Spatial Analysis of Neighborhoods in District 10 of Tehran from the Perspective of Gentrification and Its Driving Forces

Urban regeneration of deteriorated and aging neighborhoods, undertaken with the objectives of improving urban services, enhancing infrastructure, and reconstructing the physical and spatial fabric of local areas, can simultaneously generate both positive developmental outcomes and unintended socio-spatial consequences. Although such projects are designed to revitalize declining urban environments, increase quality of life, and stimulate public and private investment, they often produce significant side effects, including rising housing prices and rents, increasing costs of goods and services, and the gradual decline of affordability for vulnerable social groups. The cumulative result of these processes is the phenomenon of gentrification—a complex and multidimensional social and spatial transformation that displaces lower-income households and replaces them with middle- and upper-income groups, thereby reshaping the social composition, economic dynamics, and physical structure of neighborhoods.
This study specifically investigates the spatial patterns of gentrification in District 10 of Tehran and aims to identify the key driving forces shaping and sustaining it. To achieve this objective, a two-stage mixed-method methodological framework was adopted.
In the first stage, District 10—identified based on 2021 spatial data from the Tehran Municipality’s Information and Communication Technology Organization as one of the districts with the highest proportion of urban regeneration relative to its total area—was selected for detailed neighborhood-level analysis. Quantitative spatial analysis and the ELECTRE multi-criteria decision-making method were applied to identify neighborhoods exhibiting the most prominent indicators of gentrification across social, economic, and physical dimensions.
At this stage, a conceptual model guided the analytical process. Drawing on theoretical literature, this model conceptualizes gentrification as the outcome of interactions among neighborhood deterioration, public-sector interventions, and housing market dynamics. According to the model, the physical decay of inefficient neighborhoods compels public authorities to intervene to improve infrastructure and urban quality. However, when such interventions occur without simultaneous enhancement of the livelihood and economic capacity of low-income residents, they exert pressures on both the supply and demand sides of the housing market. On the supply side, long-term residents—whose land or properties have gained higher value after regeneration—tend to sell their assets to capitalize on increased property values. On the demand side, wealthier groups, particularly the new middle class seeking to reside in centrally located areas with upgraded infrastructure and convenient access to urban networks, are drawn into these neighborhoods. The interaction of these forces—reinforced by municipal incentive policies and market-oriented approaches—results in physical renewal without social equity, ultimately driving the process of gentrification.
The quantitative results revealed that the most and least pronounced signs of gentrification were observed in Salsabil and Hashemi neighborhoods, respectively. To enhance the validity and reliability of quantitative findings, systematic interviews and consultations were conducted with local informants possessing deep knowledge of neighborhood transformations. From an economic perspective, almost all informants confirmed significant increases in rent and housing prices in Salsabil, Karun, Imam Khomeini, and Mortezaei neighborhoods compared to others in District 10. The main factors influencing this trend included favorable access to urban transportation networks, proximity to employment and service centers, and the construction of small housing units that have made these areas attractive to new population groups, particularly young couples and office employees. Although the available data and methods used in this study do not allow for precise assessment of the economic status of all new residents, land prices—as a proxy for income level—indicate that, overall, newcomers are relatively more affluent. In terms of neighborhood security and social well-being, informants reported a moderate decline in street disputes and local conflicts, but no definitive evidence of structural change in crime levels was found.
In the second stage, qualitative research was conducted to interpret, contextualize, and deepen understanding of the mechanisms driving gentrification in the selected neighborhoods. Semi-structured interviews were held with experienced experts from the Tehran Urban Regeneration Organization, urban planners from local development offices in District 10, and academic scholars specializing in urban renewal and socio-spatial dynamics. The qualitative data were systematically analyzed through thematic analysis using MAXQDA software, enabling the identification and categorization of forces influencing gentrification in Salsabil, Imam Khomeini, Karun, and Mortezaei neighborhoods.
Findings from this stage indicate that the driving forces of gentrification operate across three interrelated analytical levels. At the macro level, Urban regeneration and renewal policies in Tehran have been accompanied by increased housing demand, price escalation, and displacement of lower-income groups.
At the meso level, urban planning strategies, municipal policies, and institutional renewal programs implemented by local authorities directly affect the scope, direction, and pace of neighborhood transformation. Without due consideration of socio-economic factors have acted as catalysts of gentrification, leading to rising property values, and influx of new middle-class residents. At the micro level, neighborhood-specific factors such as social composition, household economic resilience, and accessibility to transportation and commercial networks shape the intensity and spatial patterns of gentrification.
The findings further demonstrate the combined role of supply and demand factors in accelerating the gentrification process. On the supply side, investment flows and market-oriented housing policies have driven property value growth and redevelopment; on the demand side, locational preferences of the new middle class and improved accessibility have intensified the process. In District 10, central location, relatively lower housing prices, and the feasibility of constructing small residential units have been the key drivers attracting new social groups. Incentive-based density bonuses, provision of financial facilities, and administrative ease in building permit issuance have reinforced a pattern of continuous and incremental regeneration. Additionally, the study identifies several structural characteristics unique to District 10 that distinguish its gentrification pattern from other urban cases—namely, a high proportion of indigenous homeowners, a well-organized street network, and strong inter-district connectivity—which together have shaped a distinctive pattern of investment attraction and population replacement.
Finally, it is recommended that future research, if supported by detailed data on population displacement, should examine the social and spatial impacts of gentrification at the neighborhood scale. Comparative analyses of conditions and influencing forces in other Tehran districts exhibiting signs of gentrification could further contribute to understanding the diverse and context-dependent manifestations of this phenomenon across the city.