bachelor thesis
Social Segregation
Challenges of segregated residential
locations
The following work will deal with the topic of social
segregation, its critical and differentiated challenges.
The phenomenon that social groups are distributed differently
across residential locations has not only been known since the Chicago School
introduced the concept of segregation in the 1920s, but since cities have
existed. The division between rich and poor caused by social inequality, as
well as a growing proportion of the population with a migration background,
make social and cultural differences visible. This heterogeneity leads to an
unequal distribution of the social groups in the urban space, the districts and
quarters separate and the segregation increases. Segregation is a spatial
representation of social inequality in society, which is discussed again and
again by social changes. Thus segregation is often presented as problematic in
politics and the public, but here a distinction must be made between voluntary
and involuntary segregation. If segregation occurs voluntarily, there is no
reason to fear any adverse effects at first. Although we can speak of
exclusion, which is legitimate, it can be offset by positive effects such as
relationships, belonging and mutual support among the residents living in the
neighbourhood. The situation is different in the case of involuntary
segregation, where the effects mentioned may be helpful, but they are not
sufficient to counteract the clear and concentrated unequal distribution of
life chances and social demands. Without appropriate policies and approaches,
there may be additional problems such as concentration of inequalities,
ghettoisation and thus renewed exclusion or discrimination. All this is
encountered by those affected in a residential location which is assigned to
them in a forced manner, for example as a result of housing market policy, and
they have no decision-making power and only limited exit chances. "(...) The
rich live where they want, the poor live where they must" (Häussermann
2012: 384). This quote, among other things, leads to considerations as to
whether social segregation must be problematic and what the situation is
regarding the segregation of the rich.
The first section of the thesis serves primarily to clarify the
general concept and positioning of social segregation in the scientific
context. Furthermore, preliminary assumptions can already be derived from the
first basic ideas at the beginning. The concepts of the city, of the space are
cut and the connection to segregation is made visible. Selected historical
stages make the development as well as the transition to the current situation
present.
In the second section
The third section
…
This first section serves as an introduction to the discussion.
The concepts of city and space in the sociological sense serve to derive from
segregation. The historical digression sheds light on social development and
creates a context for the current situation.
If we want to look at social segregation, it is appropriate to
look at the concepts of city and space in order to guide initial considerations.
A delimitation of the terms city and space is questionable, what
makes a fusion of these, in sociology without them in a differentiated
meadow, unthinkable. The reasons lie in the subject areas, on the one
hand urban sociology wants to examine the spatial aspects and on the other hand
it is committed to sociology in its sense, to the exploration of society (cf.
Eckard 2004: 44).
Nassehi tries to explain spaces according to Luhmann as a pattern
of perception. An individual and communicative construction without physically
existing entities, which create a level of interaction and thus a social space (cf.
Nassehi 2002: 216ff). Löw refers to Kant, who describes space as something
created by people through their imagination (cf. Löw 2001: 29). Other authors
illuminate an idea of spaces in which the thoughts and actions of people and
groups of people take place (Löw/Steets/Stoetzer 2008: 9f).
The concept of the city, on the other hand, can be described as
follows: "(...) as a place of crystallization of social and thus
aesthetic, spatial, political, etc., and as a place of cultural, social, and
cultural exchange. Developments that affect surrounding and networked
places" (Löw/Steets/Stoetzer 2008:11). According to Friedrich's
considerations, the city is "(...) a spatial concentration of people and
resources" (Friedrichs 1995: 18). Max Weber goes back to history and develops
a definition of the city as a market place, a place of refuge for the
protection of the citizens, surrounded by fortification walls. However, the
most important spatial features of the city, such as size, density and
heterogeneity, can be taken from Wirth's approaches (cf. Friedrichs 1995: 17),
on which there are thoroughly critical views. According to Löw, Häusermann and
Siebel, Häusermann and Siebel consider size and density to be unsuitable for
the explanation of urban sociological problems, because neither space nor the
big city are responsible for social problems such as crime, for example, but
rather the structures of society as a whole are an explanation of these.
Although Löw positions himself on Häußermann's and Siebel's side, he stresses
the lack of discussion of the connections and effects between social and
spatial structures as well as the social action shaped by them (cf. Löw 2001:
46).
Wirth also attempted to explain social phenomena from non-social
causes; urban sociology should remain separate from sociology in its sense (cf.
Häußermann/Siebel 2004: 93). This view must be questioned, because the basic
ideas about the city and space, even if only roughly outlined, lead to the
assumption that they are not only responsible for their own core, but that both
are dependent on social structures and complex interactions. The city can thus
also be seen as an image of society (cf. Löw 2001: 45). Cities are also spaces
"(...) in which social and symbolic conflicts are carried out" (Häußermann/Siebel
2004: 139). This final evaluation, carefully combines city and space and allows
an approach to the concept of segregation.
Friedrichs explains the connection between social and spatial
inequality, segregation as one of the most central fields of research in urban
sociology (cf. Friedrichs 1988: 56). Social segregation cannot be explained by
a uniform theory; rather, the interdependencies at the macro and micro levels
must be taken into account in relation to their conditions, which implies that
hypotheses must be resorted to (cf. Friedrichs/Triemer 2009: 11). Segregation
can thus be explained both on the macro- and on the micro-level (city
individual), but both levels are insufficiently connected, for which two models
of macro-sociological and micro-sociological explanations by Friedrichs are
proposed (cf. Friedrichs 1988: 56).
From the macrosociological perspective, "Segregation is the
disproportionate distribution of social groups across urban districts (or other
spatial units)" (Friedrichs/Triemer 2009: 16). In other words:
"(...) Segregation measures the concentration of certain social groups in
certain subspaces of a city or urban region" (Häußermann/Siebel 2004:
140). At the macro level there are two fundamental aspects: income inequality
and the housing market (cf. Friedrichs/Triemer 2009: 74). Income inequality and
changes in income distribution point to polarisation, with effects on the
housing market, because low incomes can only pay low rents, which in turn leads
to a concentration of poorer populations in individual districts (cf.
Friedrichs/Triemer 2009: 11ff). It can thus be said that the extent of
segregation can be determined among other things by income inequality,
inequality of school-leaving qualifications, shares of the minority in the
total population and the size of the population (cf. Friedrichs 1988: 57). On this
basis Friedrichs explicates some hypotheses: "1. spatial distances between
people correspond to their social distances (Park 1926), i.e. social distances
also lead to spatial distance. 2. the higher the income of a household, the
greater are its possibilities to choose between different locations. The higher
the social inequality (measured by income, education or occupation), the
greater the differentiation of lifestyles. The greater the differentiation of
lifestyles, the greater the desire for spatial proximity to persons of similar
lifestyles" (Friedrichs 1988: 58). With regard to the minority shares,
Friedrichs and Triemer refer these particularly to ethnic segregation, the
higher the minority share the higher the segregation (cf. Friedrichs/Triemer
2009: 74). What is striking about these explications is that they are
micro-sociological and do not aim to explain segregation but to explain the
decisions made about residential locations. Friedrichs now sees the challenge
in formulating a microsociological theory and combining it with
macrosociological theory, i.e. the explanation of segregation (cf. Friedrichs
1988: 59).
