Cities, Vol. 19, No. 6, p. 419–423, 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.Pergamon

Printed in Great Britain0264-2751/02 $ - see front matter

www.elsevier.com/locate/cities

PII: S0264-2751(02)00072-0

Viewpoint

Gentrification and SouthAfrican cities

Towards a research agendaGustav Visser*Department of Geography, P.O.Box. 339, University of Free State, Bloemfontein,9300, South Africa

Whereas South Africa’s cities have generally been understood as a “unique” urban form, manytheoretical perspectives and urban processes – such as gentrification – which are often reserved forconsideration in cities of advanced capitalist societies, are also of relevance there. In fact, importantcontributions to these theoretical perspectives can be made by drawing upon the South African urbanexperiences, while also providing a basis whereby local scholarship can be integrated into inter-national urban debates. 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction

Over the past three decades urban plan-ners, private developers and numerousgovernment bodies have seriouslyengaged a range of urban renewal pro-grammes (Harvey, 2000). These drivesfor urban regeneration have similarlybeen echoed in South African cities,with countless initiatives proposedsince the beginning 1990s (Bremner,2000; Dirsuweit, 1999). The need forsuch calls to action were underpinnedby a range of decentralisation processesthat have taken place since the mid1970s, “white-flight” from the inner-city areas since the late 1980s, insti-tutional capital disinvestment and thesuburbanisation of high-order servicefunctions, all of which have contributedtowards the physical decay that hascome to define South Africa’s CentralBusiness Districts (CBDs) and sur-rounding inner-city areas (Beavon,2000a, 2000b).

∗Tel.: +27 51 401 3762; fax:+27 51 4013816; e-mail: visserge@sci.uovs.ac.za

419

These processes of decline are notunique to the South African urban con-text but have been witnessed in manyformer industrial cities internationally(Lees, 1994). Literally hundreds ofurban renewal programmes have beenintroduced to reverse these processes ofdeterioration (Harvey, 2000). Perhapsthe most controversial form of urbanrenewal to emerge has been the processof gentrification, a complex and variedform of urban regeneration (Slater,2002). In the South African context,however, gentrification processes havelargely been absent and this explains anextremely limited body of literatureconsidering its relevance to the localurban context (see as exceptions Gar-side, 1993; Kotze, 1998; Kotze andVan der Merwe, 2000; Steinbergetal., 1992).

Recent developments in the manage-ment of South African central cities, inparticular the introduction of CentralCity Improvement Districts (CIDs),along with a number of inner-cityredevelopment initiatives most force-fully seen in Cape Town and Johannes-

burg (see Cape Business News, 2002a;Star, 2002), in addition to a significantrent-gap between CBDs anddecentralised nodes have, however,presented classic opportunities forgentrification processes to emerge as apart of urban regeneration. In fact,recent media reports suggest that thisprocess is starting to take shape in anumber of Cape Town’s inner-cityareas, provoking intense critique,whilst few local policy makers, plan-ners, urban managers and developersseem able to respond in any informedmanner (see for example, Cape Times,2001; Yutar, 2001).

Seen against this backdrop, theobjective of this commentary is simple:to assess gentrification as a potentialsite for research in the South Africanurban system. To achieve this goal thediscussion first reviews the limitedbody of gentrification research under-taken in South African cities. The focusthen turns towards a consideration ofthe type(s) of gentrification researchissues we might address in the post-apartheid urban context.

Viewpoint: Gustav Visser

Gentrification as urbanprocess in South Africa

Gentrification, in the broadest sense,has come to mean a unit-by-unit acqui-sition of housing which displaces low-income residents by high-income resi-dents and is independent of the struc-tural condition, architecture, tenure, ororiginal cost level of the housing(Kotze, 1998). Explanations of gentr-ification are complex, in the mainbecause it is affected by different theor-etical and political underpinnings ofthose that conduct research into itsworkings. The analysis of gentrificationhas exposed a considerable tensionbetween those focusing on the econom-ics of the process – that being therelationship between the flows of capi-tal and the production of urban spaceon the one hand (e.g. Smith, 1979); andthose interested in the characteristics ofthe gentrifiers and their patterns of con-sumption within the broader sphere ofurban culture in post-industrial society,on the other (Ley, 1995, 1996). Whilstsomething of a simplification of thediscourse of gentrification, these twopositions have respectively becomeknown as “production-side” and “con-sumption-side” explanations of gentr-ification.

