with values and norm different from the majority culture in society,” the Snakehouse is a prime example of a case study which fits this description. Additionally NDSM Wharf fits Shaw’s description of ‘alternative culture’ as the space has shifted from a ship building arena to a commercialised creative space through the use of squatters, artists and creative entrepreneurs. Those who have squatted and worked in the

Snakehouse and NDSM Wharf have been interviewed to understand the reasoning behind the motivations of acquiring these spaces and the contestation over them between artists, private developers and the Municipality of Amsterdam. Furthermore interviews and policy document analysis will be done to find why cities are striving to achieve a top-down, controlled version of alternative culture.

Paradox: Shaw (2013, 338) describes the paradox further, explaining “not only does the attraction of new investors and consumers often require substantial state expenditure that is orientated more to the new businesses and tourists than long-term locals, but the success of the strategy is premised on increasing land prices and rents, driving out marginal and cultural producers and destroying what genuine diversity the city had in the first instance.” Shaw (2009) discusses the contradictory nature and the appeal of “culture-led regeneration” which is a paradox in itself as interventions with place (whether it be to protect, demolish or alter) can have a negative impact by hindering the natural continuity of the building/ space/ place, affecting the authenticity and natural evolution of a space. This can be seen through the removal of the Snakehouse and the shift in use of the NDSM Wharf which has turned from a marina to a cultural site and now with plans to remove the art studios and replace them with a more commercial use. Furthermore “the

designation of cultural value and ‘authenticity’ puts a premium on the place such that the resulting cachet exacerbates the pressure for gentrification” (Shaw; 2009, 150). The removal of existing creative alternative spaces and the existence of the Art Factories policy is a contradiction within itself. Through reviewing the Art Factories policy implemented to support creative entrepreneurs and interviewing the involved actors (those who have caused and the effected) to highlight the motivations of the paradox Amsterdam is experiencing.

Right to the City: The right to the city was first introduced by David Lefebvre in 1968 when he proclaims “demand... (for) a transformed and renewed access to urban life”. David Harvey (1989, 939) builds upon

this idea and later describes the right to the city as “not merely a right of access to what already exists, but a right to change it after out heart’s desire. We need to be sure we can live with our own creations (a problem for every planner, architect and utopian thinker).” The right to the city is a central theme, and combined with the humanistic approach will help to assist identify how policy is influenced by citizens, and the effects from the outcome. This concept will be particularly relevant alongside squatting as part of an urban social movement and who has the right to acquiring the existing alternative spaces and gentrifying them. This concept links in with the removal of the Snakehouse and the contested ownership and land-use of NDSM Wharf as well as Volkshotel and its success as a mixed use creative space.

Methodology

The findings of this research project should lead to identifying to what extent there may be a policy-led double paradox of commercial gentrification in Amsterdam are. As mentioned previously, a humanistic theoretical stance shall be adopted alongside Harvey’s (1989) work on the Right to the City. The structure of the research design and methodology (shown Figure 1) will be inductive for the first 3 steps and then deductive for the final step. At the end of this process, the results will be discussed and related to the already established theoretical stance. A combination of primary and secondary research methods will be used. Following the policy analysis (Figure 1), semi-structured interviews will be carried out following the process shown in Figure 2.

Theme

The main themes of this study are David Harvey’s ‘Right to the City’ and commercial gentrification. The research stands alongside Harvey’s (1989) position on the right to the city as this will be the most suitable angle to approach the investigation from. Harvey (1989, 939) describes the city as “remarkably resilient, enduring and innovative social form” whereby social mobilization and action are essential to ensure the “right to fight for one’s heart’s desire” (Harvey; 1989, 939). By looking at social mobilizations, this will help to address whether or not there has been resilience towards the development of new cultural spaces and what the motivations of the actors are for engaging in such urban social movements. This is appropriate for this research project as there will be research into the contestation of space and identifying who has “the right to the city” and what different actors (from a bottom-up creative entrepreneur and a policy-makers’) perspectives are on the future of the city.

This research shall adopt a humanistic approach as “humanistic geographers study topics such as (the) cultural construction of place and landscape the cartography of everyday life, place and identity.

