Protests in Mexico City: Gentrification or Miscommunication?

July 28th, 2025
Cody Brown

In early March, a wave of protests began to form inside of Mexico City in response to an influx of tourists. Notably, figures estimate that Mexico saw 45.04 million tourists in 2024–an increase of roughly 7% from 2023. These visitors also bring concerns over housing prices. As tourists flood into the country, gentrification has inevitably pushed families out of their homes due to price hikes. Specifically, Mexico has been met with digital nomads–tourists who reside within a country and work remotely, doing little to provide for the economy. In many cases where tourists visit for 6 months or less, digital nomads—whose incomes are entirely from foreign sources—aren’t subject to the most important Mexican taxes. Subsequently, digital nomads have reshaped the housing market from a buyers' market into a sellers' market, all whilst having done little to support the Mexican economy aside from their purchasing power.

However, while tourism certainly doesn’t cool housing prices, these figures are representative of a broader trend in Mexico. Studies show housing prices rose by 247% from 2005 to 2021, and that the average price increase per year has declined from 2020, from 44% down to 25%.

Nonetheless, as protests rage on into July, the people are desperate for answers. Over several months, Mexican officials have articulated a handful of perspectives on the matters. Initially, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum publicly denounced the protests, highlighting the violent nature of some demonstrations by stating the messaging of the protests was xenophobic. Two takeaways stand out here. Firstly, the protests appeared violent in some instances. While initially peaceful, one gathering included a small group who vandalized several stores, bashing in windows and spraying graffiti in the process. Most pertinently, however, the claim that the protests were xenophobic was met with backlash. Some individuals carried signs adorned with phrases such as “Go Home Gringo,” inciting debate online, as the sentiment was targeted at American tourists. The disconnect between the governmental response and the people’s demands only served to increase tensions between the two parties. Yet, on July 16th, Mexico City’s Mayor Clara Brugada announced a solution. In order to combat housing price increases, Brugada proposed housing regulations on landlords to instill a rent increase cap that cannot surpass inflation.

While it seems the people of Mexico City will soon be given a remedy to their woes, concerns still linger about the lack of federal response. Many point to the outright lack of housing as the center of the issue. Specifically, in the early 2000s, housing construction was limited to only four sets of mayoralities. While this was eventually resolved, the infrastructure of Mexico City was then unfit for the exponentially increasing population that tourism has brought to it. Estimates found in 2023 that only 1,701 homes were constructed out of the roughly 11,000 homes that would be needed to meet population demands. Furthermore, only 12% of those homes were actually considered affordable. If a solution is to be found, federal oversight may be required to address the infrastructure dilemma facing the city’s housing market. Additionally, critics have pointed out that tourism has provided several net benefits to the people of Mexico as a whole. Figures indicate that in Mexico City, tourism accounts for nearly 10% of the GDP, and is directly responsible for more than 740,000 jobs. Most ironically, the issue of housing prices isn’t limited to just cities with high levels of tourism.

While the constituents of Mexico are right to demand answers, the burden of solutions now falls on their leaders. Unfortunately, the reality for Mexico and many countries is that intense price increases spell out weary economic outlooks. Instead of solely focusing on the ramifications of tourism, it is imperative policymakers and the populous alike collaborate to amend systematic issues, particularly to avert disastrous responses such as these, establishing clear communication for the future.

Extemp Analysis by: Cody Brown

Question: Is Clara Brugada’s plan to address concerns of gentrification in Mexico City sufficient?

AGD: Considering the topic, you could choose to be more serious and go with a narrative story, it’s not hard to find interviews with families who have lost their houses due to price hikes from gentrification–alternatively a more lighthearted approach could look like joking about vacationing in Mexico City and being too poor to afford anything, etc, etc i.e “In my recent vacation to Mexico City, I was astounded, not by the El Ángel, but by the price of a single Starbucks coffee–and unfortunately coffee isn’t the only thing that's seen price hikes in Mexico in recent years.. Blah blah”

Background: This topic is deceptively simple, so the background may need to be a bit heavier. It’s probably most important to establish 1) high tourism rates and the correlated housing price increases have led to anger from residents, 2) what digital nomads are and why they’re concerningly parasitic. Given time constraints, it may be better to lob the digital nomad explanation into the first point, and give a more brief overview on background.

Answer: Again, this topic is deceptively simple, on the surface it appears Brugada’s policy directly addresses gentrification, but I personally lean towards a no here. The issue within Mexico City (and Mexico as a whole) is the misunderstanding and miscommunication behind the origin of the housing issue. There are simply too many factors that have brought us to where we are today, solving ONE isn’t going to mitigate the harms, and therefore won’t relieve concerns. However, I doubt literally ANYONE is going to know that, so you could also get away with a yes.

3 Points
1) The plan is too surface level - Brugada’s plan, at its current stage, is underbaked. It only intends to put a cap on rent prices, but it's ineffectual at addressing the real issue with digital nomads. The worry of gentrification is two fold, in that A) it pushes people out of their homes, but B) is parasitic in that these nomads get off scott free on taxes and contribute little to the economy.

2) Lack of federal reinforcement - Brugada’s plan is exclusive to Mexico City despite the country wide problem, a lack of federal follow through coincided with Sheinbaum’s statements regarding the protests is likely to keep a flame lit in the hearts of those most affected most adversely. The issue is again magnified twofold because A) the mayor's plan is piecemeal at most, and B) the systematic issue never gets fixed at a federal level meaning perceptions of gentrification never really go away.

3) Housing availability – Brugada’s plan won’t resolve the infrastructural problem plaguing Mexico City, meaning residents will still be pushed out even by modest shifts in pricing due to low availability.

Analysis + Concluding Thoughts: As is alluded to in the title of this article, the biggest issue surrounding housing prices is miscommunication over where the issue starts. Simply put, Brugada’s plan is putting bandaids on bullet wounds. Insert any other fancy analogy here. Ultimately while it’s possible Brugada’s approach will mitigate concerns and possibly end the waves of protests, so long as the head of the snake isn’t cut off, this discourse is likely to resurface.