Milan: The Cultural Drive That Makes Neighborhoods Thrive

At first, it is almost imperceptible: an art gallery appears in a side street, a small theater is reborn, a coworking space replaces an empty warehouse. Then come the outdoor seating areas, the developers, the glitzy renderings. And, eventually, the booming rents. It is in this subtle space, where creativity and the real estate market intersect, that the fate of entire Milanese neighborhoods is now being played out.

The first map of this interaction is provided by the study Cultural investments and gentrification: An urban transformation study of the city of Milan between 2001 and 2021, penned by Lorenzo Biferale (University of Chieti and Pescara), Paola Dubini (Bocconi) and a group of students from the master’s degree course in Economics and Management in Arts, Culture, Media and Entertainment (ACME at Bocconi). The work combines two decades of socio-economic data and almost 3,000 cultural organizations mapped by the MapMi project, providing a clear picture: Milan has not gentrified everywhere in the same way, instead following precise rules. And culture is often the seismograph, or the detonator, of these transformations.

The geography of the push: three axes that are heating up and two that remain static

The new gentrification index gauged by the authors shows three areas of the city that have risen rapidly over the decade: the northeast, northwest, and southwest. Neighborhoods such as Lambrate, Quarto Oggiaro, Stephenson, Navigli, and Tortona are in the highest quartile of gentrification. These are the same areas where, since 2011, the largest share of new cultural openings has concentrated.

The center, on the other hand, is another story: it appears as a huge “silent zone,” not because it is not changing, but because it had already changed. At the opposite end of the spectrum, the agricultural belt to the south remains understandably impervious to major urban trends: low population density, few services, and little appeal to developers and investors.

“Culture rarely initiates transformation, but it almost always amplifies it,” explains Paola Dubini, professor of management, who co-designed the research. “When a new infrastructure—a subway line, a campus, a large real estate project—opens a gap, cultural offer follows and consolidates the change. And at that point, the dynamic tends to accelerate.”

Four Milans in the same city

Combining the intensity of gentrification and new cultural investments, the study identifies four types of neighborhoods.

1. Cultural Catalysts: where cultural energy and socio-economic change progress together. This is the case in Lambrate, Tortona, and NoLo: places where coworking, artistic spaces, and new residents have rewritten balances and perceptions.

2. Cultural Precursors: neighborhoods where culture is fermenting but gentrification has not (yet) exploded. Isola and Sarpi fall into this category: very high cultural vitality, but limited social change for now.

3. Speculative Growth Areas: where prices rise even without culture. This is happening in areas such as Stephenson and QT8: the process is driven by real estate, infrastructure, and development strategies, with little cultural mediation.

4. Quiet Areas: hyper-gentrified center and suburbs that remain on the margins.

“The categories tell us something very simple: we cannot say that culture equals gentrification. It is culture interacting with other forces,” adds Lorenzo Biferale, a researcher at the University of Chieti and Pescara. “And when the interaction is unbalanced, culture risks becoming a multiplier of exclusion.”

Nolo, Tortona, Lambrate: workshops in a city that is changing too quickly

Actual examples help us understand.

In NoLo, the grassroots cultural boom of the last ten years—festivals, clubs, coworking spaces, associations—has generated considerable magnetism. But with the arrival of investors, the direction has changed: skyrocketing rents, growing tourist pressure, long-time residents under stress.

In Tortona, the metamorphosis began long ago: Design Week as a global brand, converted industrial spaces, real estate investments that have turned it into a ‘creative district’ – with all the contradictions that come with that.

In Lambrate, the regeneration of the rail area paved the way, and culture jumped on board: galleries, studios, small institutions. The combination worked, but not for everyone.

Urban policies: the point is not to bring culture, but to bring culture with rules

The paper leaves little room for convenient interpretation: without targeted strategies, culture and the real estate market feed off each other, resulting in richer but less accessible neighborhoods.

The policy recommendations are clear:

– Regulation is needed, not just incentives: social housing, limits on real estate conversions, anti-eviction measures.

– Integrated planning is needed: culture, infrastructure, and urban welfare must move together.

– We need to distinguish between commercial culture and community culture: galleries and showrooms attract capital; social theaters, civic centers and bookstores attract communities.

“Cities that work are those that know how to manage the pace of change. Milan today is being forced to that pace,” concludes Dubini.

The issue, ultimately, is this: culture can make a neighborhood more vibrant, richer, and more beautiful. But without adequate protections, it can also make it more exclusive. Milan has reached a point of no return: it must continue to grow, yes, but it must decide for whom.