Humanistic geography “achieves an understanding of the human world by studying people’s relations with nature, their geographical behaviour as well as their feelings and ideas in regard to space” (Tuan; 1976, 266). This will help establish what the causes and effects of commercial gentrification in Amsterdam are, particularly with reference towards the reasoning behind any potential resistance to new and existing cultural spaces. Common to all of these research interests is a concern with understanding meaningful, humanly authored worlds” (Entrikin and Tepple; 2006, 30). This approach is relevant because it aims to understand the interaction between people and the environment “reasserts the importance of human experiences of people and place, a geography of feeling and emotion, involvement and participation” (Aitkin and Valentine; 2006, 263); as the purpose of this study is to identify the process of commercial gentrification and learn about the actors involved, adopting the humanistic approach is most appropriate to understand the motivations and barriers to making new creative spaces.

Qualitative Research Method

A combination of primary and secondary qualitative research methods will be used. Bryman (2008, 366) describes qualitative research as 'the stress is on the understanding of the social world through an

examination of the interpretation of that world by its participants'. Using qualitative methods supports the humanistic methodological approach suggested and aims to understand the processes of the commercial gentrification of industrial workspaces and who the involved actors are. Additionally, the use of qualitative research rather than quantitative will allow the opportunity to examine the social setting and the opinions of those within this setting towards the creative policies the Municipality of Amsterdam and Breeding Places Amsterdam. 'Qualitative methods can allow us to access these 'embedded' processes by focussing on the context of people's everyday lives, where such decisions are made and enacted' (Barbour; 2008, 13). This will assist addressing the motivations and goals of the policies in place and who the main actors are involved with the decision making processes. Furthermore Barbour suggests that qualitative methods allow the research to focus on the context of everyday lives and social settings which will be useful for this study by identifying the motivations behind implementing bottom-up and top-down developments alongside their effects and the resistance towards the development of new creative spaces.

Overview of Data Analysis

A document policy analysis outlining the details of the Breeding Places Amsterdam has been included. Following the document policy analysis, a thorough analysis of the document has been completed, this will guide the establishment of the key topics to discuss during the interviews with the members of the

Municipality of Amsterdam and Breeding Places Amsterdam (and this will be used in comparison with the interviewees’ responses). The topics that will be discussed during the interviews with the Municipality of Amsterdam and Breeding Places Amsterdam share a similar structure. A separate interview guide and set of questions has been used for the artists, squatters and creative entrepreneurs of the Tobacco Properties, NDSM Wharf and Roest to understand their involvement and experience of bottom-up development initiatives. Prior to conducting the interviews, notes of the discussion topics were split into themes noted down alongside a list of relevant questions. Notes will not be made during the interviews as this could have disrupted the ‘flow’ of the discussion. The interviews will then be transcribed and sent back to the

them in this study. The option to have the recordings sent back was an option that is also made available to the interviewees.

Policy Document Analysis

A critical document policy analysis was the first research method completed. The inclusion of secondary data sources such as the Policy Framework, Studio and Art Factories Programme (Bureau Broedplaatsen; 2012) is important as the published information may “provide the main source of information for the project” (Flowerdrew and Martin; 2005, 36) which served useful in forming the interview questions, particularly for interviews with those at the Municipality of Amsterdam and Breeding Places Amsterdam. Document policy analysis allows the researcher to “probe private, underground or closed social worlds of the past or see behind the scenes of public or well-known events” (DeLyser et al.; 2010, 307). This method has provided detailed information on the Breeding Places Policy and how the goals and achievements outlined in the documents fit in with the Municipality of Amsterdam’s plans for the city and what the creative policies hope to achieve in the future. A number of official documents are available online through the Breeding Places Amsterdam and Municipality of Amsterdam websites, thus the source is authentic, credible, representative and meaningful (Kitchin and Tate; 2000, 227).

Usually one of the advantages of secondary data analysis is the ease of accessibility, however in this case the secondary data analysis is limited to publications in English due to a language barrier as it would be too time consuming to translate numerous documents. This method will be useful; however it is likely that the majority of available documents will be Dutch, which will serve as a significant obstacle due to a language barrier. This deduction of documents based on language does reduce the number of significant documents available, but this does allow ample opportunity for a more in-depth, information-rich analysis.

Additionally, it is important to recognise that the document(s) produced may be biased as “secondary data reflects the aims and attitudes of the people and organisations that collected the data” (Flowerdrew and Martin; 2005, 69).

The key questions kept in mind during the document policy analysis was: ‘why has the Municipality of Amsterdam removed existing cultural spaces and what are the motivations behind this?’ and ‘what do the creative policies hope to achieve?.’ In correspondence with the finding s from the policy document analysis, the topic list and questions to ask were generated for the interviews.

