The Degree's of Gentrification: Trader Joe's v. Whole Foods
The problem with redevelopment, is the lack of actual development for the existing community. To develop the community often implies improving the community, hence replacing it with a new one. Post housing redevelopment, statistically 80% of original residents become displaced. It is true that new, desirable retail development attracts wealthier, white populations and like-wise raising local rent, however what does this say for the future for the existing communities?
Idealistically, such communities would be benefited by Black or local owned business. However, aside from that progress, most oppressed communities become transformed into “food deserts.” In many low-income, neighborhoods of color, grocery chains do not usually exist, except for chains such as Key Foods or C-Town. These chains are known for offering low prices, yet in reality not as low as Trader Joe’s. Would Trader Joe’s then not be good for all communities? They offer incredibly low prices and organic options. Aside from not offering as many culturally specific food items, as I often have to visit other stores, Trader Joe’s still remains cheaper than all other chains. Yes, I agree, new development tends to gentrify communities and push residents out, but should we place Trader Joe’s on the same pedestal as a Whole Foods – a chain that is much more expense, not affordable, and famously shopped by wealthy, young liberals? I would argue that the development of a Whole Foods v. a Trader Joe’s would create a much steeper gentrification, welcoming like retailers and their shoppers too. A perfect example of this is in NYC, where Columbus Avenue and 100th Street have become the pinnacle of gentrification beginning with a Whole Foods. Does Trader Joe’s have the ability to attract all populations, of all income levels, adding to the mixed economy and overall stability of a neighborhood?