"To explain segregation at the micro level, i.e. through
hypotheses about the behaviour of individuals and the outcome of these actions
at the macro level, an individual theory is needed. This can generally be
formulated as a theory of the choice of residential location" (Friedrichs
1988: 56). Farwick also relies on theoretical approaches at the macro and micro
levels for his attempts to explain segregation. For him, political and economic
structures are therefore aspects at the macro level, and decisions about where
to live are aspects at the micro level (cf. Farwick 2001: 29). Macro-sociological
aspects based on micro-sociological aspects will be used to explain the
location decisions. However, macrosociological aspects are not tested and the
two levels are not linked. The increasing differentiation of society
increasingly restricts the attempts to explain segregation and decisions about
where to live on the basis of individual characteristics, which makes the
microsociological explanation by means of theories appear meaningful. Here
Friedrichs draws on features of Berry and Kasarda's microsociological theory
with which they try to explain the decisions about where to live. It is the
income on which the price of the dwelling depends, the position in the life
cycle that influences the type of dwelling sought, among other things in terms
of size, or one's own preferences in terms of lifestyle that determine the type
of neighbours desired (cf. Friedrichs 1988: 59). The micro-level thus has a
socio-psychological origin, which can be traced back to patterns of perception
of the individual. The effects of these can be prejudices and developing
feelings such as fear and threat, for example towards minorities. Avoiding
contact with members of the minority or other social groups could be the
consequence (cf. Friedrichs/Triemer 2009: 74f). How these characteristics and
facts and the isolated hypotheses derived from them are to be brought together
leads to a dilemma that exists not only in urban research but also in sociology
in general. Friedrichs' attempts to explain this go in the direction of action
theory in that segregation is also understood as the result of a
process, the process of an individual decision on where to live (cf. Friedrichs
1988: 60f). Finally, sociology does not lack hypotheses in which either,
as already mentioned, features of the macro-level are related with the help of
the theories of social inequality or features of the micro-level are related
with the help of action-theoretical approaches; rather, it tries in vain to
formulate hypotheses that connect both levels with each other (cf. Friedrichs
1988: 65). Segregation at the macro level can only be explained by social and
spatial characteristics, whereas at the micro level it is explained by the
actions of individuals and the social norms that guide their actions (cf. Friedrichs
1988: 66ff).
How people or households are distributed in space is "(...)
the result of individual decision-making processes and the spatial distribution
of (residential) opportunities. (...) The individuals do not act spatially, but
the results of their actions have spatial consequences (...)" (Friedrichs
1988: 74).
Häußermann and Siebel explain the city and space as objects of
segregation research by defining these two factors as prerequisites for
segregation. For only when social as well as spatial differences exist in a
city can it be examined how these are interrelated and what effects these
interdependencies are associated with (cf. Häußermann/Siebel 2004: 143). References
of Friedrichs and Friedrichs and Triemers to micro- and macro-level can be
found here. From these considerations it becomes clear that the demarcation
between spatial and social is no longer conceivable with regard to social
segregation, since both are interdependent. Wirth's initially presented
assumptions of "separating urban sociology from sociology" cannot
therefore be related to segregation.
Based on the assumptions underlying the concepts of city and
space as well as segregation, the next step is a historical excursion.
At the beginning of the 20th century, Simmel began the debate
about city after city. Löw refers to Simmel's approaches and states that
"space is therefore for Simmel an ineffective form in itself, comparable
to the form through which wood becomes a cupboard, but which does not lead to
an independent existence outside the material" (Simmel, Georg 1905, Kant.
Sixteen lectures held at Berlin University, cited by Löw 2001: 59). Furthermore,
space should be seen abstractly, as a perception generated by people in their
imagination, which gives meaning to space. Human activities are thus
responsible for how things are brought into spatial form, from which social
structures can be identified. According to Simmel, society is created,
when isolated coexistence is formed into certain forms -
socialization as a result of social interactions (cf. Löw 2001: 59ff;
Löw/Steets/Stoetzer 2008: 30f).
Simmel's reflections were influential for the researchers Robert
E. Park, Ernest W. Burgess and Roderick D. McKenzie of the University of
Chicago when they developed the first approaches to the clarification of
segregation in the 1920s, which are still the subject of segregation research today.
Farwick cites criticism based on Firey, the researchers attribute a high
weighting to economic factors in the clarification of socio-spatial structures
instead of taking cultural values into account (cf. Farwick 2001: 31f). As
already mentioned, however, these points of criticism can also be seen in the
current discrepancy between the demarcation and fusion of urban sociology and
general sociology.
In times of industrialization, especially towards high
industrialization, a process of urbanization and urbanization began with
effects on society. "The increase in the population as a whole and the
steady increase in jobs in the factories are leading to explosive growth in the
cities" (Löw/Steets/Stoetzer 2008: 23). These processes led to a
fundamental change in society and to the emergence of class society. Among the
most important classes in industrial society were the working class on the one
hand and the capitalists on the other. This led to a concentration of the
working class (the majority) mostly in working-class neighbourhoods and the
segregation of the capitalists outside these (cf. Löw/Steets/Stoetzer 2008: 25).
At present, the city is no longer industrial, but architectural and social
patterns can always be traced back to the period of industrialization. A
further distinction is made between working-class neighbourhoods, West and East
Ends and upscale neighbourhoods (cf. Farwick 2001: 25), which also reflects the
patterns of class and class affiliation.
After 1945, and thus an extreme housing shortage, economic and social policy
endeavoured to provide
housing for a broad section of the population by intervening in the private
housing market with social housing. To no longer allow "(...) spatial
segregation of low-income households" (Häußermann/Siebel 2004: 147), which
led to a decrease in social segregation in many cities. Especially the state
housing supply in the GDR could control the segregation processes
administratively, since the apartments were administered by the municipalities
and enterprises. In the 1960s and 1970s, urban development policy
continued to focus on redevelopment programmes aimed at counteracting a
one-sided social structure. Modernisations and new buildings in the socially
disadvantaged districts and neighbourhoods were to make these attractive to the
wealthy inhabitants with the aim of creating a social mix (cf. Häußermann/Siebel
2004: 148f).
Also, in 1974, the goal of the city policy was to dissolve
"ghettos" and to scatter the foreigners, mostly those who came to the
Federal Republic of Germany in the course of the immigration of guest workers,
into all residential areas of the total population. Appropriate measures should
be taken to achieve a social mix to dissolve the spatial concentration of
immigrants (cf. Häußermann/Siebel 2002: 29).
Since the 1980s, the dismantling of welfare state interventions
in housing provision in the Federal Republic of Germany and state housing
provision in the GDR, and thus the abolition of the measures contributing to
the social mix, has led to higher social segregation. An increase in income
inequality becomes visible, the ethnic composition of the resident population
becomes more heterogeneous and the housing supply offers more mobility, which ultimately
speaks in favour of higher segregation in the future (cf. Häußermann/Siebel
2004: 149). Given the persistence of income inequality, it can be inferred that
income is crucial for the choice of housing location. At the same time, the
aspect of the ethnic composition of the population and the immigration
situation still trigger the concept of migration today. Häußermann and Siebel
talk about other perspectives of migration, from which the "problem"
becomes a bearer of hope. However, they are also critical of urban policy,
which is at a loss as to "(...) whether one should combat, allow or even
promote social spatial concentration (...)" (Häußermann/Siebel 2002: 30).