Interviews

Interviews are a flexible and common method used to collect information as demonstrated by Karsten (2014) and Savini (2013). More specifically, semi-structured interviews shall be used in this study. Denscombe (2006, 167) describes the main benefit of this method as “the answers are open ended, and there is more emphasis on the interviewee elaborating on points of interest” as the questions can be adapted to focus in on particular topic areas which will be done for the interviews with the Municipality of Amsterdam and Breeding Places Amsterdam. Additionally, interviews have the potential to gain ‘better, fuller responses’ (Robson; 2007, 77) which can be adapted to pick up on key themes and hopefully provide answers to the research questions. This benefit has proved useful throughout interviews with the artists, squatters and creative entrepreneurs which have been fruitful for providing interesting and relevant new

leads. This method is ideal for gathering information from a first-person perspective which will hopefully provide insight towards the processes behind commercial gentrification (and answer the other

sub-questions mentioned previously). This coincides with Bell’s (1999, 135) belief that ‘a skilful interviewer can follow up ideas, probe responses and investigate motives and feelings’ which will be useful for

understanding how the policies regarding commercial gentrification have affected the artists and squatters interviewed which ties in with the humanistic approach.

Prior to conducting the ‘elite’ interviews with members of the Municipality of Amsterdam and Breeding Places Amsterdam, a pilot study was completed to indicate; if my research methodology was suitable, the plausibility of gaining suitable participants and to get a rough idea of how long the entire study would take to complete. “Projects that are undertaken without any pilot study often run into problems which are difficult to solve without any pilot scrapping what has been undertaken and starting again” (Kitchin and Tate; 2000, 43).

In order to answer the research questions, it was important to interview various actors at different levels of involvement with Breeding Places Amsterdam. Having the opportunity to interview members of the

Municipality of Amsterdam and Breeding Places Amsterdam was particularly important with the belief that these interviews would be the most information-rich and likely to answer the set research and sub-research questions.

The first interviews carried out were done with the artists and squatters of the Tobacco Properties. This was a logical starting point due to the finite lifespan of the properties and their creative use before eviction and acquisition from De Key. The information that will be collected was broad and led onto similar topics which acted as a good pilot study before initiating with the more ‘elite’ interviews. From this, the in depth responses gathered from the pilot interviews has shed some light on other creative living-working spaces similar to those of the Tobacco Properties and discussed the effects of the Breeding Places Amsterdam projects. The questions for these interviews were left deliberately broad to gain as any opportunities for interesting leads. Furthermore, these interviews were particularly fruitful in addressing ‘who are the main actors responsible for initiating the development of Amsterdam’s creative workspaces?,’ ‘what are the motivations and goals for implementing bottom-up development?’ and ‘has there been any resistance to the development of new cultural spaces?.’

Similarly it was beneficial to interview someone from Roest to get a different perspective. Roest is a mixed use venue which also acts as a creative space and hosts a number of different uses (comparable to the Snakehouse). It would be fascinating to find out how that space has survived and thrived as a bottom-up development without assistance from the Municipality. This case study also proved useful in expanding on the answers provided by those at the Tobacco Properties and addressing the same sub-questions listed above.

Interviews with the various actors of the Tobacco Properties, NDSM Wharf and Roest led onto the ‘elite’ interviews with one member of the Breeding Places Amsterdam project team, the project initiators of NDSM Wharf and Volkshotel, and a planner from the Municipality of Amsterdam. Prior to conducting the ‘elite’ interviews with members of the Municipality of Amsterdam and Breeding Places Amsterdam, a pilot study will be completed to indicate; if my research methodology was suitable, how plausible it would be to get suitable participants and to get a rough idea of how long the entire study will take to complete.

“Projects that are undertaken without any pilot study often run into problems which are difficult to solve without any pilot scrapping what has been undertaken and starting again” (Kitchin and Tate; 2000, 43).

Following the pilot interviews, the interviews became much more concise and relevant maximising the opportunity to gain specific information that would have been difficult to gather otherwise. This was assisted by a familiarity with the policy document analysis to ensure that specific facts and figures could be discussed in detail. There most information rich responses were able to address ‘why has the Municipality of Amsterdam removed existing cultural spaces and what are the motivations behind this?,’ ‘what do the creative policies hope to achieve?’ and ‘has there been any resistance to the development of the new cultural spaces?.’