A growing concern in gentrificationliterature aims to move the researchagenda beyond the production-con-sumption binary of the past two dec-ades. Whilst production-side argumentshave enticingly been reconfigured asdebates about the “ revanchist city” , andconsumption arguments under theheading of the “emancipatory city” ,apparent agreement has been reachedthat there is ultimately complimentarityin these two approaches. Whereas thereis much work to be done in developinga more theoretically appealing alterna-tive, drawing upon this realisation, theconcerns of both are key to thinkingthrough the role of gentrification inSouth African urban context.

Under provocative press releasessuch “Residents of The Bo-Kaap stageda march over the weekend to protestagainst what they termed the ‘gentri-fication’ of the area…” (Cape Times,2001, 5) and “Commercialisation andgentrification threaten the great qual-ities of the Bo-Kaap…” (Yutar, 2001,15), the process of gentrification has

420

recently emerged as a growing concernin South African urban redevelopmentdiscourse. However, in seeking a local“voice” concerning the desirability ofgentrification, South African researchpresents little for a measured and infor-med response to this process. In fact,in the local context, there is currentlyonly a handful of academic studies wemay turn to for guidance. The near totalabsence of research on gentrificationlocally has to be read against the recentdynamics of urban change in SouthAfrican cities.

The chronicling of inner-city declineacross South Africa has been keenlypursued for some time (see for exampleBeavon, 2000a, 2000b; Bremner,2000). Perhaps the most interesting isthat of Beavon, who traces some of thedecline of central Johannesburg tocompetition for decentralised tertiaryactivities as far back as the 1960s,when for political reasons the State cre-ated new municipalities, such as Sand-ton and Randburg, on the northern per-iphery of Johannesburg. It wassuggested that in order to secure theirown tax base these new municipalitiesaggressively competed for both retailand office business in central Johannes-burg. This in turn led to dramatic urbandevelopment on the city periphery andalong a number of decentralised nodes.Subsequently, these patterns were notonly discernible in the other neighbour-ing municipalities around Johannesburgbut also in Cape Town, Pretoria andDurban.

In addition, as demonstrated is a ser-ies of papers by Rogerson (1986, 1995,1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001)industrial change in terms of facilitylocation, land-use needs and customer-base, as well as national and regionaleconomic cycles, both during the lateand post-apartheid era, underpinnedfurther disinvestment and the sub-urbanisation of manufacturing and arange of related service functions.These processes of change came, incombination, to underpin the physicaldecline of South Africa’s Central Busi-ness Districts (CBDs) and surroundinginner-city areas. Whilst this process hasbeen most visible in Johannesburg andto a lesser extent Pretoria and Durban,even Cape Town, often hailed as theSouth African exception, has until veryrecently seen disinvestment from its

CBD to suburban locations (Cape Busi-ness News, 2002b). Given that theseprocesses have been in evidence formore than two decades, it is not surpris-ing that the existing literature on gentr-ification is small. Despite its size, theresearch nevertheless, displays the twomain theoretical approaches seen ininternational gentrification research.

