An island of civilization in a sea of delay? Indifference and fragmentation along the rugged shorelines of Kiev’s newbuild archipelago

ABSTRACT

Some of the literature on newbuild gentrification (NBG) suggests that residents of neighborhoods exposed to NBG gradually become alienated from their surroundings because it erodes the sense of place, producing, as one influential scholar noted, “colonized and unfamiliar” environments. The degree to which such feelings prevail relates to the extent and nature of the social contacts and connections between newbuild gentrifiers and “locals,” yet the current state of the art is inconclusive and, above all, geographically skewed toward the experience of a few Western cities. This article addresses both problems. Thus, based on a case study conducted in Kiev, the least studied of Europe’s great cities, this article explores how the social environment evolves in areas that experience NBG. In-depth interviews with newbuild gentrifiers and locals and the analysis of contributions to relevant web-based fora are used to investigate how and to what extent the “newcomers” interact with their “indigenous” neighbors, the two groups’ mutual perceptions of one another, and the locals’ assessment of the impact of the newbuilds on the living conditions in the neighborhood.

Acknowledgments

This article was first presented at the conference “Redefining Cities in Post-Soviet Space” (Leipzig, November 24–26, 2016) and at the 7th CAT-ference (Kiev/Dnipro, September 26–29, 2017). The authors thank the two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on this article.

Interviews cited in text

K1: M, 30, single, no children, higher ed, interviewed by Gentile, Mezentsev, and Mezentseva.

K2: F, 34, one child, higher ed, married, interviewed by Mezentseva.

K3: F, 25, higher ed, two small children, married, interviewed by Mezentseva and Stebletska.

K4: M, 36, higher ed, one small child, divorced, interviewed by Mezentseva and Stebletska.

K5: M, 40, higher ed, two children, divorced, interviewed by Stebletska.

S1: M, 30, higher ed, married, no kids, interviewed by Mezentseava.

S2: F, 57, higher ed, married, three grown-up children, has lived in curent dwelling since 1962, interviewed by Mezentseva and Stebletska.

S3: M, 25, incomplete higher ed, single, no children, interviewed by Stebletska.

Notes

1. An additional local characteristic is the continued (albeit greatly reduced) tradition of employer-supplied housing. Some newbuild developments are thus built by ministries for the exclusive use of their employees.

2. In reality, as a result of the Ukrainian hryvna’s tendency to devaluate, property prices are expressed in “conditional units,” which is a euphemism for U.S. dollars. This is quite typical in post-Soviet space.

3. The post-Maidan crisis refers to the ongoing severe economic turmoil following the Euromaidan revolution in 2013–2014.

4. The mean 2013 UAH/U.S. dollar exchange rate was 7.99, whereas it was 21.84 in 2015 and 26.31 in June 2017. It has remained stable at around 26–27 UAH/U.S. dollar since then.

5. ZhK stands for zhilishchnyi kompleks, meaning housing development or residential complex.

6. Khrushchëvka (plur. khrushchëvki) is a term that is conventionally used to denote buildings erected during the first wave of mass housing construction (approximately from the late 1950s to the mid-1960s; i.e., the years of Nikita Khrushchëv’s hold on power), but it is frequently used to describe any low-rise Soviet apartment block that has passed its best-before date.

7. It should be noted that “Soviet” terminology is not necessarily used in a negative sense in Ukraine. Its meaning is very contextual.

8. In Russian: na nashem rayone. The preposition na, rather than v, before rayon is slang of a kind that is often associated with a lower level of education.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Kostyantyn Mezentsev

Kostyantyn Mezentsev is Professor and Head of the Department of Economic and Social Geography at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv and Head of the Kyiv Department of Ukrainian Geographical Society. His recent research examines the transformation of post-Soviet urban regions and cities, participatory and effective urban planning, and migration issues in Central and Eastern Europe. He is co-editor of the book Urban Ukraine: In the Epicenter of the Spatial Changes (2017). Mezentsev teaches courses in human geography and quantitative and qualitative methods in regional and urban studies.

Michael Gentile

Michael Gentile is Professor of Human Geography at the University of Oslo and associate editor of Eurasian Geography and Economics. He is an urban geographer specialized on cities in Central and Eastern Europe and has published extensively on this topic. Recent publications include articles in the Annals of the Association of American Geographers, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, and Urban Geography.

Nataliia Mezentseva

Nataliia Mezentseva is Associate Professor in the Department of Economic and Social Geography at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Her recent research and teaching interests include urban social transformations, public spaces, gender issues, and migration and (in)security in Ukraine. She is co-editor of Urban Ukraine: In the Epicenter of the Spatial Changes (2017).

Iuliia Stebletska

Iuliia Stebletska is a PhD Candidate in the Department of Economic and Social Geography at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Her ongoing dissertation work focuses on Kiev’s spatial development and city planning, particularly in relation to gentrification and brownfield regeneration.