One possible explanation they see is that there is too little clarity about
segregation and what it means. Not without good reason, because it is
problematic to "(...) distinguish the different aspects of this complex network
of meanings and to evaluate them in a differentiated way" (Häußermann/Siebel
2002: 30).
How the social space of a city is structured depends on social
structures and values. In today's so-called open societies, there is an
increase in the demands placed on these aspects (cf. Häußermann/Siebel 2004:
153).
The transformation of the city can also reflect social change, it
is a reflection of our society (cf. Wehrheim 2012: 32).
In this section, an attempt is made to distinguish the
concept of segregation in a differentiated way, into "voluntary" and
"involuntary" segregation, which shows that different factors are
important in its emergence. It is in and of itself about the perspective from
which segregation is discussed, which leads to the question of why segregation
is considered a problem and almost exclusively precarious.
Löw generally refers to Luhmann in his attempts to define
differentiation, who regards differentiation as "expected
inequality". A differentiation of people according to criteria of social
inequality in Löw's attempts at definition is to be carried out historically
under consideration of the approaches of Durkheim, Simmel and Weber. Durkheim's
division of labour differentiation goes hand in hand with specialisation in the
world of work. He sees the parts of a society such as tribes, families and
hordes no longer as homogeneous, but rather as dissimilar, created by the
individual functions which they assume for the overall system. Durkheim thus
distinguishes between two forms of differentiation in society: the simple or
the segmented and the higher, division of labour. Durkheim sees the formation
of cities and an increasing density as the cause for the emergence of
differentiation based on the division of labour (cf. Löw 2002: 12f). The
researchers at the Chicago School refer to Durkheim's thoughts on density and
work out a city-theoretical concept. They find that with increasing density,
the degree of division of labour differentiation as well as the necessity of
segregation increases. The changes in the class society in times of
industrialization as well as an increase in ethnic conflicts due to new
immigration groups give the researchers reason to analyse the design of the
different spatial environments of these groups. The higher the settlement
density, the higher the differentiation in the sense of the specialisation of
lifestyles, occupational roles and fields of activity, this view can be found
equally particularly in Wirth (cf. Löw 2002: 13). Simmel shares Durkheim's
considerations, but works out a further aspect that not only creates a
diversity and dependence of occupational groups through differentiation, he
sees in these differentiation processes specific sets of actions that differ
from the practices and habits of others and thus distinguish each individual in
a special way, which gives rise to individuality (Löw 2002: 13). Max Weber
pursues the principle of rationalism, which, according to his assumptions,
underlies the fundamental structure of modern Western occidental society. Löw
draws on a quotation from Kalberg, which describes Weber's understanding of differentiation
very aptly for her: "For each sphere of life, at least one point of view
can be stated which is based on a value postulate and to which its
"rationality" is related. Each sphere "defends" its value
postulates and makes the aspects of all other spheres of life appear
"irrational"" (Kalberg 1981: 17). According to Weber,
rationality is dependent on all our thought processes and has an effect on
social action, allows various patterns of action to emerge and enables an
individual and rational lifestyle (cf. Kalberg 1981: 14, 23). "Weber is
one of the first to discuss the division of society into autonomous sub-areas
that produce their own horizon of meaning" (Löw 2002: 14).
According to Löw, differentiation is currently understood as
functional in the sense of Luhmann's systems theory, which means the
dismantling of hierarchical differentiation. Luhmann thus divides Weber's
thoughts into examining the differentiation of society into equal, but
dissimilar parts. A differentiation in Luhmann's sense is "(...) not a
process of decomposing something originally uniform into its individual parts
or into specialized units, (...) system differentiation in Luhmann means rather
the emergence of "ways of accessing" the world. For Luhmann, system
boundaries are "limits of meaning" (Löw 2002: 15). Luhmann sees the
increasing complexity of society in the primacy of the functional division of
society, which is based on specialization, the development of communicative
systems and autopoiesis (cf. Löw 2002: 15). The reduction of hierarchical
differentiation shifts the discourse from class theory to social inequality
theory. The dimension of vertical social inequality is supplemented by the
horizontal dimension and raises the question of how both levels are related to
each other and according to which patterns, processes of subdivision or
decoupling take place at these levels (cf. Eckardt 2004: 33).
According to Häußermann and Siebel, a decision on where to live
is based on the supply and demand sides of the housing market. On the supply
side, the question is examined as to how a spatially unequal distribution of
qualitatively differentiated housing stocks occurs, and on the demand side, the
distribution of individuals among the different segments of the housing market
is important (cf. Häußermann/Siebel 2004: 153).
For the supply of housing, political, economic, symbolic and
social criteria are decisive for the differentiation of spaces in relation to
the unequal distribution of housing supply across the urban area. Different
actors acting in these fields create a differentiation of spaces. Landowners,
investors, urban planners, housing politicians or landlords are thus responsible
for where which apartments are offered to whom. There is also no uniform
housing market in the cities, which consists rather of segments, which face
some barriers before entering such as price differences, images, administrative
guidelines (with social housing) or informal discrimination of landlords
opposite foreigners or members of other cultural minorities (see Häußermann/Siebel
2004: 155ff; also Häußermann/Siebel 2002: 33f).
"The demand side is determined by private households seeking
access to housing using the economic, social and cultural resources available
to them" (Häußermann/Siebel 2004: 157). The economic resources are
decisive for the freedom of choice a household has in choosing its place of
residence. Attractive areas and the quality of housing are reflected in land
prices and rents; the lower the economic resources, the less choice there is in
these areas. Not only the level of household income but also the security of
income determine the economic resources, which a civil servant receives more
easily a loan and thus access to the condominium market. Cognitive resources
include language skills, knowledge of the housing market, tenancy law and
relevant welfare regulations in order to be able to draw on a variety of
information sources and various providers (private owners, housing
associations). With social resources Häußermann and Siebel mean the social
networks to which a household has access, including relatives, friends,
colleagues and acquaintances who can help with information when looking for
accommodation. Political resources, such as the right to vote, welfare state
entitlement to housing benefit and price-linked social housing and the ability
to organise can also be advantageous in the search for housing (cf. Häußermann/Siebel
2004: 157f; also Häußermann/Siebel 2002: 34). With these dimensions Häußermann
and Siebel name, but without explicit reference, the dimensions which Bourdieu
considers decisive for the description of social structures: economic capital,
social capital, cultural capital, in order to be able to explain this
subdivision and structuring of society according to classes (cf.
Alissch/Dangschat 1993: 61).
In addition to the resources, preferences are included in
decisions on residential locations. The preferred residential area, that which
the individual is prepared to accept as a good residential area, creates
further room for manoeuvre in the choice of residential location. It is the
wishes and needs of the residents that they follow in order to make their
location decisions. In this way, great importance is attributed to the
residential location, which only makes it possible to leave a neighbourhood for
serious reasons. Family households, for example, therefore aspire to the desire
for a home of their own. It could also be observed that in the case of a change
of residence, an apartment close to the previous one is sought, especially in
the case of long periods of residence, the possible reasons for this lie in the
fact that the households want to remain in their social network, with friends,
relatives, neighbours, the environment they know and are familiar with (cf. Häußermann/Siebel
2004: 158f).