The first published work on gentr-ification in South Africa came to pressin the early 1990s. In research drawingheavily on “production-side” politicaleconomy, Steinberg et al. (1992) inves-tigated the possibility of gentrificationin the east-end of central Johannesburg.Their research drew heavily on thepremise that by the beginning 1990sthere was a significant rent-gap inJohannesburg and hence opportunityfor gentrification to take place. Theyargued that the “crusade” for inner-cityredevelopment throughout the late1980s and early 1990s occurred in thecontext of broader economic crisis inSouth Africa (i.e. speculative capitalistinvestment). They contended that it hadbeen led by the structural rise of fin-ance in the economy and that it came ata momentous historical junction whenurban desegregation permitted thespace of the city to play a greater rolein the broader formation of classalliances (Steinberg et al., 1992). Theysuggested that the most coherentapproach of the local state and capitalis gentrification, but of a particular sort,aimed at an ascendant fraction of theblack working class more than at tra-ditional white “yuppies” . As a conse-quence they concluded that in light ofthe peculiarities of capitalist overaccu-mulation in South African cities, thechances of gentrification as understoodin the international context were slim.In reflecting upon Johannesburg’sCBD, this prediction appeared to havebeen very accurate. On the whole, how-ever, this study lacked extensiveempirical foundations and did not gen-erate further debate concerning pro-duction-side gentrification in Johannes-burg, or elsewhere.

An equally limited body of localresearch has drawn upon the greaterintellectual freedom afforded by theconsumption-side approaches to gentr-ification research, as well as the needfor empirical investigations into agent-led gentrification processes in South

Viewpoint: Gustav Visser

African cities. This movement is prob-ably best reflected in the work of Gar-side (1993); Kotze (1998), and Kotzeand Van der Merwe (2000) in CapeTown. The first empirical research ongentrification to emerge came from anexploratory study by Garside (1993) inCape Town’s Woodstock neighbour-hood. This study demonstrated thaturban renewal processes – of whichgentrification was a part – started in the1980s, when increasing numbers ofmore affluent people from the ‘colou-red’ community started to settle inLower Woodstock (a white group areaat the time), after a decision by aNational Commission of Enquiry sug-gested that white municipalities had todecide themselves at what level, andwhere, racial desegregation could takeplace. Garside found that the localhome-owners, who began to notice thereplacement of working class renterswith middle class renters, started toredevelop their dilapidated terracedhouses to secure higher rentals or sell-ing prices. This process was also repli-cated in Higher Woodstock, wherewhite working class people werereplaced by middle-class professionals.

To date, the most comprehensivestudy of gentrification undertaken inany South African city is Kotze’s(1998) doctoral thesis on gentrificationin a number of Cape Town inner-cityneighbourhoods. In a highly technicalstudy, the objective of the research wasto develop a gentrification profile forCape Town, which in turn underpinnedthe generation of a gentrification modelfor this city. The key focus of thisresearch was who these gentrifiers werein order to confirm gentrification anddifferentiate it from urban renewal inCape Town’s inner-city. The researchas a whole identified two neighbour-hoods within the inner-city that actuallyexperienced gentrification processes –the foremost area being De Waterkant,bordering the CBD to the north-west.Whilst the historical impact of theapartheid state’s relocation policieswere in evidence in some cases, thisinvestigation demonstrated that per-sonal characteristics, typical of the“new middle class” , were the key driv-ers of gentrification.

Notwithstanding this study providingan appropriate platform for furthergentrification studies, no current

421

research appears to be following onfrom this exploration or its applicabilityto other South African cities.

Prospects for South Africangentrification studiesOver the past two years, there has beena significant shift in the cycle of declinewitnessed in South Africa’s inner-cityareas. The introduction of Central CityImprovement Districts, commonlyreferred to as CIDs, and major infra-structure investments, including trans-port, conference facilities, etc. areseemingly bucking trends of decay.These processes of change are noteven, and currently it is probably CapeTown that has gone furthest down thisroad. In fact, a range of multi-billionrand redevelopment projects, such asthe V&A Waterfront area, the Fore-shore and CBD, are being transformedinto new spaces for living and working,as well as for leisure, and have grippedthe public imagination nationally(Wesgro, 2002).