Participants

Name Location Role Interview length

Bart Snakehouse and NDSM Wharf Artist and activist 1:14:04

Ellenoor Snakehouse Artist and squatter 44:14

Jos Municipality of Amsterdam DRO, Planning Department 37:47

Merel Roest Bar staff and event

organiser

23:25

Klaar NDSM Wharf Artist and activist 21:51

Eva NDSM Wharf Project initiator 1:04:40

Job Volkshotel Project initiator 23:10

Bas Urban Splash and Volkshotel Project manager 50:33

Structure

Prior to the interviews a number of questions were devised in order to increase the likelihood of answering the research questions that were set out. These questions were split into themes of Commercial

Gentrification, Creativity, Policy and Urban Social Movements so that the interviews could follow a logical order and maintain a ‘flow’. However, due to the semi-structured nature of the interviews it was not always possible to follow the planned order as this would have limited the opportunity to probe responses further by getting clarification on specific topics which have been useful for gaining valuable information that would have otherwise been overlooked.

Each of the interviews began with some basic introductory questions to build rapport and to clarify the interviewees’ background, this took place by asking them

 Introduce yourself

 How long have you lived/ worked here for?

 What is your role?

Followed by asking the interviewee on their thoughts towards commercial gentrification in Amsterdam as a whole, creative spaces in the city and what the positive and negative features of gentrification are before moving onto more interviewee-specific questions to utilise the opportunity and gain insight on their role and how their space links in with the breeding places policy.

Theme Question Interviewee

Introduction Introduce yourself

How long have you lived/ worked here for?

What is your role? Perception on

Commercial Gentrification

How has commercial gentrification affected Amsterdam? How has commercial gentrification affected creative and alternative spaces?

What are the pros and cons of commercial gentrification?

All

Overview of case study

How would you describe (case study)?

Who was behind the transformation of the building into (case study)?

What were the motivations of setting up this space? Why do you think (case study) is so successful?

Volkshotel, Roest and NDSM Wharf Urban Social Movements

Has there been any resistance to the commercial development of (case study)?

Who is the main opposition to squats; anyone other than the Municipality of Amsterdam?

Do squatters get much support from the public? Why is squatting so important for Amsterdam?

Snakehouse and NDSM Wharf

Policy What has the Municipality’s role been at (case study)? How has the Breeding Places policy affected (case study)? What does the policy hope to achieve here?

How can the policy be improved?

Is policy the best way to stimulate creative spaces?

All

Future of Creative Spaces

What does the future hold for (case study)?

What does the future hold for creative spaces in Amsterdam? All

The first round of interviews were carried out with the artists at the Snakehouse. These interviews served as pilot interviews as the questions asked were pre-determined but not split into different themes and ordered in a logical order like with the later interviews. These interviews were more lengthy than their counterparts as the questions asked were more vague allowing for open-ended responses and to gain further insight into urban social movements as that was the most relevant discussion topic at the time and to avoid mention of squatting and the impending eviction of the creative entrepreneurs and artists of the Tobacco Properties would have been a missed opportunity.

The ‘elite’ interviews that were carried out with Jos, Eva and Job were organised well in advance due to the difficult nature of reaching people with such specific roles in the decision-making process. Each of these interviews started off by asking a deliberately vague question on commercial gentrification to gain insight into what the interviewee prioritised as the effects of commercial gentrification are to them. This question intended to understand their thoughts on a personal, humanistic level. The remaining questions were logical to ask as these would address the research questions and make use of the interviewee’s insider knowledge.

The bottom-up interviews conducted with Job from Volkshotel followed a similar structure to that of the ‘elite’ interviews. The interview had a greater flow and the answers were much more concise and fluent as the interviewee requested the questions in advance to be able to prepare information-rich answers in advance. The interview questions focused more on the actors involved with initiating creative spaces and bottom-up developments in addition to the questions asked at Roest. A similar interview style was adopted for both of these cases as these two places have been selected for their independent and successful nature.