Based on the personal preferences of the households, those with a
high endowment of the capital types mentioned (resources) are the first to have
the opportunity to enter the housing market, whereas households with the lower
endowments have to accept what is left over, which does not mean a great deal
of freedom of choice for them when choosing a place to live (cf. Häußermann/Siebel
2004: 158). According to Alisch and Dangschat, a competitive situation for
residential locations arises, since the people and the segregating groups
generally do not have the same access to the individual types of capital, which
allows the competitive situation to take place on the three levels of economic,
social and cultural division mentioned above. Segregation patterns arise which
can be determined by a type of capital (cf. Alisch/Dangschat 1993: 62).
"There are therefore concentrations of population groups which, although
homogeneous in terms of economic capital (low), differ significantly in terms
of social and/or cultural capital (Alisch/Dangschat 1993: 62).
The social differentiation, especially the differentiation of
people according to certain criteria of social inequality which also result
from the interaction of supply structures and resources such as preferences,
unequal distribution in urban space or in certain neighbourhoods, substantiates
the concept of segregation. The above-mentioned approaches to differentiation, as
well as the aspects of the supply and demand side of the housing market,
influence housing location decisions, which on the one hand can lead to
voluntary and on the other hand involuntary (forced) decisions. These decisions
are presented in the following, on the basis of the levels of residential
location decisions.
Blasius goes into the investigations of the Chicago School of
Park, Burgess and McKenzie, which follow a basic assumption that "(...)
there are similar "distribution struggles" in the city or city region
as in nature, the territories (or habitats) of flora and fauna correspond to
the (residential) locations of (city) inhabitants" (Blasius 1988: 410). As
a result of this ecological process (segregation), different habitats of urban
dwellers emerge in which groups of people of different affiliations, such as
ethnic groups, live (cf. Blasius 1988: 410). Kley also summarizes the
approaches of the Chicago School researchers and understands "(...) the
city as an ecosystem in which city dwellers are in an exchange with their built
and social environment. Each social group occupies an ecological niche in the
"city" system and in this context finds its quasi-natural habitat in
a certain urban area. One belongs to the same social class, speaks the same
language, shares central values, and generally has similar attitudes"
(Kley 2016: 296f). Ecological approaches are based on dependence and interdependence
between living beings and their environment, which can be transferred to social
ecology and develop certain competitive struggles. While two rivals argue about
a coveted object, in ecology about a prey, this object of dispute in social
ecology is the residential location. How these competitive battles are fought
out is clear in ecology, since physical superiority usually leads to the goal,
whereby it cannot be clearly determined in social ecology and the supply
structures, types of capital and preferences are considered decisive (cf.
Blasius 1988: 410).
"The desire for social homogeneity is the driving force for
segregation processes, (...). Households with children react particularly
sensitively to a neighbourhood that is socially heterogeneous because, on the
one hand, they want to avoid undesirable influences from children from other
social strata and cultures and, on the other hand, they fear that their
children will be disadvantaged as a result of too low a level of performance at
school" (Häußermann/Siebel 2004: 159).
The preferences of foreign households, in addition to social
segregation, contribute to ethnic segregation, the desire to live together with
one's peers, is considered to be decisive here, and voluntary decisions about
where to live are made. On the supply and demand side, decisions on where to
live are increasingly influenced by ethnic characteristics, but this can also
have a negative impact on voluntary decisions and lead to involuntary
segregation (see Section 4.2 for details) (cf. Häußermann/Siebel 2004: 173).
The fact that the wishes for a place to live vary throughout the life cycle can
be found, among other things, in the approaches of Herlyn (cf. Häußermann/Siebel
2004: 159).
According to Herlyn, voluntary decisions on where to live can be
traced back to the individualisation processes in CVs. Starting from the social
inequality specific to social strata and classes, he considers it relevant to
relate the life course in its entirety to urban structures, especially in
connection with the pluralization and differentiation of lifestyles in order to
pursue the linking of the family cycle and housing behaviour (cf. Herlyn 1988:
111). By individualization, Herlyn does not mean a fundamentally new phenomenon,
but rather the emergence of modern society accompanied by socialization and the
associated dissolution of the state order. This restructuring and broadening of
horizons can be associated with different behaviours in certain phases of life
(cf. Herlyn 1988: 112). Formulations such as the discovery of childhood, the
invention of young people, the emergence of post-adolescence or the new age as
a cultural category bring about changes in the area of the family and the forms
of living together. The resulting differentiated forms of life lead to a
pluralization of lifestyles, followed by individualization processes, which
unfold choices as well as decision-making constraints in the area of training
for the choice of life partner, generative behavior, decisions on where to
live, etc. For Herlyn it is questionable about these individualization
processes to what extent these decisions are perceived as burdensome and as a
coping strategy of this "local world of life" as the manageable,
coherent and true world of life with which one identifies oneself, the place
where all our ideas are linked (cf. Herlyn 1988: 113f). Environment as home,
social networks, social infrastructure, spatial mobility, home ownership are
the characteristics of the local living environment, some are discussed under
the aspect of the curriculum vitae. According to Herlyn, the place of everyday
life and a feeling of personal continuity in the lifetime are included under
the aspect of environment and home. Industrialisation, world wars or urban
redevelopment processes demanded an involuntary change of apartments or
residential quarters. This loss of the stabilizing function (spatial
environment) of social life is nevertheless always sought and used anew. Herlyn
tries to make this desire clear by means of the "mourning for a lost
home" (Fried 1971) or the "search for home" (Greverus 1979) (cf.
Herlyn 1988: 115). The mourning reaction is also dependent on the neighbourhood
solidarity, the greater the neighbourhood solidarity, the more difficult the
change becomes and the more an involuntary decision on where to live. The
neighbourhood solidarity can also be described as follows: "The different
quarters within a city and the houses within a quarter have a fixed place and
are as strongly anchored in the ground as trees and rocks, such as hills or a
plateau. It follows from this that the group of city dwellers does not have the
impression of wanting to change as long as the appearance of the streets and
buildings remains the same" (Halbwachs ………… ). Thus, the first sentence
allows us to comprehend the stabilizing effect of the spatial environment that
characterizes social life (cf. Herlyn 1988: 115). The second sentence rather
understands approaches of the social city programme, which are dealt with in
the sixth section. In this environment, experiences are also gathered that
contribute to the acquisition of identity and make it possible to speak of
home. These include experiences such as those in childhood and adolescence,
which contribute to the emotional occupation of physical elements of the
environment at the level of homeland attachment. Experiences of socialisation
at different levels constitute a strong attachment to the environment and the
homeland (cf. Herlyn 1988: 116f).
