Throughout our decision making process something that has interested me is how we as students can impact Binghamton economically and in the long-term. The areas surrounding Binghamton have been experiencing poverty and job losses for a while now. I was interested in finding out how the university impacts this poverty and how it could prevent it from getting worse. On the university’s website I was able to find a page dedicated to the economic impact the school has. On this page I found that Binghamton University employed over 5200 faculty and 7300 full and part time jobs across the state. The university’s impact is estimated to be about 13% of the GDP of Broome and Tioga counties. Throughout the 2015-16 school year it was found that the school’s total expenditures resulted in a $1.13 billion impact on Broome and Tioga counties. On top of this BU offers many programs and events to help benefit the local community, many being student initiatives. Some examples would be the Binghamton Relay For Life, Harpur’s Ferry, the Binghamton University Food Co-Op, and even the university’s Center for Civic Engagement. It is clear that the school has a great impact on the surrounding areas but is it always a positive one?
While conducting some research on the university’s website I came across an article discussing gentrification in Binghamton. Undergraduate student, Joshua Gonzalez, is conducting a study on how the new pharmacy school will impact the greater Binghamton area. Gentrification occurs when a business, such as BU, purchases a depreciated property which increases the value of the surrounding properties. This leads to higher rent prices and forces low-income residents to move out of the area. Gonzalez is arguing that this will be an effect of the new pharmacy school being built in Johnson City. Gonzalez had experienced this back in Harlem where he is originally from. He said “Watching my own home change and my friends move out of their homes really pushed me toward this research… its purpose is to improve the area for the community, but if you’re pushing the existing community out as a result, who is the improvement for?”. Gonzalez’s research is important because it will be able to track and examine gentrification before the process even begins. Most research is done after it has occurred. This way Gonzalez and his team can have solid evidence of how it negatively affects the surrounding area.
My question for the class then would be, does the positive economic impact the school has on the community outweigh an issue like this? Should we as students be activists against the school’s expansion like Gonzalez is?
Dear Alexa,
ReplyDeleteI know Josh and his research is definitely something that the university should take a hard look at. Important to point out that the school decided to build the Pharmacy school in Johnson city in order to lift the local economy, they knew what they were doing and they know it will cause gentrification. I agree with Josh, I believe that the incoming pharmacy school students will be eager to pay much higher rent than the locals of Johnson city, which will lead to landlords offering impossible deals when locals will have to renew their lease. Will the opening of Pharmacy school lead to betterment of Johnson city? Yes but on the expense of the local population. That being said, we should not be looking at the economical betterment only in terms of numbers but we should also take the sociological aspect of it. If we push people out of their homes, we most definitely are not helping them escape the poverty.
To play the devil's advocate, a similar research could be conducted to see the other side of the story. Will locals be able to benefit on incoming students through family owned business and new chain stores hiring the local population? That will be something too observe.
Hi Alexa,
ReplyDeleteThank you for bringing up this interesting topic!
As you’ve shown, Binghamton has a great impact on the community. While the project of building the new pharmacy building will certainly have negative results, I think it is important you also consider the opportunities it can create. Firstly, many additional workers will have to be hired by the school in order to complete the large construction process. This new employment opportunity gives many people the chance to make additional income. Additionally, once the new building is completed it will need staff for such things as upkeep and maintenance. As a result, even more people will be hired. Lastly, this new pharmacy program will undoubtedly draw more students to the area that will spend money in local stores and help improve the well-being of businesses. Therefore, the new pharmacy building in Johnson City is not entirely a bad thing for the local economy, even though it creates a negative situation for the people living in that neighborhood.