Limitations

Due to the importance of those involved in planning at the Municipality of Amsterdam, it was difficult to get in contact with people that would have provided information rich responses which would have added more weight to the responses provided by Jos and expanded on them further. This was also an issue with trying to contact project members involved with the redevelopment of the Snakehouse at De Key, several attempts were made requesting for an interview or a brief statement, all of which were left unanswered. If an interview with someone from De Key or another commercial gentrifier had have been possible this would have hopefully provided an alternative insight towards the market’s perspective on commercial gentrification, displacement and the importance of social housing and subsidies. Plus, to hear the reasoning of the social housing company’s desire to build luxury, private apartments. Unfortunately, it was not possible to arrange an interview with anyone from the Breeding Places Policy, this would have been ideal for the study as the interview would have provided the opportunity to find out specific details about the policy that were left somewhat vague in the policy handbook.

Literature Review

Within this section of the study, a review of existing literature has been carried out around key topic areas and which has created a basis for the proposed research to be carried out. This literature review has assisted with the creation of the (sub) research questions from the literature that has been regarding commercial gentrification in Amsterdam and on creative spaces, alongside bottom-up development and the influence of policy. Thus, the main topics that this literature review examines consist of; the right to the city, urban planning, urban policies, social movements and community action and bottom-up initiatives. Some preliminary questions were formed to help with the direction of research for this literature review. Who are the actors responsible for initiating commercial gentrification in Amsterdam? What are the motivations for implementing bottom-up development? What are the barriers preventing bottom-up creative space initiatives? To what extent does ‘right to the city’ play over the contestation of space? Which areas in Amsterdam are prime examples of existing redevelopment?

Right to the City

Harvey (1989, 939) acknowledges that “the right to the city is not merely a right of access to what already exists, but a right to change it after our heart’s desire” which sounds idealistic but he later goes on to explain that “the city has never been a harmonious place” due to class division and inequality as a result from the strength of the market. Although he paints a pessimistic picture describing that “we live in a society in which the inalienable rights to private property and profit rate trump any other conception of inalienable rights you can think of,” (Harvey; 1989, 940) he recognises that it is a solvable problem. There is a sense of optimism towards bottom-up developments where he suggests “the creation of new urban commons, a public sphere of attractive democratic participation, requires that we roll back that huge wave of privatisation that has been the mantra of a destructive neoliberalism” (Harvey; 1989, 941). Harvey’s stance on the right to the city is a central theme throughout this study as it complements the humanistic approach that has been adopted and will be used to understand the processes and experiences of the actors involved with the commercial gentrification of creative spaces.

Similarly Fainstein (2010) analyses the relations between equity, diversity and democracy with theoretical arguments addressing “the nature of the good city instead of how one is derived… or the ideals of how to attain them” (2012, 58). Fainstain defines the concept of the just city which she describes as “a city in which public investment and regulation would produce equitable outcomes rather than support those already well off” (2010, 3). The processes of planning and urban policy are discussed in great depth by providing a narrative of the rise of neoliberalism socially, economically and politically. To compliment this she considers the importance of communal, bottom-up participation and how this can influence the quality of life within a neoliberal urban context. Harvey (1919) too looks at the importance of social participation and the potential for contestation and resilience over space alongside the innovation and potential for cities which can be achieved through the quest for social change. This coincides what Fainstain describes as the need for “an intervening stage of mobilization (which) is required between the formulation of ideas and social

action” (33, 2010) to ensure that planning can occur with socio-spatial consideration. Fainstain’s arguments will be used in support with the data collected in this study, particularly in relation to urban social

movements and in junction with the Snakehouse case study which had relied on the success of squatting prior to eviction.

Shaw (2009) cites McAuliffe (2004, 103) defining alternative cultures as “innovative, experimental,

challenging and devoted to the overthrow of orthodoxies.” This description links with Harvey as he argues that post-modern production should be about “the selling of place as part and parcel of an ever-deepening commodity culture” to avoid cultural homogeneity and serial replication. Shaw also acknowledges the challenges posed by the dominance of neoliberalism in terms of planning and the impact it has when trying to create and maintain places of alternative cultures with the threat of neoliberalism letting “the market decide if the demand is there, there will always be other places where reinvented cultures will emerge” (155) rather than it being a social demand. Furthermore, Shaw recognises that the majority of alternative cultural producers are “the politically progressive, middle class” (156), similar to the driving force of neighbourhood gentrification investigated by Karsten (2014). She then discusses that despite the strength of the market, alternative cultures are much sought after and encouraged, focusing on Melbourne, New York and Amsterdam case studies.