By social networks Herlyn means social contacts and distinguishes
between kinship, acquaintance and neighbourly relationships. Kinship networks,
focus on the generational contexts and the importance attributed to families
and relatives and thus primarily expect support and assistance from them. The
derivation is that living in the same place as close as possible to each other
is a prerequisite for an exchange of material help, social care and emotional
attention through family relationships. Acquaintance relationships are
established individually, they are not fixed and not normatively defined like
neighbourhood and family relationships. They also have different status, from
distant acquaintances to best friends. The creation and maintenance of social
circles of friends and acquaintances requires initiative again and again, which
points to a possibility of control in the area of one's own life; this can also
be a resource in times of crisis. Greater spatial mobility in the middle and
higher social strata due to better opportunities for job and housing choices is
put forward as a preferred reason for greater dissemination of acquaintance
contacts. Neighbourly relations, on the other hand, are attributed the least
importance; usually distance is kept as desired (cf. Herlyn 1988: 117ff). Häußermann
and Siebel also mention that a pronounced segregation can be found especially
among those groups that have a particularly high degree of freedom of choice on
the housing market, which indicates a need for the choice of neighbourhood (Häußermann/Siebel
2004: 184).
Herlyn also mentions the aspect of social structure and refers to
institutionalisation. In order to cover the age-specific needs that could not be
covered privately, these were regulated by institutionalisation and facilitated
and improved under state control and a social infrastructure created. Looking
back on history, an expansion began in public facilities tailored to meet the
needs of certain phases of life, kindergartens with pedagogical programmes,
differentiation in secondary education, adult education, expansion and
extension of various preventive institutions, counselling centres and social
stations, primarily for older people in the health sector. This system of
state-guaranteed security still exists today, in a contrast between the
pressure to individualize, the pressure to make decisions and the need for
security where traditional family security is no longer sufficient (cf. Herlyn
1988: 121f).
Finally, the aspect of spatial mobility is briefly dealt with. Herlyn
argues Beck's thesis that the individualization of life paths is decisively
driven by social and spatial mobility processes. The most decisive factors here
are local and long-distance migration, which can depend on life-long specific
housing decisions. A decision to move may therefore indicate a change in the
composition of the family. Marriage, family growth or family reduction when
family members move out, lead to housing decisions according to preferences (cf.
Herlyn 1988: 123f). Accordingly, a high level of neighbourhood solidarity can
be the result of a close migration. The housing market and economic resources
continue to be decisive for housing decisions. According to Beck's thesis, home
ownership is one of the greatest obstacles to mobility and individualisation
and creates immobility (cf. Herlyn 1988: 124). Herlyn has made an attempt with
his approaches to list some factors that slow down the process of
individualization and are considered significant in the curriculum vitae, but
he does not present them as complete and refers to the possibility of
supplementation (cf. Herlyn 1988: 128).
In view of the above-mentioned aspects of supply structures,
resources and preferences such as individualisation processes, it can be said
that the less freedom there is to choose where to live or the less this freedom
does not even exist, we speak of involuntary or forced segregation. "Thus
segregation always has two poles, the group of people who are displaced and the
group of people who are displaced" (Blasius 1988: 411). Taking supply and
demand levels into account, Blasius can substantiate this thesis. Depending on
the types of capital, resources and preferences, we find ourselves in the
competition for the "good" residential location. This struggle forces
the loser to make an involuntary and forced decision because his wishes and
needs cannot be fulfilled due to a lack of resources (cf. Häußermann/Siebel
2004: 159). The superiority of another person (also group) over another group
leads to a displacement and distribution of the group members to individual
areas of the city. Friedrichs speaks here of a "disproportionate
distribution" of the group members to the individual areas of the city
(also Section 2.1.2) (cf. Blasius 1988: 410). When and for when, however, this
disproportional distribution becomes problematic can be considered in the next
section.
From a historical point of view, segregation according to class
or class was already seen as problematic before industrialisation, since
poverty and fatal diseases often concentrated in the urban areas of the lower
classes and this was seen as a danger to public health and political order (cf.
Häußermann/Siebel 2004: 149). The development of capitalist society also
brought about a radical change. Häußermann and Siebel refer here to their own
approaches from the sociology of housing (2000: 131ff) to "Education
through Housing - Education to Housing" and summarize: "(...) The
dense living together in working-class quarters enabled a direct and uncensable
communication that promoted the development of class consciousness and made
political organization possible. (...) The concentration of the working class
in the large cities and their crowding together in a few quarters were thus a
prerequisite for their political capacity to act. These ideas were also shared
by the opponents of the proletarian movement, which is why they advocated the
dissolution of the segregated districts within the framework of 'housing
reform' and 'urban development reform'. Desegregating housing construction was
conceived as a means of educating and domesticating the 'dangerous classes' (Häußermann/Siebel:
2004: 151). If today we speak of neighbourhoods with concentrated social
problems, it becomes clear that they are no longer homogeneous social groups
such as the working class, but rather heterogeneous and conflict-laden
neighbourhoods (cf. Häußermann/Kronauer/Siebel 2004: 28). Segregation is
therefore not equal to segregation and is not immediately seen as a social
problem, it depends on how it came about (cf. Häußermann/Siebel: 44). What
matters is whether segregation is voluntary or involuntary, forced segregation.
"The segregation of the upper class into special residential areas is not
viewed with the same concern as the concentration of low-income households or
ethnic minorities. (...) The socio-spatial segregation of the upper class is
usually much stricter, but the higher the income, education and social status,
the more voluntary segregation is (Häußermann/Siebel 2004: 183). For members of
the upper class, segregation therefore has hardly any negative consequences.
The members of the lower class and in marginal locations are separated from the
upper class and pushed into already disadvantaged areas, with the consequence
of involuntary segregation. The process of stigmatizing the lower class is
thereby intensified (cf. Häußermann/Siebel 2004: 45). "The marginal social
situation can be consolidated and aggravated by living in such segregated
areas, so that disadvantaged neighbourhoods become disadvantaged
neighbourhoods" (Häußermann/Siebel 2004: 159). In addition, "Spatial
concentration (...) is only regarded as a problem if it concerns the
segregation of groups whose otherness is defined by the majority as
threatening. The problem is not perfection or the degree of demarcation, but
the acceptance of the culture that becomes visible through demarcation"
(Häußermann/Siebel 2004: 45). The question of whether and when segregation is
problematic is therefore to be discussed from the perspective of compatibility
for natives and the perspective of the minority. Häußermann and Siebel
exaggerate that the point is "(...) how many strangers a neighbourhood can
tolerate until it claims dominance, or how many foreigners may appear in the
street scene until the Germans feel threatened and move away when they
can" (Häußermann/Siebel 2004: 45), which in turn leads to the question of
the voluntary and involuntary and associated standards of housing location
decisions. In this respect, it can be said that a high concentration of rich
households in residential areas is generally not discussed, the concentration
of low-income neighbourhoods as well as neighbourhoods with ethnic homogeneity
are in the foreground. The life chances of the residents are questioned with
regard to the advantages and disadvantages of the disadvantaged neighbourhoods.
To the question whether segregation is a problem there are therefore different
answers which can be answered perspectivistically from the question (cf.
Häußermann 2012: 384f).
