IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/urbstu/v54y2017i16p3772-3788.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Community leadership and engagement after the mix: The transformation of Toronto’s Regent Park

Author

Listed:
  • Shauna Brail

    (University of Toronto, Canada)

  • Nishi Kumar

    (Wellesley Institute, Canada)

Abstract

The CAD$1 billion transformation of Toronto’s Regent Park neighbourhood from Canada’s largest public housing site to a mixed income community is likely to inform the next several decades of public housing redevelopment policy both nationally and internationally. This paper focuses on the process and impacts of large-scale redevelopment, in the context of attempts to build a physically and socially inclusive neighbourhood incorporating non-market and market housing in downtown Toronto. Drawing from in-depth interviews with 32 Regent Park community leaders and other key decision makers, the paper explores how resident engagement and leadership development opportunities impact redevelopment processes in mixed income initiatives. Results focus on three key emerging areas of both strength and concern: (1) efforts to build community alongside the redevelopment as an integral, evolving and place-specific strategy; (2) the impacts and challenges of both a strong institutional environment in Regent Park and a sense of weak institutional memory; and (3) formal and informal leadership and mentorship opportunities and their contribution towards the development of engagement and cohesion in Regent Park. The opportunity for low-income housing initiatives to support knowledge building and learning, preservation of institutional memory and local leadership development is significant in the context of examining physical and social redevelopment.

Suggested Citation

  • Shauna Brail & Nishi Kumar, 2017. "Community leadership and engagement after the mix: The transformation of Toronto’s Regent Park," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(16), pages 3772-3788, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:54:y:2017:i:16:p:3772-3788
    DOI: 10.1177/0042098016683122
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0042098016683122
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0042098016683122?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J. Lucio & W. Wolfersteig, 2012. "Political and social incorporation of public housing residents: challenges in HOPE VI community development," Community Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(4), pages 476-491, July.
    2. Elena Sautkina & Lyndal Bond & Ade Kearns, 2012. "Mixed Evidence on Mixed Tenure Effects: Findings from a Systematic Review of UK Studies, 1995–2009," Housing Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(6), pages 748-782.
    3. Kleinhans, Reinout & van Ham, Maarten, 2013. "Lessons Learned from the Largest Tenure Mix Operation in the World: Right to Buy in the United Kingdom," IZA Discussion Papers 7168, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Martine August, 2014. "Negotiating Social Mix in Toronto's First Public Housing Redevelopment: Power, Space and Social Control in Don Mount Court," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(4), pages 1160-1180, July.
    5. Rachel Garshick Kleit, 2005. "HOPE VI New Communities: Neighborhood Relationships in Mixed-Income Housing," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 37(8), pages 1413-1441, August.
    6. Erin M. Graves, 2011. "Mixed Outcome Developments," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 77(2), pages 143-153, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chu Chu & Rie Nomura & Suguru Mori, 2019. "Actual Conditions of Mixed Public–Private Planning for Housing Complexes in Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-19, April.
    2. Amie Thurber & Claire Riehle Bohmann & Craig Anne Heflinger, 2018. "Spatially integrated and socially segregated: The effects of mixed-income neighbourhoods on social well-being," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(9), pages 1859-1874, July.
    3. Pablo Mendez, 2018. "Encounters with difference in the subdivided house: The case of secondary suites in Vancouver," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(6), pages 1274-1289, May.
    4. Ruth Sessler Bernstein & Morgan Bulger & Paul Salipante & Judith Y. Weisinger, 2020. "From Diversity to Inclusion to Equity: A Theory of Generative Interactions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 395-410, December.
    5. Zwiers, Merle & Kleinhans, Reinout & van Ham, Maarten, 2015. "Divided Cities: Increasing Socio-Spatial Polarization within Large Cities in the Netherlands," IZA Discussion Papers 8882, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Mark Joseph & Robert Chaskin, 2010. "Living in a Mixed-Income Development: Resident Perceptions of the Benefits and Disadvantages of Two Developments in Chicago," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 47(11), pages 2347-2366, October.
    7. Richard Lawder & David Walsh & Ade Kearns & Mark Livingston, 2014. "Healthy Mixing? Investigating the Associations between Neighbourhood Housing Tenure Mix and Health Outcomes for Urban Residents," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(2), pages 264-283, February.
    8. Zwiers, Merle & Bolt, Gideon & van Ham, Maarten & van Kempen, Ronald, 2014. "Neighborhood Decline and the Economic Crisis," IZA Discussion Papers 8749, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Merle Zwiers & Maarten van Ham & Reinout Kleinhans, 2019. "The effects of physical restructuring on the socioeconomic status of neighbourhoods: Selective migration and upgrading," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(8), pages 1647-1663, June.
    10. Galster, George & Andersson, Roger & Musterd, Sako & Kauppinen, Timo M., 2008. "Does neighborhood income mix affect earnings of adults? New evidence from Sweden," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 858-870, May.
    11. Melissa Butcher & Luke Dickens, 2016. "Spatial Dislocation and Affective Displacement: Youth Perspectives on Gentrification in London," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(4), pages 800-816, July.
    12. Stephen L. Ross, 2009. "Social Interactions within Cities: Neighborhood Environments and Peer Relationships," Working papers 2009-31, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    13. Fenne M. Pinkster, 2014. "Neighbourhood Effects as Indirect Effects: Evidence from a Dutch Case Study on the Significance of Neighbourhood for Employment Trajectories," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 2042-2059, November.
    14. Jaap Nieuwenhuis & Tiit Tammaru & Maarten van Ham & Lina Hedman & David Manley, 2020. "Does segregation reduce socio-spatial mobility? Evidence from four European countries with different inequality and segregation contexts," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(1), pages 176-197, January.
    15. Gary Bridge & Tim Butler & Patrick Le Galès, 2014. "Power Relations and Social Mix in Metropolitan Neighbourhoods in North America and Europe: Moving Beyond Gentrification?," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(4), pages 1133-1141, July.
    16. Leccis, Francesca, 2019. "Regeneration programmes: Enforcing the right to housing or fostering gentrification? The example of Bankside in London," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    17. April Jackson, 2020. "Three Local Organizing Strategies to Implement Place-Based School Integration Initiatives in a Mixed-Income Community," Societies, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-20, January.
    18. Jeongseob Kim & Kristin Larsen, 2017. "Can new urbanism infill development contribute to social sustainability? The case of Orlando, Florida," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(16), pages 3843-3862, December.
    19. Musterd, Sako & Marci?czak, Szymon & van Ham, Maarten & Tammaru, Tiit, 2015. "Socio-Economic Segregation in European Capital Cities: Increasing Separation between Poor and Rich," IZA Discussion Papers 9603, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Martine August, 2016. "Revitalisation gone wrong: Mixed-income public housing redevelopment in Toronto’s Don Mount Court," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 53(16), pages 3405-3422, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:54:y:2017:i:16:p:3772-3788. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/urbanstudiesjournal .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.