Although Shaw’s article is encouraging by addressing the successes of alternative cultures, her city case studies are overly broad and do not specify in detain on singular case studies and their process of development. The study should continue to have multiple case studies, but it could be improved if it was more similar to Savini’s (2011) study which focuses on the redevelopment of Amsterdam’s Eastern Docklands, Rotterdam’s Lloyd Quarter and Groningen’s Hortus Quarter. However, her perspective of the double-paradox is interesting and applicable to Amsterdam and the direction it is developing in, thus this notion of the double-paradox will be implemented in this study to explore to what extent this notion is being experienced in commercial gentrification. Additionally, Shaw provides a good overview of what alternative culture is, which coincides with Florida’s description of the ‘creative class’ and provides a good basis for answering who are the main actors responsible for initiating the development of Amsterdam’s creative scenes?

Florida (2002) notes that the Creative Class is a key driving force for catalysing economic development, explaining that “society is changing in large measures because we want it to” (Florida; 2002, 4) as people are claiming their right to the city. Florida describes a shift that has occurred because the economy has moved on from a corporate-centred system to a more people-driven one where we “individually and collectively make the city through our daily actions and our political, intellectual and economic engagements” (Harvey; 1989, 940). The inclusion of Florida will help answer who are the main actors responsible for initiating the development of Amsterdam’s creative spaces? through his explanation of the creative class and how the rise of the creative class and the “growing segregation of the Creative Class and other classes” (Florida, 2002, 11) which will contribute to answering how (if at all) has the development of creative spaces experienced resistance?. Peck (2005, 767) however, argues that the re-creation of creative strategies is “a serial reproduction of an increasingly clichéd repertoire of favoured policy interventions” which removes the authenticity and significance of existing grass-root creative spaces. Peck’s critique contributes towards answering how do the motivations and end goals of bottom-up and top-down creative spaces differ? And what does the Art Factories policy hope to achieve?

Uitermark, Nichols and Loopmans (2012) is a theoretical paper which provides an historical overview of cities and social movements and critiques the right to the city. Cities can breed contention for a number of

reasons such as the dominance of neoliberalism. Existing studies are critiqued and compared throughout. Cities are described as “an empty canvas” (p2546) where social movements can occur as “the city is a generative space of mobilizations” of innovation. This study will help understand how (if at all) has the development of creative spaces experienced resistance?

Novy and Colomb (2013) consider the growing trend of urban social movements among the creative class in defence of urban space and influencing urban development. This study builds upon existing literature on urban social movements, contestation to neoliberal urbanism and critiques the role of creative city policies in urbanisation, similar to that of Florida (2003). Harvey is referenced throughout, particularly his notion of “spaces of hope” whereby alternative politics and progressive urban change are spoken of highly. Novy and Colomb (2013, 1820) recognise “cultural and artistic resistance i.e. the critical intervention of artists and cultural producers in urban struggles, is not in itself a new phenomenon,” but an ongoing process, one which can be seen at NDSM Wharf.

Mayer (2009) contextualises and expands upon the right to the city slogan in different contemporary urban social movements including who the involved actors are. This study provides an overview of the motto in a shifting context, critiques the right to the city and explains that the right to the city is not the only

movement after an alternative urban lifestyle and social change despite the similar motivation to “fight the commercialization of public space, the intensification of surveillance and policing of urban space, the entrepreneurial ways in which cities market themselves” (Mayer; 2009, 366). Although Mayer (2009) looks at the right to the city and the fluid meaning of the slogan historically, this is more of a linguistic review briefly analyzing each slogan and the meaning within a specific context. This would be more useful if it was a pure critique rather than briefly discussing individual urban social movements associated with the right to the city. This study would benefit from discussing fewer examples and focusing on them and their historical context in further depth and comparing them to one another.

Urban Planning

Both Savini (2013) and Smit (2011) look at the transformation processes of redundant industrial workspaces on the docklands. These papers are both relevant and coincide with the NDSM Wharf case study, as that space was formerly a redundant industrial workspace which has now been developed into a mixed use creative space through bottom-up development. Savini (2013) utilizes an explorative approach and discusses the transformation processes of the North West region of Amsterdam, and how such processes are involved among broader political challenges. Savini (2013) conceptualized the political challenges for planning by splitting them into three categories: approaches to spatial investment,

regulation and spatial interventions in the periphery. The paper successfully demonstrates that the political challenges are part of a bigger picture and linked to broader political spatial topics, issues faced by those at the Snakehouse and at NDSM.