In this section,
the characteristics of poverty and ethnicity are emphasized to allow a
differentiated view of segregation. The main characteristics of poverty and
ethnicity are addressed to highlight these inequalities as the focus of
segregated housing. This part of the study will also provide an insight into
role of segregation in a society and how to leads to differentiation. Segregation
does not come naturally in a society but it is developed by using a systematic
process which based on number of policies, plans and practices. And such a type
of plans and policies denied to give equal rights and opportunities to the
minority populations. Segregation between the racial and ethnic groups is
increasing day by day and it is analyzed that African Americans are more
segregated in terms of urban housing markets and other factors, as compared to
different ethnic and racial groups. In 20th century, there is a high
contribution of African Americans to introduce racial segregation in the
country. The higher levels of segregation have resulted in increased black
isolation. This section of the study will also include two important forms of
segregation i.e. poverty and ethnicity. Both of these resulted from increasing
contribution to the social segregation. Social norms of a society also play a
vital role to provoke poverty and ethnicity, and even democratic rules and
regulations support such a type of social discrimination (Massey 2001, p. 392-399). [NA1]
Inequalities in the
focus of polarized cities are also at boom. Polarized cities are encouraging
income inequality, economic displacements, and fluctuations in real estates.
Such a type of factors played an important role to create differentiation among
different social groups. Analysis of capitalist society and pre-capitalist
society shows that issues of polarizations are increased with the emergence of
social segregations. Globalization and its factors are harming culture of
equality. Urban poverty is also resulted from polarization and it has created a
difference between the low wealth and high wealth classes of economy. Culture
of poverty and cycle of poverty also increased social polarization. Media is
also strongly connected with the social polarization as digital media is
creating number of homophilous circles which are increasing social
polarization. Different scholars have also provided number of content about
increasing rigidity of social boundaries and class which is dividing economy of
the country in a polarized form of society (Zwiers
et. al 2015, p. 3-4).
Research conducted in
some of the large cities like London, Tokyo, and New York has indicated that
polarization refers to the shifting of people from the industrial sector of
economy to postindustrial labor markets of economy. And such a type of shifting
has also increased internalization of the economic sector of countries. And
this type of issue has also led to increase in low wage jobs and lower income
groups are attracted to such a type of jobs. Polarization has also created
decline in demand for the low-skilled workers while there are large number of
managers and professionals working in the economy. This is leading to an
increase in unemployment in the society. Occupational structure of the economy
is also destructed due to increasing social segregation (Zwiers et. al 2015, p. 3-4).
There are also
number of issues which are resulted social segregation and these include
poverty, inequality, violence, crime, and segregation. Migration of people is
increasing urban social inequality. International capital flows and globalization
is causing poverty as one of the famous urban phenomena. There is existing a
casual relation between the social segregation and income inequality. Spatial
concentration of poverty in urban areas is also accompanied by surge in income
inequality. Pricing of the local areas is also increasing when rich people try
to pull away from rest of society, and there is also an increase in risk of
drug misuse and stress in urban life. Income inequality is due to economic
segregation and residential segregation. Social and economic progress also
increased urbanization. There are large number of differences in the sales,
financing, and rentals in the societies due to increase in urbanization. Some
of the researchers found that there is existing a strong relation between
residential segregation and income inequality which is also affecting health of
locals on the basis of inequality (Gilbert 2013,
p. 683-686).
Poverty is one the
important outcome of social segregation and it is used to indicate state of a
person who lacks status, amount, or a material possession which is socially
acceptable. And such a type of state exists in an economy when there is a lack
of means which can be used to satisfy basic needs of people. Social segregation
plays a key role for the lack of basic needs of people as it determines status
which would be able to define means which can be used to satisfy basic needs of
people. Poverty can be in the form of hunger, lack of shelter, being sick and
not able to get treated by doctor. Poverty also includes inability of a person
to have access to education, and not having job or insecure future. There are
different forms of poverty which are changed from one place to another and from
time to time. poverty also creates such a type of situation which everyone
wants to escape and want to adopt new ways which could be able to provide
better to eat and live. Inability of a person to participate in recreational
activities is also one form of the poverty (Myers
2018).
Social segregation
creates number of factors which contribute to increase poverty in an economy.
As social segregation lead to the isolation or separation of an ethnic group,
class, or race in specified area by using means of voluntary residence or
enforcement. Use of discriminatory means and separate educational activities
are also used to create a line of segregation in a society. Different
facilities are provided to different classes of society due to social
segregation. Freedom of people is also restricted and opportunities are also
limited in a segregated society. Only dominant group of the society can avail
best possible opportunities, freedom, and access to basic needs. Fluctuations
in prices and supply and demands of goods and services are also affected due to
classification of society in different groups. Various social strata also lead
to a difference in social culture and demands of such culture could not be
supported by lower classes of society. Residential locations are also provided
on the basis of preferences, and those people are provided with best
facilities. Poverty resulted from social segregation also creates situations in
which people of lower classes are not able to access adequate amount of
nutritious food and clean water, and they have no access to the jobs or livelihood.
Decision making power of the segregated classes of economy becomes weak and
they are excluded from the high sects of economy. There is also lack of
infrastructure for the communities which are excluded from urbanization.
Isolation of such classes of society also limits number of opportunities which
are provided to people in urban areas (Myers
2018).
4.1.1.
Types of Poverty
There are various
types of poverty which come into existence from the social segregation and
these include cyclical poverty, collective poverty, concentrated collected
poverty, and case poverty.
Cyclical Poverty
Such a type of
poverty which occurs at a large scale in a society and it occurs for a limited
duration. Poor agricultural planning and various natural phenomena lead to existence
of such a type of circumstances which can create shortage of food and other
basic necessities of life. There is an increase in price fluctuation in
cyclical poverty and prices are usually high which affect living standard of
people. Business cycle of society is also affected by this type of poverty. Economic
fluctuations affect lowest social socioeconomic strata and it also declines
public work projects (Britannica 2018).
Collective Poverty
Collective poverty
creates such a type of situations which lead to permanent insufficiency of the
resources which can be used to fulfill basic needs of people. Wealth is
concentrated in large groups of society and collective form of poverty is
passed on from one generation to another. This type of poverty lasts for a
longer period of time. some of the situations which are caused by it are low
life expectancy, poor health conditions, and high level of infant mortality.
GNP level of such a type of society is also declined.
Concentrated Collected Poverty
This type of
poverty is existing in most of the affluent countries of world, and large
number of demographic groups pass on concentrated collected poverty from one
generation to another. It leads to an increase in mortality rates, low
educational levels, poor health conditions in specifies segments of society as
compared to those which are affluent segments of a society. Ghettos who are
abandoned by industry and who cannot compete in working environment are
affected by this type of poverty for a long period of time (Britannica 2018).
Case Poverty
Case poverty is
defined as inability of certain class of a society to secure its basic needs
from the prospective economy. And this type of poverty is created due to lack
of important traits or attributes which can contribute to maintain living
standard of a person. Mental and physical handicaps are included in this group
of society (Britannica 2018).
These types of
poverty exist in a society where social segregation is prevailing and
controlling all sects of economy. Social segregation is considered as a key
factor which can induce poverty in a society and determines standard of living
of different groups.
4.1.2.