Considering the additional positive impact that this construction project would create in addition to the impact the school already has on the community, I would argue that the positives do outweigh the negatives in this situation. While I have no statistical data to defend this, I am going to use basic Economics to explain my answer. I agree with Rati’s statement that the school would have considered the negatives of gentrification before deciding to construct a new building. Assuming that whoever was in charge of that decision is a rational thinker (a person who makes decisions based on optimal levels of benefit), they would have only decided to continue with the building process if the marginal benefit (things listed above) of doing so outweighed the marginal cost (gentrification). To operate under any other conditions would be inefficient, and therefore a rational thinker would not act. Therefore, I believe the incidence of the expansion occurring is reflective of the assessment that the benefits do indeed outweigh the costs.
That being said, the only way I would push for students to become activists against the expansion is if it becomes evident that the cost of the project–gentrification–starts to outweigh the new opportunities created by it.
Here is a link on the economics of gentrification:
http://web.williams.edu/Economics/ArtsEcon/library/pdfs/WhyIsGentrificationAProbREFORM.pdf
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHi Alexa!
ReplyDeleteI really appreciate this argument because it isn't something that I have previously thought about in regards to the new pharmacy school.
Gentrification is faced by many impoverished communities where some businesses think that they are doing the best to help the community when in fact they are only hurting them. As in the case of the pharmacy school, I believe those in charge of such projects will always predict in the favor of the project to say that benefit will outweigh costs. But I think the question is, will it really? How do we know for sure that that people in the community will benefit more from the construction of this building?
My argument is not that there will be zero benefits from establishing the new pharmacy school in Johnson City but I think if we examine the long run cost and benefits as opposed to the short run then I think costs will eventually start to out weight the benefits in the long run.
I know that the university does have good intentions for the community with all that it does to contribute. However, I believe that the unfortunate reality of the gentrification that will take place as a result of the new pharmacy school will have dire effects on the Johnson city population and surrounding communities. The truth is that low income residents will sadly suffer at the expense of everyone else.
I absolutely agree that gentrification and the displacement that follows it are both big issues that require more research on. That being said, the concern over the effects of the new pharmacy school is somewhat overblown.
ReplyDeletePut it this way. It's very difficult for an impoverished neighborhood to get out of poverty. The neighborhood is stuck in a cycle of low employment opportunities, which creates low average incomes, which means not much money available for spending on local businesses, which means few local businesses survive, which creates low employment opportunities, continuing the cycle. Pretty much the only way to break this kind of cycle is by injecting some stimulus into the area, in the form of some new employment opportunities. This is what the pharmacy school would bring in. Not only would it create jobs directly for locals, but it also draws students to the area, who bring with them money to spend at local stores and businesses, boosting the local economy and attracting new business and employment opportunities to the area.
This process is, of course, the process of gentrification. Because of this, supposedly, all of the low-income locals will be pushed out as a wave of WholeFoods-chasing hipsters swarm in and drive up the rents.
But this may not actually be the case. There is actually little consensus on the extent of the displacing impact of gentrification. A 2005 study on gentrification in NYC found that the rate of displacement due to gentrification was “a mere 1.3%” http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1078087404273341.
Another study in the same area found that low-income households in gentrifying neighborhoods were 15% less likely to be displaced than in non-gentrifying neighborhoods https://www.citylab.com/equity/2015/09/the-complicated-link-between-gentrification-and-displacement/404161/ .
We absolutely should continue studying the effects of this complex issue, and I strongly support Gonzalez’s plan to study gentrification in action. But I don’t think we need to be as distrustful of the University's intentions with the construction of the new pharmacy school. Economic development is the best way to address widespread poverty in an area, and that's the biggest impact that this new facility will have.
Hi Alexa,
ReplyDeleteFirst off, I am glad that you are addressing relevant issues that may even effect us. Gentrification is an issue that has been discussed for many years now, all around the world, meaning that this issue seems to be more pressing than people think. Generally, I believe that we should be supportive of innovation, progress, and development of our community. Even though this may lead to Gentrification, being more progressive means that it is better for the economy. Binghamton could be able to attract businesses and investors from the outside, which leads to jobs. Even though gentrification brings upon some negative externalities, as you mentioned in your post, we should all be in favor of constant progress within our community
Hi Alexa,
ReplyDeleteThanks for bringing up this topic that I had not thought of before.
