Artwashing
Artwashing is a term used to describe the use of artistic and creative practices in ways that have been associated with processes of gentrification. In academic literature, the term has been used to refer to situations in which art is employed to make locations more amenable to private capital and to the aesthetics favored by higher-income groups.
The term is also widely used by activists, who argue that by promoting narratives of “creativity” and “coolness,” artistic activity can function as a form of symbolic capital that contributes to the rebranding of devalued or industrial neighborhoods, a process they associate with the displacement of existing low-income communities.
In urban planning and development, artwashing is often described as taking the form of corporate sponsorship of temporary artworks or the creation of cultural “hubs", which are used to rebrand specific sites during periods of redevelopment. Critics argue that while such initiatives may create a sense of community engagement, they frequently align with broader redevelopment strategies that do not address underlying social inequalities and may reproduce existing power imbalances rather than produce inclusive forms of neighborhood change.
Etymology and relation to other “washing” concepts
The term “artwashing” gained prominence in the mid-2010s and was popularized by activists and journalists, most notably Feargus O’Sullivan, during anti-gentrification protests in the Boyle Heights district of Los Angeles.Etymologically, the term is a portmanteau of the words “art” and “whitewashing״. Artwashing has been discussed alongside other forms of “washing,” such as greenwashing, pinkwashing, and sportswashing, which are often described as practices aimed at shaping public perception and legitimacy.
Academic and theoretical context
The conceptual roots of artwashing predate the term itself and have been linked to earlier theories on the relationship between culture and urban development, including the “artistic mode of production” theorized by Sharon Zukin in the early 1980s. This framework examines how cultural activity has been incorporated into real estate development and investment strategies within the built environment.Similarly, geographer David Ley analyzed the role of artists in processes of gentrification, describing them as early or “pioneer” actors whose presence can contribute to the revaluation of previously disinvested or industrial urban areas, thereby attracting subsequent middle-class and professional investment.
Typology of art-led urban regeneration
A typology of art-led urban regeneration has been proposed, distinguishing between three models based on their underlying motivations and outcomes:- Parasitic: A top-down model in which capital-rich developers appropriate and monetize a community’s existing cultural assets, a process associated with commodification and displacement.
- Paternalistic: An approach characterized by externally driven interventions that offer limited or "cosmetic" responses to structural social problems without substantially altering local power relations.
- Empowering: A horizontal, community-led model oriented toward self-determination, local control, and the expansion of civic participation.
Artwashing in urban development and planning
In the late 1990s and early 2000s, UK policy discourse under the New Labour government promoted an “Urban Renaissance” agenda that positioned arts and culture as tools for addressing urban decline and social exclusion. Researchers have since noted that while these policies emphasized cultural investment, they often relied on high-profile “flagship” projects and offered limited evidence of sustained social benefits, particularly in relation to affordable housing and long-term inclusion.Temporary and tactical urbanism
In more recent urban development contexts, artwashing has been discussed in relation to practices commonly described as “temporary” or “tactical” urbanism. These approaches involve short-term, flexible, or interim uses of urban space, often deployed during periods of redevelopment. In this context, developers and other actors may sponsor rotating street artworks, cultural installations, or short-term events in “interim” spaces as a way of activating sites prior to their final use. Such practices have been analyzed as forms of cultural signaling that reframe redevelopment areas as “creative” or “vibrant”, even while longer-term plans remain focused on commercial or high-end residential development. Scholars have also examined the role of digital platforms in these processes, noting how the circulation of curated images of temporary artworks and urban aesthetics can contribute to shaping public perceptions of redevelopment projects. This form of “digital placemaking” has been discussed as influencing which representations of the city become publicly visible and associated with particular sites.Case studies
The concept of artwashing has been examined across a range of urban contexts, with scholars, journalists, and activists applying the term to different forms of cultural intervention and redevelopment. The following case studies, drawn from academic research and public debate, illustrate how artwashing has been discussed in diverse geographical, institutional, and social settings.These examples are not intended to provide an exhaustive account of the phenomenon, but rather to highlight recurring themes and variations in how artistic practices intersect with processes of urban redevelopment, public perception, and displacement.