Residential segregation, which is the spatial sorting and separation of groups by population characteristics, has long been a core concern in urban studies, both academic and policy-geared.
Professor Eva Andersson from the Department of Human Geography at Stockholm University is an authority in the field of residential segregation and urban social inequalities, with much of her attention being directed towards the consequences of these phenomena for vulnerable groups. Andersson often reminds her readers that such studies need to keep in mind that the patterns, processes and consequences of segregation are multi-scalar. This sensitivity to multiple scales is at the core of Andersson’s current scholarly agenda.
When does residential segregation become a problem?
Spatial segregation is a phenomenon that structures the way societies work, occasionally oiling its nuts and bolts, but more often creating frictions and obstacles.
– I wouldn’t say that residential segregation is mostly a problem, but we do tend to think about the problems.
– Most residential segregation is the way we live, because we are sorted, says Andersson
Andersson points out that residential segregation can be good in certain circumstances, such as elderly people living together having adapted services.
– The problematic side of segregation is when it adventures the trust, and also the social cohesion of society, Andersson explains.
Different opportunities between children growing up in separate areas are contradictory to the goals of most welfare societies, and it makes it an issue for research. In some cities the polarization of society has become so prevalent that it has led to tensions between groups, which again has led to riots in certain marginalized areas of the city.
– The polarization, and actually the discovery of this polarization from people that see themselves as marginalized is very important.
– If you find yourself marginalized from society, and see that you lack opportunities in your area and you don’t understand why, that is sort of the relation of segregation, says Andersson.
The main debates of the last decades
At the time Andersson began her research on residential segregation it was still debated whether there were neighbourhood effects, but this has turned around in recent years, as the phenomenon has become more prevalent in other research areas outside of human geography. The focus of research has also shifted in the last couple of decades, with different aspects of segregation being researched.
– When I was starting out, it was mostly about socio-economic differences between areas, says Andersson.
– With the migration all over Europe, I would say that the non-European segregation of both the Norwegian and the Swedish society, and other European countries, has been at the forefront of what segregation is.
Andersson emphasizes that this shift is largely driven by political ideals and current debates in the media.
Neighbourhood effects
Neighbourhood effects is a phenomenon where the characteristics of a particular neighbourhood influence your opportunities and life chances in the future. Andersson explains that this may occur in neighbourhoods on both ends of the economic scale, and that growing up or living in wealthier areas may enhance a person’s socio-economic status.
– We have found that for instance rich areas to a larger extent affect young people growing up there, says Andersson.
– It is larger than the negative effects from growing up in poor neighbourhoods.
Andersson explains further that young people living in big cities with very different geographical areas, will have very different neighbourhood effects. As opposed to smaller towns, where the differences between areas are almost negligible.
– If you just consider metropolitan areas it would sort of overestimate the effects of neighbourhoods, says Andersson.
Contextual differences and multiple scales
Andersson emphasizes how residential segregation and associated phenomena need to be assessed with a keen eye being paid to context. She also highlights how the importance of these contextual differences depend on the outcome you are looking for.
– If you think about income and education opportunities for young people, then income and education would be very important.
– What you want to measure in the context would depend on what outcome you want to look at, Andersson explains.
The Nordic countries have a very similar segregation pattern if you measure the dispersal of non-European migrants. However, the housing markets in for example Norway and Sweden create differences between the metropolitan areas in these countries.
– The public housing/rental sector in Sweden is very much concentrated to suburbs, and then you would have a concentration of poorer people that are renting as a first step into the housing market, Andersson elaborates.
Many of Andersson’s recent publications emphasize the need to study residential segregation not only as contextually embedded, but also as multi-scalar in terms of its causes and consequences.
– Segregation for a pre-school child is very different from that of an adult person.
The child and the adult operate in different scales when it comes to residential segregation, and how it affects them. An adult person looking for employment would have a much larger scale than a child with most of their network nearby.
In her work, Andersson discusses the need to transcend the limits imposed by using administrative boundaries to delimit the units of analysis used in segregation research.
– We use data for every individual, and then we use the geo-coordinates for that individual and all individuals.
– Then we expand like a buffer around that person to incorporate firstly the ten closest neighbours, twenty, hundred, four hundred, thousand, fifty thousand closest neighbours of that individual, and then we do that for all individuals, says Andersson.
The information gathered can be used to look at a person’s individualised neighbourhood, and the share of different groups/people in that specific area.
Listen to Professor Eva Andersson in conversation with Professor Michael Gentile on Residential segregation and trajectories of vulnerability.