These processes are also increasinglyin evidence elsewhere in South Africa.The much publicised “Blue IQ” pro-jects in Gauteng are probably the mostfar-reaching in their intent to regeneratelarge parts of inner-city Johannesburg(Blue IQ, 2002). Whereas, in mostcases these development initiatives arebuilt around an array of large-scale pro-duction and consumption facilities, per-haps the most interesting relates to themovement of private, rather than pub-lic, capital to inner-city areas(Dirsuweit, 1999). Under titles such as“Joburg face-lift is already paying divi-dends” (The Star, 2002), “Durban’sCBD is bouncing back” (Horner, 2002)and “Back to town!” (Jordan, 2000), anumber of changes suggest that theseCBDs are turning around and is “againbecoming hot property” (Horner,2002). The motif in most cases is suc-cinctly stated as “ investors being luredback by bargain-basement prices, fall-ing crime and reliable rental” (Jordan,2000). Seeing that a major rent-gap isin evidence across South Africa’smetropolitan inner-city areas, this is nosurprise. It is also in this context of pro-perty “being ripe for redevelopment”and the introduction of a range offacilities often drawn upon by the “newmiddle class” that possibilities for

gentrification arise. In this context,then, we might interpret what followsas providing some outlines of whatgentrification research might be pur-sued in South African urban areas.

Firstly, the decline of inner-cityareas has in many ways providedopportunities for new societal cohortsto both engage the urban economy andfind a place of residence in the CBD,mainly in former white working-classand lower middle income areas(Morris, 1997; Rogerson, 1997). Gentr-ification in a South African contextdoes not need to take on its typicalAnglo-American form, in which gentr-ification is generally closely associatedwith black–white displacement pro-cesses. In contrast to the production-side gentrification research and its longtradition in which working class urbanblacks are portrayed as the victims ofgentrification (cf. Lees, 2000), a smallbut significant literature by authorssuch as Schaffer and Smith (1986);Taylor (1992) and Downer (1999),demonstrate that Black cohorts can alsobe agents of gentrification. Conse-quently, in the local context, thisimmediately begs the question ofwhether it is not possible that similarprocesses are playing themselves out inpost-apartheid cities.

In fact, there is a growing literatureon the desegregation of post-apartheidurban areas (Christopher, 2001; Kotzeand Donaldson, 1998; Kotze, 1999),demonstrating that this process hasbeen uneven across the urban hierarchyin terms of where it takes place andwhat socio-economic cohorts areinvolved. It has to be kept in mind thatdespite the close relationship betweenrace and class in South Africa, a sub-stantial black middle-class is emerging(Mail and Guardian, 1999). Many ofthose in the black middle-class can beclassified as “ the new middle-class” .Thus, in viewing desegregation data,we might suggest that far from blackurban in-migration “ lowering” formerwhite neighbourhoods, perhaps move-ment towards white working-class dis-placement by increasingly upwardlymobile black professionals, less con-cerned with the inner-city areas being“black” , presents evidence of gentr-ification. In addition, we might seek outquestions as to whether these potentialblack gentrifiers share the same per-

Viewpoint: Gustav Visser

sonal characteristics as their whitecounterparts, as well as possible prob-lems related to racial difference in suchcases, and so on.

On the other hand, black middleclass in-migration provides opport-unities to consider “white” displace-ment in the post-apartheid context. Oneof the ironies of desegregation researchin the post-apartheid context has beenthe eerie silence concerning wherethese “displaced” whites have moved.To put this in a more concrete SouthAfrican urban context, it is necessaryto ask where the former white workingand lower-middle classes of innerJohannesburg, Durban, Cape Town, orPietersburg and Boemfontein, to namea few, have moved to?

Second, the emergence of an increas-ingly large black middle-class alsoposes questions surrounding the possi-bility of gentrification in South Africa’sformer black townships. Whereas theseareas are near universally portrayed ashomogenous dormitory towns andneighbourhoods of abject poverty andstruggling working class residents, thisis certainly not always the case. Conse-quently, we might ask what the dynam-ics of neighbourhood change takingplace in these areas are and if it is notpossible that sites of gentrificationmight be identified there?

