The current growth of higher education has increased the concentrations of students in residential areas in urban centers (Smith, 2005). Most of higher learning institutions have open doors policy for both the local and international students that translate into the influx of students from different cultural backgrounds in residential areas. The firms owning residential buildings interpret studentification as a benefit to their business (Sage, Smith, & Hubbard, 2012). These companies usually inflate the rental charges to match the increased housing demand. The social cohesion in the residential communities has also been adversely affected by the growing number of students in these areas. Studentification affects the typical functioning of the society since it cannot carry out its activities as it used to in the previous period(s). Moreover, it is associated with physical environment upgrading or downgrading given the local context. The results of studentification can be termed as having a detrimental as well as advancement impacts on the local society (Smith, 2008).
Just like the 1900s gentrification, studentification has seen the transition in the urban residential as well as the lifestyles of the surrounding community (Smith, 2005). The residence belonging to the local communities in most cases is occupied by the students that are considered to be wealthier as opposed to the people living in a community. However, the transformations are not usually to the positive side since in the long-term they end-up leading to accumulation of adverse impacts that affects the residents. For instance, it leads to recommodification of the personal houses causing displacement. The seasonal nature of studentification is likely to result in many losses for those who transform their homes into private rented housing (Smith, 2005). Studentification is causing economic, cultural, as well as the social threat for the residential communities and thus, necessary measures should be taken to curb such adversative impacts.
Economic Challenges of Studentification
The influx of students in cities and towns has led to the displacement of the local citizens who previously occupied the facilities. Most of the owners of apartment and other houses have converted their private residents into commercial residents for students’ tenancy (Smith, 2008). Even though such a conversion is a creation of income generating projects, it makes the owners incur the cost of hiring houses. The owners can no longer enjoy the privileges of residing in their homes. The transformation of life from personal residence to rental is also challenging. Investing in students’ housing comes at an expense of reduced owner-occupation as well as the creation of additional rental cost for individuals who previously resided in personal homes (Smith, 2008). The increased number of students in specific areas has led to growth in demand for houses that transpires an increment in the housing cost. The increase in prices motivates investment in student houses that leads to the neighborhoods domination by the private rented housing.
The property market has been hit by inflation resulting from the augmented rental costs. Most of the firms dealing with student housing usually raise their prices following the increased demand for houses. These businesses fail to acknowledge the existence of a local community that end-up being affected by the augmented property prices. Studentification leads to upgrading of neighborhoods. However, such an upgrade does not remain in a constant state since it comes at an expense of future downgrading (Sage, Smith, & Hubbard, 2012). The demand for student housing is usually seasonal implying that it is not homogenous throughout the year. Such a condition is a key determinant in the computation of the rental charges that leads to inflated prices. During the rental cost decision making, the local community welfare is not included, despite having a longer or continuing residency that makes them to pay the increased prices throughout the residency (Smith, 2008). The economic welfare of the local community(s) eventually deteriorates following the massive rental charges.
Communities dominated by students’ residency often face the challenge of seasonal employment. Those employed in the rental services companies typically lose their jobs when the students are on the holidays. Similarly, those serving students in shops, pubs, and other rental facilities also lose their jobs during the holiday seasons (Smith, 2008). Other changes experienced by the retail sector incorporate the variations in the type of services offered whereby most of the businesses become entertainment-oriented. Companies are dealing with food products also become re-oriented such that they specialize in takeaways. The re-orientation changes are likely to affect the non-student community (Sage, Smith, & Hubbard, 2012).
Social Challenges of Studentification
Studentification leads to an inflow of students in urban residency. The established permanent residential houses become occupied by a young people and the middle-class (Smith, 2005). The concentration of students in the communities leads to the formation of student groupings. Such concentration leads to segregation between the local community and the students within the same residential area. The concentration of students in residential areas leads to an increment in the possibilities of accumulation of deviant behaviors in the society (Sage, Smith, & Hubbard, 2013). For instance, the vulnerability of the young people makes a crime to crop up following the attraction to living expensive lives. The displacement of residents creates a pressure amongst the residents who feel that they are marginalized as they presume that they are perceived as being prone to replacement. Accumulation of students in residential areas leads to increased competition between local community residents and the students (Smith, 2005). Studentification leads to a greater pressure especially for the provision of institutions catering for the increased demand for the nighttime entertainment.
Segregation in the communities leads to the establishment of a class system in the society that increases the social pressures within a particular residential center. Social stratification in the society disrupts the unity and social cohesion that existed before the emergence of studentification (Smith, 2005). Besides, the displacement of communities also disturbs the coherence since individuals who were neighbors are likely to be separated from each other that end up effecting societal unity (Sage, Smith, & Hubbard, 2013). Numerous associated consequences always accompany the rise of crime and another low-level anti-social behavior in the society. For instance, it leads to an increment in insurance premiums. The residents in the community typically turn to insurance as a means of securing their property against crime as well as other perils that are likely to occur in the society. The increased insurance premiums are usually an additional expense to the residents that can end up deteriorating their lifestyles.
The demand for nighttime entertainment comes at a cost of a detrimental effect on the residential amenity. People invest more on entertainment as opposed to other social amenities that are likely to improve the welfare of people in the society. The social order existing in the society is likely to be affected by the disruption following the emergence of crime and other anti-social behavior (Sage, Smith, & Hubbard, 2013). Despite having students who have social manners in the community, the perception of misconduct is likely to be attributed to the entire group. The rivalry between the residents and the students is more likely to crop up and thus disrupting the social cohesion between the community and the students’ fraternity (Smith, 2005).
