Atkinson looked to see whether population changes were voluntary migrations and, whether, what he called “G” areas were truly gentrified or if they had simply experienced natural social changes (Atkinson, 2000). Atkinson’s (2000) research revealed the inverse relationship between gentrification and homeless populations in London. There were more homeless people in outer London than in the inner city, due to inner London’s greater extent of gentrification, which in turn pushed many people to outer London (Atkinson, 2000). It was found that in the areas of London that were gentrified, mostly professionals moved in, while those of lower income were displaced (Atkinson, 2000). This type of research adds an empirical strength to understanding causality between gentrification and a city’s homeless population. However, perception cannot be seen in data, but can only come from interviews and understanding personal
Atkinson looked to see whether population changes were voluntary migrations and, whether, what he called “G” areas were truly gentrified or if they had simply experienced natural social changes (Atkinson, 2000). Atkinson’s (2000) research revealed the inverse relationship between gentrification and homeless populations in London. There were more homeless people in outer London than in the inner city, due to inner London’s greater extent of gentrification, which in turn pushed many people to outer London (Atkinson, 2000). It was found that in the areas of London that were gentrified, mostly professionals moved in, while those of lower income were displaced (Atkinson, 2000). This type of research adds an empirical strength to understanding causality between gentrification and a city’s homeless population. However, perception cannot be seen in data, but can only come from interviews and understanding personal