As housing costs continue to increase across many cities in North America and Europe, local governments face pressure to understand how housing’s rising cost is changing neighbourhoods and to ensure that everyone can access a home they can afford. To confront displacement concerns, cities are adapting models developed within academia to identify neighbourhoods that may be susceptible to gentrification and displacement. We compare four gentrification and displacement risk models developed by and for the US cities of Seattle, Washington; Los Angeles, California; Portland, Oregon; and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and apply all four methodologies to one city, Boston. We identify the geographic areas of agreement and disagreement among the methods. The comparison reveals striking differences between the models, both in inputs and outputs. Of the 18 variables considered among the four models, only two variables appear in all four models. In the resulting maps, the four methods identified between 25 and 119 of the 180 Boston census tracts as at risk of gentrification and displacement, or as currently gentrifying. There are only seven tracts that all four models agreed were either gentrifying or at risk of gentrification and displacement. The findings indicate a need for cities to consider critically the assumptions of the models that are included in urban policy documents, as indicators and thresholds have major impacts on how neighbourhoods in the liminal space of gentrification and displacement are characterised. This novel comparison of United States local government analyses of gentrification provides insight as modelling moves from theory to practice.

In 2017, amidst rising Hindu nationalist politics, the 'Historic City of Ahmadabad' was designated India's first UNESCO World Heritage city for its Islamic architectural heritage. How should we understand the emergence of this seeming counter-narrative at a time of rising ethnonationalism? Ahmadabad's diverging international and intranational heritage narratives are instructive in understanding what motivates national identity constructions inside and outside a nation-state's borders. Using evidence from semi-structured interviews and documents, this paper illustrates how Ahmadabad's World Heritage narrative is manipulated for different objectives at each scale. Internationally, Ahmadabad's heritage cooperation with the French government, and framing as "multicultural" is intended to internationalise the city and appeal to a global audience. Internally, its framing suggests inclusivity but operates as a subtle form of control by presenting a carefully curated degree of Islamism. Ultimately, this narrative of inclusion excludes the Muslim and migrant populations most closely associated with this heritage. By unpacking the socio-political and economic forces at play in constructing Indian national identity internationally and internally, this paper highlights the uses and abuses of built heritage.

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.