Cultural Challenges of Studentification
Studentification typically concentrates students from diverse cultural backgrounds in one residential center. The migration if students to an area bring out different lifestyles as well as the cultural values that differ from those of the long-term residents in a particular location (Sage, Smith, & Hubbard, 2012). The differences between the students and the local communities are the root to tensions that are likely to occur between the two groups. The hostile community is more likely to differ with the students and thus acting as primarily the source of hostility (Sage, Smith, & Hubbard, 2013). The consumption behaviors of students are more likely to be aligned to entertainment. Besides, students prefer buying takeaways for their use. Another area that is likely to be affected by the students’ influx in the transport sector. The middle-class students who possess vehicles are more likely to drive their cars recklessly on the highways (Sage, Smith, & Hubbard, 2013).
The new lifestyles and the cultural values are likely to change the nature of communities due to acculturation. The future generations of these communities are more likely to assume the cultures of the students that can gradually terminate the cultural values of the long-term residential community (Sage, Smith, & Hubbard, 2012). The retail market is likely to make the local community integrate the culture of consumption of takeaways as well as gradually assuming the cultural values associated with late night entertainment. Such a step affects the morals of the long-run residents. Moreover, it can lead to confusion regarding which types of behaviors to adopt. The flashy lifestyle and reckless driving can cause accidents and road-related offenses (Sage, Smith, & Hubbard, 2013). The welfare of the community is adversely affected by such malpractices.
Policies for Solving the Challenges
Several plans can be implemented for purposes of solving the challenges posed by studentification. The development of student-based accommodation in city centers is a crucial step towards ending studentification. Focusing on termination of Houses in Multiple Occupation in the residential neighborhoods is also an essential move towards solving the challenges posed by studentification (Sage, Smith, & Hubbard, 2012). It is important to partner with different organizations such as the councils in various locations to come up with better plans for dealing with studentification threats. Partnerships with the necessary agencies are essential towards the alleviation of gentrified concentrations. The responsible associations should initiate policies necessary for providing affordable housing (Smith, 2008). An emphasis on holistic perspective is another measure towards minimization of the studentification threats.
Communities can come up with holistic approaches to counter the adverse impacts of studentification. For instance, the leaders in the community can initiate policies that aim at introducing students to new practices that can see their behaviour change. Counter-excessive entertainment, as well as drinking policies, can be introduced for purposes of reducing students’ behavioral practices (Smith, 2008). Furthermore, those owning entertainment places as well as pubs can also regulate the opening and the closing time to regulate the partying and drinking practices of the students. Communities can also come up with voluntary social education meant for teaching as well as mentor students to change students’ behavioural practices (Sage, Smith, as & Hubbard, 2012). The government can fix the opening and the closing hours for operating pubs and other entertainment facilities as a measure of regulating excessive entertainment as well as excessive drinking. As a measure of controlling reckless driving on roads, the government can also fix the minimum driving speed on roads and highways. The government can also initiate housing policies that aim at moving students from communities to urban centers. Besides, decentralizing students occupancy can make them spread to different regions and thus minimizing the challenges. A holistic approach involves the students, community, as well as the government.
Conclusion
Studentification poses lots of challenges in the residential communities. Most of the owners of apartment and other houses have converted their private residents into commercial residents for students’ tenancy. The displacement of communities also disturbs the cohesion since individuals who were neighbors are likely to be separated from each other that ends up effecting societal unity. Communities dominated by students’ residency often face the challenge of seasonal employment. Those employed in the rental services companies typically lose their jobs when the students are on the holidays. Accumulation of students in residential areas leads to increased competition between local community residents and the students. Segregation in the communities leads to the establishment of a class system in the society that increases the social pressures within a particular residential center.
Social stratification of in the society disrupts the unity and social cohesion that existed before the emergence of studentification. The migration if students to an area bring out different lifestyles as well as the cultural values that differ from those of the long-term residents in a particular location. The new lifestyles and the cultural values are likely to change the nature of communities due to acculturation. The future generations of these communities are more likely to assume the cultures of the students that can gradually terminate the cultural values of the long-term residential community. The economic, social, and cultural challenges of studentification typically lead to deteriorated life of individuals in the community. The government should intervene to counter mechanisms aimed at dealing with economic, social, and cultural displacement occurring as a result of studentification.
References
Smith, D.P. (2005). ‘Studentification.' Gentrification in a Global Context The New
Urban Colonialism, 72-89. Retrieved March 3, 2016, from https://southwarknotes.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/studentification-darren-smith.pdf
Sage, J., Smith, D., & Hubbard, P. (2013). New-build Studentification: A Panacea for Balanced
Communities? Urban Studies, 50(13), 2623-2641. Retrieved March 04, 2016, from http://usj.sagepub.com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/content/50/13/2623.full.pdf
Smith, D. (2008) The Politics of STudentification and ‘(Un)balanced’ Urban Populations:
Lessons for Gentrification and Sustainable Communities? Urban Studies, 45(12), 2541-2564. Retrieved March 04, 2016, from http://usj.sagepub.com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/content/45/12/2541.full.pdf
Sage, J., Smith, D., & Hubbard, P. (2012). The Diverse Geographies of STudentification: Living
Alongside People Not Like Us. Housing Studies, 27(8), 1057-1078. Retrieved March 01, 2016, from http://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/doi/pdf/10.1080/02673037.2012.728570
