THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF URBAN REVITALIZATION Competing Theories

The Marxian and pluralist approaches to the study of inner-city revitalization are described and contrasted. Each approach works from different assumptions about the role of the state, the functions of economic development, and the causes of urban change. However, the approaches agree that there is mutual interdependence among cultural, political, economic, and ecological determinants of gentrification, and this is seen as a basis for a possible synthesis that would enhance the usefulness of future research. Social scientists are just beginning to collect useful data on the spreading phenomenon of inner-city revitalization, or &dquo;gen-trification.&dquo; The current absence of good data notwithstanding, a heated scholarly debate is already in progress between Marxian and pluralist theories about revitalization (see Horton, 1966; Buttel, 1976; Guterbock, 1980). The theories are expressly political in their content and implications and lead to opposing hypotheses about the nature of current neighborhood changes and their consequences for social inequalities. This article outlines the contrasting assumptions of the two theories, con-siders whether empirical research can possibly reconcile the conflicts between them, and suggests a possible synthesis. AUTHOR’S NOTE: This paper grew out of’research on inner-city revitalization conducted in collaboration with Tracey Bidewel! while she was an under