Effects of Poverty on a Society
Poverty has number
of effects on a society and it creates issues like hunger, illness, and poor
system of sanitation. There are various troubles and lifelong barriers which
are passed from one generation to another. Poor housing and crippling accidents
are also result of poverty. Violence is also increased in a society due to
poverty. Terrorism is also induced by poverty as it leads to such a type
situation which increase unemployment in the society and these create
opportunities for people to earn from illegal activities (Shelton 2016).
Poverty instill
number of risks for good health, safety, security, employment opportunities,
and educational opportunities. People are more vulnerable to diseases due to
poor living conditions and lack of basic necessities of life. schooling and
education of generation is also affected adversely. Level of stress is also
increased and financial uncertainties lead to an increase in criminal victimization,
eviction, and job loss. Homelessness is also result of poverty and it also
leads to occurrence of number of social crimes (Anon.
2018).
Ethnic social segregation limits of
prospective opportunities for the low status class of economy. Urban
residential patterns are also promoted as a result of increase in ethnicity in
a community. Ethnicity is increasing in developing countries and creating
number of barriers for the progress of those countries. Home grown terrorists
are also resulted from the social segregation and ethnic groups in the society.
Ethnicity is also increasing factors which create enforced separation of two or
more groups of the society. Ethnic segregation is also occurring at
geographical scales. There are number of cities in European countries which
possess large concentration of ethnic groups. Spatial segregation of groups of
population is one of the famous process which occurs in cities. And it is also
analyzed that ethnic segregation is more common at workplaces rather than at
residential places. Ethnicity is considered as an important factor in the
provision of jobs to a certain class of society (Silm
2014, p. 36-41).
Acceptance of foreigners in a country also
leads to creation of large ethnic groups. These groups include people of
different nationalities and different cultures. Foreigners prefer to work in
such a type of environment which is feasible for them and which would not be
based on ethnicity. As inclusion of ethnicity at workplace leads to existence of
number of conflicts which can lead to decline in the performance of employees
and it can also destroy working atmosphere of companies. Acceptance of
foreigners also leads to a creation of changes in the culture of societies as
people are more attracted to diversity in culture. Ethnicity diversity in a
country is favorable for foreigners as they can contribute to improve
infrastructure of a country by contributing and investing in economic
activities. Different ethnic backgrounds also lead to an increase in cultural
diversity (Batra 2008, p. 3-10).
5 Consequences and challenges
Investigators who try to describe racial
residential segregation state that it is responsible for the negative
consequences that minorities face, particularly the blacks. The past few
decades have been witness to a number of investigations that have reported and
shown evidence that segregation is responsible and increasing concentrated
poverty among the black community, leading to higher unemployment, lesser rates
of children completing their schools and graduating, eventually leading to
higher mortality rates. Ghettos are a consequence of this societal evil which
according to Wacquant means an ‘ethno-race formation that combines all four
forms of race superiority: categorization, discrimination, segregation, and
exclusivist violence’ (Vasecka 2012, p.1). [NA2]
Concentrated poverty, and battling the
hurdles that such a challenge presents, means that such high poverty
neighborhoods are conflicted with problems such as having lesser public
services and in turn have more fast-food chains that encourage an unhealthy
lifestyle, numerous liquor stores and in turn have a shortage of credible,
organic and healthy food grocery stores. Such neighborhoods also face greater
exposure to pollution as well as violent crimes. There have been researches
that show that communities that have such a huge proportion of racial and
ethnic minorities are also the ones who have the least access to established clinics
and doctors. African – American
neighborhoods have been studied to show the highest rates of poverty and death
resulting due to heart diseases and different forms of cancers (Lichter 2019).
Segregation has the ability to impact
everyone in disastrous ways and subjecting them to exclusion from necessities
and rights that should be fundamental and accessible to every human. Even the
children aren’t free from the racial segregation within communities. Even the
income segregation among families who have children increases. Children’s
opportunities are affected by school segregation which isolates them from
opportunities and impacts their developmental period massively (McArdle & Acevedo-Garcia 2017, p. 1-3).
5.1 Segregated poverty
Roithmayr, in
the book ‘Locked in Segregation’, poses and argument that colored families
who’re living in segregated neighborhoods are facing the effects of efforts
that were made in earlier times to exclude them from the society, while the
while families comfortably enjoy structural advantages, as well as better
schooling, jobs and better forms of social capital. African-Americans of lower
incomes are incapable of attaining the feeling of safety of moving to white
neighborhoods. There’s also the concern of how colored neighborhoods lack
quality services and better rental apartments to attract the attention of white
folks. This inadvertently locks the colored people into an area of concentrated
poverty, allowing white neighborhoods to prosper comfortably (Massey 2017).
In an age where globalization has modified many sectors and
modern technology has become integral to economic and financial growth, there’s
a digital divide between the race of the people and how lesser income levels
eventually disrupt the chances of long term success that colored people can
face, thereby impeding their opportunity to digitalize and match the growth of
neighboring areas. Latinos and African Americans have lesser access to the
Internet that their white counterparts. This massively limits their ability to
become contributing and vital members of the community. It also acts as a
hindrance in economic opportunities presented to them and confines them to
further poverty.
It has been century’s worth of plans, practices and policies
that have established and enforced racial segregation within residential areas
and gave rise to segregated districts of concentrated poverty in multiple US
cities. The fact that it still persists today means that there’s a desperate
need to talk about concentrated poverty from a
racial perspective (Anas 2006).
5.2 Ghettoization
Simply put, it means the process through
which minorities are forcibly removed from the mainstream picture either
through physical means or by extraditing them from cultural norms and values.
Speaking of the term Ghettoization, it refers to the systematic pushing of
groups of people that are not considered by certain members of the society as
core members of their community. Instead, these people are then all grouped
into overcrowded areas of the urban location which is specifically associated
with certain ethnic groups or racial populations that are living below the
poverty line (Haynes 2019).
A more
crucial aspect to discuss is Exclusion. It is defined as an institutionalized
policy that aims at preventing minorities from residing in certain places.
Examples of legalized exclusion are the South African apartheid and the Warsaw
ghettos. In Cyprus, ethnic ghettos were imposed back in 1974 at the hands of
the Turkish army. Before the invasion had engulfed the city, majority of Greek
people and a minority of the Turkish people were intermingling and living
together. However, the invasion led to an ethnic cleansing of almost 200,000
Greek Cypriots from their residential homes and all their belongings were then
distributed amongst the Turkish Cypriots who had voluntarily moved to Turkey
and even to illegal people (Agnew
2010, p. 144-147).
Another politically correct and recent example of
exclusion is that of Israeli settlements along the West Bank and in
Gaza. This serves as relevant examples of exclusionary policies that exist till
now. Since 1967, ever since the war,
these occupied territories serve as homes to Israeli Jews, and at a micro level
these areas are purely Jewish.
Advanced marginality has best been described
in the book Urban Outcasts: A Comparative Sociology of Advanced Marginality. It
states that there was a sudden increase of black American ghetto’s after the. A
change in local and federal policies led to a remarkable evolution from the
communal ghetto, and all blacks were then confined to a place that both
protected and enclosed them. It gave rise to a hyper-ghetto, a territory that is
desolate and made of the most unstable people from the African-American working
class. It is in this hyper-ghetto that that these people are exposed to the
worst forms of insecurity, whether that be in the form of economic, social,
criminal or housing insecurities (Wacquant
2014, p. 1687-1695).
