Quinton and Nesbitt confront the conceptual proliferation surrounding environmentally induced urban displacement. Their systematic review compares seven overlapping terms—green, environmental, eco-, ecological, climate, carbon and resilience gentrification—and shows how each has developed around partially distinct drivers while repeatedly describing a common process: sustainability interventions contributing to the production of space for progressively more affluent users. Their proposal of “sustainability gentrification” is therefore not merely terminological simplification. It is a classificatory intervention intended to reconnect fragmented literatures and expose how climate adaptation, environmental improvement and low-carbon development can become real-estate mechanisms. The paper’s methodological operation is taxonomic: it studies how categories distribute attention and how disciplinary naming can obscure structural continuity. Its wider bridge is to urban political economy and epistemology, demonstrating that naming is not secondary to urban process; categories help determine which causes become visible, which cases become comparable and which political effects remain hidden behind the ostensibly benevolent language of sustainability.
URBANISM MEETS ART