2026-09-19T17:14:01Zhttps://dspace.mit.edu/server/oai/requestoai:dspace.mit.edu:1721.1/378602022-01-13T07:54:44Zcom_1721.1_7582com_1721.1_7581col_1721.1_131023
Langley C. Keyes.
Gallagher, Caitlin
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Urban Studies and Planning.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Urban Studies and Planning
2007-07-18T12:58:21Z
2007-07-18T12:58:21Z
2006
2006
http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/37860
123569947
Thesis (M.C.P.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Urban Studies and Planning, 2006.
Includes bibliographical references (p. 78-79).
Communities often object to the siting of controversial social service agencies in their neighborhoods. Traditional NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) literature outlines not only the forces at work in NIMBY dynamics, but also proven strategies that social service agencies have used in order to overcome such opposition. There is little research, however, on the "flip side" of this scenario - what happens when an established social service agency begins to see gentrification, and as a result, community opposition, in its back yard? This thesis looks at two such cases in Boston's South End and examines their responses to gentrification in the context of traditional NIMBY literature. What it uncovers is that the dynamics involved in the "flip side" of NIMBY have an additional dimension not explored in traditional NIMBY literature - namely, the force of neighborhood change itself. When social service agencies are "there first," and gentrification follows, community opposition to the facility varies based on the speed and scale of neighborhood change, and how the real estate market alters the community landscape.
by Caitlin Gallagher.
M.C.P.
79 p.
eng
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
M.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.
http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582
Urban Studies and Planning.
Already in my back yard : community opposition to social service agencies in gentrifying neighborhoods
Community opposition to social service agencies in gentrifying neighborhoods
Thesis
application/pdf
false
Publication
unknown
unknown
<Publication xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/1.1/" id="e3c07d81-af31-4e69-9e72-cb786753bb60">
<Type xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/vocab/COAR_Publication_Types">http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_1843</Type>
<Language>eng</Language>
<Title>Already in my back yard : community opposition to social service agencies in gentrifying neighborhoods</Title>
<Subtitle>Community opposition to social service agencies in gentrifying neighborhoods</Subtitle>
<PublishedIn>
<Publication>
</Publication>
</PublishedIn>
<PublicationDate>2006</PublicationDate>
<Authors>
<Author>
<DisplayName>Gallagher, Caitlin</DisplayName>
<Affiliation>
<OrgUnit>
</OrgUnit>
</Affiliation>
</Author>
</Authors>
<Editors>
</Editors>
<Publishers>
<Publisher>
<DisplayName>Massachusetts Institute of Technology</DisplayName>
<OrgUnit />
</Publisher>
</Publishers>
<License>http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582</License>
<Keyword>Urban Studies and Planning.</Keyword>
<Abstract>Communities often object to the siting of controversial social service agencies in their neighborhoods. Traditional NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) literature outlines not only the forces at work in NIMBY dynamics, but also proven strategies that social service agencies have used in order to overcome such opposition. There is little research, however, on the "flip side" of this scenario - what happens when an established social service agency begins to see gentrification, and as a result, community opposition, in its back yard? This thesis looks at two such cases in Boston's South End and examines their responses to gentrification in the context of traditional NIMBY literature. What it uncovers is that the dynamics involved in the "flip side" of NIMBY have an additional dimension not explored in traditional NIMBY literature - namely, the force of neighborhood change itself. When social service agencies are "there first," and gentrification follows, community opposition to the facility varies based on the speed and scale of neighborhood change, and how the real estate market alters the community landscape.</Abstract>
<Access xmlns="http://purl.org/coar/access_right"
>
</Access>
</Publication>