Smit (2011) explores how visual features are important for creative entrepreneurs and provide useful planning information which could then be used to aid the development of more cultural production districts. This paper acknowledges that “until recently, both location factors at the spatial scale of the district and visual quality were generally overlooked” (Smit; 2011, 181) and addresses this absence accordingly. This explorative study has examined various case studies of districts home to creative industries across the Netherlands. This study uses the same research methods employed by Smit by

interviewing actors in and involved with creative spaces. Smit’s data collection approach was exemplary in terms of his stratified sampling and the volume of ‘elite’ interviews that was conducted.

Influence of Policies

Hoppenbrouwer and Louw (2004) look at the mixed-use development of the Eastern Docklands in

Amsterdam to improve the attractiveness of the area. This study looks at the reasoning behind the choice of developments and gains perspective of the creative entrepreneurs located within that research area. By “increasing the diversity of uses within the fabric by encouraging a compatible mix, (this) generates synergies and does not create conflict” according to Grant (2002 in Hoppenbrouwer and Louw 2004). Such attempts at avoiding conflict could be seen as an improvement to previous planning strategies mentioned by Fainstain. Hoppenbrouwer and Louw’s (2004) study has been useful as it provides an overview of the importance of mixed-use spaces, the transformation process of city development and insight into the history of the area. This study adopts a similar aim with the hope of understanding who the actors are behind initiating bottom-up creative (mixed-use) spaces and what the motivations of doing so are at spaces such as Volkshotel and Roest.

Social Movements and Community Action

Uitermark (2009, 351) narrates social movements that have occurred in Amsterdam opposing the modernisation of Nieuwmarkt whereby “everywhere in the city- residents, tenants and squatters-

successfully opposed modernist renewal plans”, contradicting Shaw’s argument that such movements are often led by the middle class. Resident movements were essential to the success of the resistance of modernisation, proving that democracy can occur from the bottom-up. Uitermark (2009, 355) describes these actions as an important factor contributing to the birth of Amsterdam as a just city as “grassroots mobilisation brought the state under democratic control” through resident engagement and direct action such as at the Snakehouse.

Comparable to Uitermark (2009), Mamadouh (1992) provides an empirical overview and expands on squatters and urban social movement by looking at the chronological order of specific movements in Amsterdam whereby “these movements demonstrated that urban residents are able to develop

alternatives about the city and to take steps to change their environment, in other words that they are not at the mercy of real estate developers.” Mamadouh describes the motivations behind actors’ involvement in such movements; Amsterdam is an urban political arena, aimed at social change and to liberate young households. The urban social movements discusses by Mamadouh are those that Fainstein (2010, 164) praises the “three criteria of diversity democracy and equity (in) Amsterdam remains exemplary.” This literature coincides with the interview findings from Snakehouse, regarding squatting, urban social movements and gentrification. Consequently, these studies have helped contribute to answering why has the Municipality removed existing creative spaces? And how (if at all) has the development of creative spaces experienced resistance?

Gonzalez and Vigar (2008, 64) demonstrate that “a sense of place, memory and heritage can be crucial ingredients in mobilising citizens to engage in governance processes and that this can enable a challenge to be mounted to a dominant urban regime” which coincides with Uitermark (2009) and Mamadouh (1992) as there is a real emphasis on the importance of place and local history. The redevelopment of Ouseburn Valley in Newcastle prioritised community participation to ensure a sense of place was maintained. Greth and Corjin (2005) acknowledge that “creeping neoliberalism has led to the systematic subjugation of community and class interests to capital in greater degrees than previously; and of social to the economic”

which concurs with Fainstain and Shaw who both discuss the dictatorship of neoliberalism. This case study is a prime example of successful community-led redevelopment, and also prove that success is not wholly dependent on capital or dependent on the motivation and drive middle-class figures as mentioned by Shaw (2009), similar to the beginnings of NDSM Wharf and the Snakehouse.

On the contrary, Karsten’s (2014) study explores the influence of the middle class families on the Middenmeer neighbourhood which has resulted in the establishment of commercial and public family-related consumption spaces. “Transformations are family-related to the growth of higher income groups in Middenmeer” (181, 2014), supporting Shaw’s perception that the middle classes are the catalyst for redevelopment and gentrification.