Third, drawing on inconclusive butnevertheless suggestive evidence inKotze’s (1998) detailed empiricalinvestigation of gentrification in DeWaterkant in Cape Town, a focus onthis area has been extended in recentwork by Elder (2003) and Visser(2002a, 2002b, 2002c), who havefound that this area has again and in avery short period of time experiencedrapid and large-scale change into a keysite for gay leisure and tourism con-sumption. Thus, those that initiated thegentrification cycle have in turn beendisplaced by a new social and econ-omic cohort. Visser’s (2002a) study,for example suggests that displacementof middle-class white gay men bywealthier gay men from core regionssuch as the United Kingdom, Germany,etc., has provoked no critique fromsocial commentators. This processmight form the basis for interestinginternational comparative researchfocused on gentrification, linked totourism and leisure-led migration.

422

Fourth, more direct questions con-cerning the desirability of gentrificationmight be thought through in a SouthAfrican urban context. For example,there is an increasing concern for theerosion of the South African historicurban fabric (important to differentraces and political formations) in termsof many sites of historical, cultural andpolitical significance falling prey todemolition on the grounds of theirirreparable state (see for exampleAnsley, 2002). In this context, a num-ber of issues arise around the intersec-tion between gentrification, urbanrenewal, urban conservation and nationformation. In a post-apartheid urbansociety, it is not as simple as is seem-ingly implied in international literature,to insist that buildings of historical, cul-tural and political significance merelybe supported by public funds, be thosenational or local. In South African cit-ies, issues of social justice in terms ofmore important basic service deliverydoes not provide the relative luxury ofplacing the needs of a few hundredhouseholds above the needs of very lit-erally the “poor masses” . In any event,those affected by gentrification ininner-city Cape Town, for example, arerelatively fortunate individuals com-pared to other urban communitieslocked into the townships and theurban periphery.

The significance to these sites alsogoes further – in terms of their impor-tance as tourist nodes in central CapeTown, and potential tourist sites inJohannesburg, Pretoria or Durban, toname a few (see Rogerson, 2002). Theinner-city of Cape Town is a keycomponent of internationally-drivenurban tourism and has in fact grippedthe public imagination of South Africanurbanites elsewhere. In addition, liter-ally tens of thousands of black and col-oured Cape Townians’ livelihoods aredependent upon tourist flows to inner-city Cape Town. Thus, the rather grislyquestion arises, as to whether we dareto argue bluntly against gentrification,as does production side research, on thegrounds of displacement of the few?

Fifth, an issue of potentially signifi-cant research interest relates to ruralgentrification in South Africa. The ideaof “saving” the quintessential ruraltowns has been in evidence for manydecades. There is increasing evidence

from the popular press that significantnumbers of wealthy urbanites areobtaining second homes in, or retiringto, these towns and villages (Roberston,2002). Most of the properties at stakeare white owned – many the residencesof generations of rural townsfolk. Thus,issues of displacement are key to theprocesses taking place in these regions.A very contentious question thatemerges from rural gentrification iswhether or not the economies of thesetowns are beneficial to the impover-ished rural areas of South Africa or not.The fact of the matter is that the influxof wealthy urban “weekenders” mightbe the only activity that keeps thesecommunities alive. Again, SouthAfrica’s resources are too scarce todraw upon the central coffers “ to savethe day” as it were, by provincially orlocally funded decentralisation pro-jects, and so forth. Related to the ideaof weekend leisure movement to ruralareas is then also the potential impactof tourism on these economies andtheir population.

