In recent decades both city planners and citizens are increasingly promoting greening strategies as a way to effectively respond to issues of urban liveability, public health, and climate change. Greening initiatives include, inter alia, the promotion of community gardens, parks, forests, recycling programs, street closures, street trees, sustainable housing, sustainable transportation, and urban farming. This movement is particularly promising given that in 2014, 53,6% of the global population lived in urban areas, a figure that is set to rise to 60,0% by 2030. In their recently published book, Gould and Lewis (2017), however, argue that, despite the fact that greening initiatives have the potential to address the issues mentioned above, they also entail a risk of causing or enhancing gentrification and displacement. This paper contributes to the debates on urban greening and sustainability by using a case study approach to examine how bottom-up greening initiatives can be entangled with or engender processes of gentrification and displacement. More specifically, attention is focused on a grassroots greening initiative called Living Streets (Leefstraten) initiated in Brugse Poort, a gentrifying neighbourhood of Ghent (Belgium). This initiative, in which residents make their street (partially) car-free for a period of two months, aims to create a temporary place for greenery and social living. As such, it actively contributes to the transition of Ghent to a climate-neutral city. Although Living Streets advocates often appeal to an apolitical or post-political discourse of ecological sustainability and urban liveability, they have met with serious opposition, mostly from incumbent residents. Drawing on 37 in-depth interviews, both with incumbent (N= 20) and newly arrived residents (N= 17), this study shows that greening initiatives in Brugse Poort not only are emblematic of a wider gentrification process but also exacerbate this process. More specifically, it is argued that greening initiatives in Brugse Poort ...