Contradictions of Transit-Oriented Development in Low-Income Neighborhoods: The Case Study of Rosengård in Malmö, Sweden

Abstract

Transit-oriented development (TOD) has become a leading model of urban planning worldwide that promises to meet a broad range of local and regional objectives: improving mobility, expanding ridership, attracting investment, reducing urban poverty, improving quality of life, making affordable housing and fostering urban integration. At the same time, the implementation of TOD in many cities has raised concerns about gentrification, displacement, re-segregation, and more polarization. This article aims to shed light on these issues by bringing together previously disparate literature that mentions these contradictions and discusses policymakers’ hopes and critics’ concern for the implementation of a newly started TOD project in a universal housing system in Rosengård—a segregated, low-income neighborhood in Malmö, Sweden. Although policy advocates view the project as a significant development strategy for a more sustainable Malmö, there are also real concerns about gentrification and the potential displacement of low-income residents. Furthermore, the mixed-methods study showes how integration might be achieved, but concerns have arisen about the possible exclusion of the current low-income residents, which brings up issues of inequality, representation of poverty, and marginalization.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 20 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.