Conclusion

This short essay suggested that in thelight of significant changes in SouthAfrican cities and their inner-cities inparticular, the process of gentrificationappears to be a process that is startingto take root and potentially a fruitfulavenue of investigation. Whereas SouthAfrica’s cities have generally beenunderstood as a “unique” urban form,many theoretical perspectives andurban processes often reserved for con-sideration in cities of advanced capital-ist societies, such as gentrification, arealso of relevance here. In fact, as Par-nell (1996) suggested, important contri-butions towards these theoretical per-spectives can be made from SouthAfrican urban experiences, whilst alsoproviding a basis for local scholarshipto be integrated into international urbandebates. The potential research areasoutlined above could go some way inachieving this goal.

ReferencesAnsley, G (2002) City of ruins. Sunday

Times – Metro, Johannesburg, 5 May, 9.Beavon, K S O (2000a) In case of index fail-

ure consult a librarian: two small keys

Viewpoint: Gustav Visser

in explaining the decline of the Johann-esburg CBD, Conference Proceedings ofthe Association of South AfricanIndexers and Bibliographers, Johannes-burg.

Beavon, K S O (2000b) Northern Johannes-burg: part of the ‘ rainbow’ or neo-apart-heid city in the making, Mots Pluriels,13, an electronic journal athttp://www.arts.uwa.edu.au/MotsPluriels/MP1300kb.html, viewed on 24 April2002.

Blue. I Q (2002) http://www.blueiq.co.za/frsabout.htm, viewed on 16 May2002.

Bremner, L (2000) Reinventing the Johann-esburg inner city. Cities 17, 185–193.

Cape Business News (2002a) CIDs makinga significant impact. http://www.cbn.co.za/issue/5140202.htm, viewed on 24April 2002.

Cape Business News (2002b) A hero tosome, villain to others. http://www.cbn.co.za/issue/feb2002/hero.htm, viewed on24 April 2002.

The Cape Times (2001) Bo-Kapenaars pro-test at ‘gentrification’ of homes, 29 Janu-ary, 5.

Christopher, A J (2001) Monitoring segre-gation in South African cities 1911-1996. South African Geographical Jour-nal 83, 249–257.

Dirsuweit, T (1999) From fortress city tocreative city: developing culture and theinformation-based sectors in the regener-ation and reconstruction of the GreaterJohannesburg Area. Urban Forum 10,183–213.

Downer, L (1999) Melting the ghetto inhard-core Harlem. The Financial Times,26 June 1999, 1.

Elder, G (2003) Malevolent geographies:sex, race and the apartheid legacy. InOhio University Press, Athens.

Garside, J (1993) Inner city gentrification inSouth Africa: the case of Woodstock,Cape Town. GeoJournal 30, 29–35.

Harvey, D (2000) Spaces of hope. In Edin-burgh University Press, Edinburgh.

Horner, B (2002) Durban’s CBD is bounc-ing back – hotels lead the turnaround,Sunday Times, http://www.sundaytimes.co.za/2002/02/10/news/durban/ndbn01.

asp, viewed on 16 May 2002.Jordan, B (2000) Back to town! Sunday

Times, http://www.sundaytimes.co.za/2000/08/13/news/gauteng/njhb01.htm,viewed on 16 May 2002.

Kotze, N J (1999) The influence of residen-tial desegregation on the property pricesin South Africa: The Pietersburg casestudy. Journal of Family Ecology andConsumer Sciences 27, 48–54.

423

Kotze, N J and Donaldson, S E (1998) Resi-dential desegregation in South Africancities: A comparative study of Bloem-fontein and Pietersburg. Urban Studies35(3), 467–477.

Kotze, N J and Van der Merwe, I J (2000)Neighbourhood renewal in Cape Town’sinner city: is it gentrification? Journal ofFamily Ecology and Consumer Sciences28, 39–46.

Kotze, N J (1998) Gentrifikasie as stedelik-geografiese verskynsel in Kaapstad.Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Universiteitvan Stellenbosch, in Dutch.

Lees, L (1994) Rethinking gentrification:beyond the positions of economics orculture. Progress in Human Geography18, 152–169.

Lees, L (2000) A reappraisal of gentr-ification: towards a ‘geography of gentri-fication’ . Progress in Human Geography24, 389–408.