While I am not well-versed in the effects and economics of gentrification, I do have a few questions about Josh’s studies on the matter. It is understandable how the negative effects of gentrification seen in many situations can make one suspicious of Binghamton University’s actions. But, I wonder how many local people out of the 12,500 people the university employs? If BU employs and continues to hire a significant amount of people, and the minimum wage continues to rise, perhaps Binghamton residents will be able to afford living in the “new” neighborhood.Is he taking this possibility into consideration? I am also interested in how BU goes about flipping the properties. An issue many people have with gentrification is that changing the town also results in changing or losing its culture. If the university could renovate in a way that could preserve the culture of the town, I think less people would be opposed to it.
It can be easy for students that do not live here to think that gentrification is good for Binghamton - despite its negative effects. As we have learned in this class - we need to people how that want to be helped. First and foremost, if BU’s intentions are good ones, then the university should speak to Binghamton locals and see how they want to be helped. If the numbers show that gentrification is the best way to help, then perhaps it is not bad after all. Ultimately, I am interested in seeing what Josh and his team find in their ongoing research.
Alexa,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that the pharmacy school will increase the economic value of the surrounding area. I do agree that gentrification may occur but I feel as though some gentrification is a necessary evil to pave the way for a better Binghamton and Broome County. I do not leave campus that often mostly because campus is much better than the surrounding area. But when I do leave campus I see dilapidated buildings and run down houses. Broome county is not somewhere I would choose to live. Joshua Gonzalez’s fear that by improving Broome county, BU will force some of the residents out is understandable. But if we must stop progress because we don't want to stop the current residents from continuing to live in poverty. I don’t think that is reasonable. The economic benefit of the pharmacy school will provide some people jobs. The higher income students that will move in will support local businesses and bring economic growth. The fear of it becoming a college town and it pushing out the current residents is valid. But I have the uncommon opinion that I would prefer any kind of progress over Broome County's current state.
Hi Alexa,
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed your post as it has everything to do with my major.
In fact, Josh and I worked together on an extension of the Johnson City study for our senior seminar this semester, focusing primarily on Downtown Binghamton and the area surrounding the new Incubator.
Gentrification and displacement are extremely pressing issues in this area. The influx of urban professionals to the area has made the market rate for housing and goods skyrocket. Lifelong residents are being pushed out of the city core and relocated to less student-desired locations North and East of the central business district.
One thing planners try to do is plan. Sounds a little redundant but let me explain. There is a a lot of literature on the subject but one of my two favorites focused on a city in Denmark called Vesterbro, where the planners tried to take into account the low income residents as the area was being gentrified. However, to avoid being racist and bigoted, they struck the definition of who those impoverished people were from, there plan and as a result, these people were displaced even though planners tried to avoid doing just that.
Another of my favorite is by a guy named Matthew Jerzyk, and he talks about the third way of gentrification, where you use old factory buildings and infrastructure to support redevelopment without having to basically clear the slum areas as per the usual course of action.
I guess what I am trying to say is that the planners, stakeholders and future leaders of this development need to account for those they are affecting. They must define the group they want to protect and they must find alternatives to simply just knocking down and building back up.
In 1950, Binghamton had a population of 80,000, now it is about 47,000. A few years back I interviewed the Director of Planning for Broome County, Frank Evangelisti, and he said, "Binghamton is ready, we can hold all these people, it is just a matter of doing it right."
I stand by that. There is a need to redevelop here, there is an opportunity to grow with strength, we may as well take the time to do it right.
Great post and thank you for letting me rant about my area of study.
-Dylan
https://jc-redevelopment.binghamton.edu/ (Link to Josh's project. Also go vote for him for BU Council, closes tonight. When we finalize our other end of the project, there will be a link from the link above if that makes any sense.)
Jerzyk
http://harvardlpr.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/3.2_9_Jerzyk.pdf
Verterbro, Denmark
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0042098008097101