Prujit (2004) reflects on urban regimes and squatting in New York and Amsterdam and discusses

Uitermark’s work in detail. Similar to Mamadouh (1992), different types of squatting are clarified and there is recognition towards how urban social movements in Amsterdam have influenced policy and planning. Specifically, the Breeding Places policy is outlined which is beneficial for this study, and the affects the policy has had on squats in the city. Interestingly, Prujit (2004, 703) describes “the key issue that mandates unity is external collective threats,” such as a dwindling supply of affordable living and working spaces and rent prices being pushed up. This insight is important for setting the scene in Amsterdam and

acknowledging that development is not always straight forward and harmonious. Bottom-up Initiatives

Bottom-up initiatives have been proven successful in Gonzalez and Vigar (2008) and Karsten’s (2014) studies. Such changes have been led by “the need to earn a living” (Karsten; 2014, 186) which thereafter construct relationships between customers and entrepreneurs, fixing their place within the local social strata.

Hopperbrauw and Louw (2007) discuss the increasing importance of policy in mixed-use development, specifically the Eastern Docklands of Amsterdam. This empirical study describes the “restrictive policy (that) has been at the heart of Dutch planning policies for the last two decades, aiming to prevent urban sprawl” (Hopperbrauw and Louw; 2007, 975) among the other benefits associated with such policies. As a result of urban policy implementation, “not only does the number of jobs outnumber the forecasts, but

entrepreneurs are also satisfied with the area” (Hopperbrauw and Louw; 2007, 975). This study is useful for acknowledging the potential positive aspects that can be associated with policy, however it does neglect to discuss the negative aspects and the potential socio-economic exclusion and displacement issues.

Kloosterman and Van Der Leun (2010) look at immigrant business start-ups in Amsterdam and Rotterdam and highlights how policy tends to neglect immigrant entrepreneurs in improving neighbourhoods. Consequently, “as scientists and policy makers gradually become more aware of the revival of the small entrepreneur, it became evident that immigrant entrepreneurs had a major part in this, especially at the bottom end of the market” (Kloosterman and Van Der Leun; 2010, 663). This is a relevant study as it looks at the actors involved with bottom-up initiatives, similar to this study; however it is not specific to those involved with commercial gentrification of creative spaces. Although Kloosterman and Van Der Leun (2010) and Hopperbrauw (2007) discuss the importance of policy and development, both studies present the opposing experiences of those who are and those who are not able to get assistance from policy. This contrast is important as it recognises the power and influence policy can have, and the social exclusions it can create as “governments try to chase away this spectre of an increasingly divided city by embarking on various policies” (Klooserman and Van Der Leun; 2010, 659).

Critical Review

The literature examined thus far has provided a good base to begin my investigation into the effects of policy and urban social movements on the commercial gentrification and creative spaces. A combination of empirical and explanatory research has been included to provide a basis for my research. Some of the articles have discussed the right to the city which will prove useful for finding out about the key actors behind initiating commercial gentrification; some have discussed urban planning and policy to understand how this can act as both a catalyst and a barrier to bottom-up development; urban policy has been looked at to address barriers of redevelopment and social movements have been researched to understand who are the actors behind redevelopment, their successes and failures in achieving their goals and employing their right to the city and evidence of case studies where this has occurred.

Savini (2011) in particular offers a good understanding of addressing the processes of change and bottom-up initiatives by including research gathered from creative entrepreneurs who work in these districts and providing background on what is missing from existing research, who the main actors are and an overview of the transition of such spaces. The main strength would be the mixed methods utilised, whereby the semi-structured interviews have been integrated with field research and cross compared. The findings are clear and support the posed research question by focusing on specific case studies (Amsterdam’s Eastern Docklands, Rotterdam’s Lloyd Quarter and Groningen’s Hortus Quarter) which could be used in comparison with this study.

Fainstain’s in depth discussion towards the just city compliments Harvey’s work on the right to the city, addressing the motivations and barriers of urban redevelopment. It is interesting to recognise the contestation over space between different actors, particularly against capitalist neoliberal development. The articles discussed have a negative view towards neoliberal development and support bottom-up initiatives and grassroots developments. This is biased but necessary for a study wanting to investigate the alternative cultures (similar to Shaw, 2009) and bottom-up developments (Karsten, 2014, Gonzalez and Vigar, 2008) which are less common than the homogenous neoliberal developments. The neoliberal developments which are often opposed by the authors, Uitermark (2009)’s narrative is evidence of the impact residents of the city can have in influencing change for social reasons rather than political or economic.

Further research on examples of the commercial gentrification of creative spaces in Amsterdam would be beneficial to this study, however this area is under-researched, thus this study addresses this gap.