Ley, D (1995) Between Europe and Asia:the case of the missing sequoias. Ecu-mene 2, 185–210.

Ley, D (1996) The new middle class and theremaking of the central city. In OxfordUniversity Press, Oxford.

The Mail and Guardian (1999) The meteoricrise of South Africa’s black middle class,http://www.sn.apc.org/wmail/issues/990402/NEWS34.html., viewed on 24May 2002.

Morris, A (1997) Physical decline in aninner-city neighbourhood: a case studyof Hillbrow, Johannesburg. UrbanForum 8, 152–175.

Parnell, S (1996) South African cities: per-spectives from the ivory tower of urbanstudies. In Contemporary City Restruc-turing International GeographicalInsights, (ed.) RJ Davies., pp 42–61.Society of South African Geographersand International Geographical UnionCommission on Urban Development andUrban Life, Johannesburg.

Roberston, H (2002) Force and grace, Sun-day Times, http://www.sundaytimes.co.za/exporer/06/16/diary.asp, viewed on16 May 2002.

Rogerson, C M (1986) A Third World per-spective on industrial decentralisation:the World Bank study on Seoul, SouthKorea. Development Southern Africa 3,619–626.

Rogerson, C M (1995) South Africa’s econ-omic heartland: crisis, decline or restruc-turing? Africa Insight 25, 241–247.

Rogerson, C M (1996) Dispersion withinconcentration: location of corporate headoffices in South Africa. DevelopmentSouthern Africa 13, 567–579.

Rogerson, C M (1997) African immigrantentrepreneurs and Johannesburg’s

changing inner city. Africa Insight 27,265–273.

Rogerson, C M (1998) Restructuring of theapartheid space economy. RegionalStudies 32, 187–197.

Rogerson, C M (1999) Local economicdevelopment and urban poverty inalleviation: the experience of post-apart-heid South Africa. Habitat International23, 511–534.

Rogerson, C M (2000) Manufacturingchange in Gauteng 1989–1999: re-exam-ining the state of South Africa’s econ-omic heartland. Urban Forum 11, 311–340.

Rogerson, C M (2001) Inner-city economicrevitalisation through cluster support:the Johannesburg clothing industry.Urban Forum 12, 49–70.

Rogerson, C M (2002) Urban tourism in thedeveloping world: the case of Johannes-burg. Development South Africa 19,95–119.

Schaffer, R and Smith, N (1986) The gentr-ification of Harlem? Annals of theAssociation of American Geographers76, 347–365.

Slater, T (2002) What is gentrification?http://members.lycos.co.uk/gentrification/whatisgent.html, viewed on 25 April2002.

Smith, N (1979) Towards a theory of gentr-ification: a back to the city movement bycapital not people. Journal of the Amer-ican Planning Association October,538-548.

The Star (2002) CBD Revamp, 31 May, 23.Steinberg, J, Van Zyl, P and Bond, P (1992)

Contradictions in the transition fromurban apartheid: barriers to gentrificationin Johannesburg. In The apartheid cityand beyond: urbanization and socialchange in South Africa, (ed.) D MSmith., pp 266–278. Routledge, London.

Taylor, M (1992) Can you go home again?Black gentrification and the dilemma ofdifference. Berkeley Journal of Soci-ology 37, 121–138.

Visser, G (2002) Gay tourism in SouthAfrica: issues from the Cape Townexperience. Urban Forum 13, 85–94.

Visser, G (2002b) Gay men, tourism andurban space: Reflections on Africa’s‘gay capital’ . Tourism Geographies, inpress.

Visser, G (2002c) Gay men, leisure spaceand South African cities: the case ofCape Town. Geoforum, in press.

Wesgro (2002) http://www.wesgro.co.za,viewed on 16 May 2002.

Yutar, D (2001) A jewel at the city’s heartis fading. Cape Argus, 27 November2001, 15.