5.3
Concentrated inequalities - additional disadvantage
The quantity of people who are living in
concentrated poverty has exponentially risen since 2000. The stats have doubled
over the years from nearly seven million to nearly fourteen million as of 2013.
This is quite devastating given that research shows that there was a decline in
concentrated poverty between the years 1990 and 2000.
The relation concentrated poverty has with
race is distressing to say the least. It overlaps in the following ways; at
least 1 out of 4 black Americans will be situated in a high-poverty
neighborhood. As for Hispanics, 1 out of every 6th Hispanic is
located in a poor district too. As for
their white counterparts, 1 out of 13 people are situated in a poorer locality.
Places like New York Syracuse, Dayton, Ohio and Delaware have seen an increase
in concentrated black poverty (Florida
2015).[NA3]
5.4
Problems of studies of segregation
One possible
reason for how less research there is on segregation and how migration flows
are responsible for producing and reproducing residential segregation, could be
due to the fact that migration flows, along with population changes (regarding
economic instability or an epidemic), sometimes doesn’t offer enough data than
the commonly used information regarding neighborhood level population
demographics. It is necessary that in order for more accurate and vast sample
of data, the individuals be tracked in real time to observe their movements,
rather than using residential areas as a whole (Brama 2006, p. 11-20).
Another problem
for why researching on segregation is problematic is because aspects regarding
the measurement of ethnic groups are being overlooked and not given priority. A
lot of faith and biased reliance is made on the already existent definitions
and classifications of race and ethnicity; thereby the possibility that some
members of the community are excluded might be imminent.
With the recent
surge in illegal immigrants, the number of undocumented residents is on the
rise. Meaning there could be legal issues with regards to involving undocumented
people in a study and complicating how it would proceed. More importantly,
there needs to be a change in how people think and wish to revolutionize their
current standards of living. Unless there is a change in how policies and laws
treat their own citizens, there won’t be sufficient attention drawn to the
plight of economic downfall and limited mobility that minorities face. So
studying segregation means understanding that its approach is complex and would
require immense research and knowledge to enhance our knowledge on a
multidimensional topic like segregation, through a multi-disciplinary approach (Brama 2006, p. 15-19).
6. Possible Courses of Action
Fair-Share Plans
The strategy
that should be considered a priority is housing allocating or a fair-share plan
in which there will be equitable dispersion of low and moderate income housing
all through the metropolitan area. This can only be achieved if voluntary
cooperation co-exists between the governments of suburban regions and the
jurisdictions within a metropolitan area (Saltman, 1977, p. 809-810).
Exclusionary Zoning Lawsuits
A legal
aspect, is the second strategy. This law should aim to remove zoning laws or
any sort of regulation that is aimed at being racially or economically
exclusionary. There are states in America which have actively banned such
exclusionary zoning. Massachusetts issued an ‘Anti Zoning Law’ in which there
was a certain quota prescribed for low and moderate income housing for each
town within it. New York has also acted out on its promise to eradicate
segregation by introducing a State Urban Development Corporation which
overrides local zoning laws, excludes other forms of land control and provides
low and moderate-income housing. The surest way to proceed with the
implementation of this is by issuing law suits against municipalities, which
results in immediate withdrawal and further helps support the cause of
curtailing segregation (Saltman,
1977, p. 810-812).[NA4]
Community Housing Audits
Another important strategy is based on a
social action. There should be implementation of existing open housing laws.
This is a combination of a research amd educational strategy to help raise
awareness about the gravity of the situation. Awareness regarding racial
discrimination seen in housing and the legal implications of it can help
encourage members of the community to help engage and bring about a
constructive change in the society (Saltman,
1977, p. 812-813).
While the
Civil Rights Movement played a key role in desegregating public schools in the
US, it wasn’t until the legendary Brown vs Board of Education case took place
in the Supreme Coat, did people also fight for segregation to be removed when
speaking of school and education. It argued that every child deserved the
chance to education no matter their class. Since then, there’s had to be
massive federal intervening to help remove any bias through race or class
(McBride). [NA5]
6.1
Socially Integrative City programme - neighbourhood management
Social City has
been hailed as one of the cornerstones of how urban development was to proceed
in Germany. Overlooked by the jurisdiction of the federal government, while
also being managed by the German federal ministry for the surroundings,
conservation of nature, structures and nuclear safety – now, it’s being
implemented by various ministries and municipal governments. The purpose of
this concept was to prevent the downward spiraling of the society through
poverty, being neglectful and causing decay of existing infrastructure. It provides
funding for revitalizing the urban society to be more inclusive and integrative
(BMUB 2015. P. 24). [NA6] The
aim of the concept was to merge simultaneously update how the society looks
structurally, economically and whether it helped the disadvantaged people and
cities. There’s hope that with a rise of stability, there’ll also be equal
chances of everyone at life. If the houses in the city will be arranged in a
joint, inclusive manner, then soon the quality of life will enhance.
6.1.1
One policy measure / 6.2 Policy measures
Policy interventions
have the power to help address poverty and inequality which is prevalent in the
poorer locales of many states in America. Even if wages were increased for the
lowest paid worker among the rest, than that has the ability with helping close
to 5 million people escape the perils of poverty (Powell 2019). In addition, this not only benefits
citizens but the country propsers too as this would help rise overall real
income that the state makes. It is crucial that it be understood that helping
the poorest people in the country won’t hurt or distort the rate of employment
and neither does it affect the economic growth of the country.
It is distressing to
state that segregations prevalence sees no end in sight because ignorance is
rampant and the same instances for which notable people like Dorothy Count
Scoggins fought, are coming back to scorn the minorities in the country (Graff 2018). [NA7] Practices
and protests that fuel the hate and racial discrimination are still visible and
enhancing the financial stabilty of the blacks would help establish a decent
and important place of them in the society, hopefully, reducing the vicious
attacks and violence that has beseeched parts of America right now.
6.1.2 / 6.3 The individual (and his
chances) in the foreground
The
book ‘The integration paradox’ states that conflicts aren’t a consequence of
unsuccessful integration of migrants and minorities; instead it is a result of
successful integrations of immigrants which causes these conflicts (El-Mafaalani
2018, p. 2-8). Social convergence and tolerance while preferred is almost the
most despised, thereby leading to more conflicts.
In
other words, society is currently constructed of societal paradoxes which have
made the inevitability of migration remaining a permanent topic in our society.
A simple example is how America fights for integration yet also vehemently
tries to maintain its own identity whilst allowing diversity to extend and
become a part of their syllabus. The chaos that is occurring due to the
enforcements of two individual ideologies is in turn resulting in the conflict
that has let the issues of racism and cultural identity become topics of heated
discussion again.
An
example where attempts made to reduce segregation has in turn affected people
negatively is through the example of the Correctional Service Canada. They’ve
been making huge attempts to reduce the segregation of their inmates, thereby
putting inmates at risk of being hurt by their own inmates. Safety has become a
concern for them, as well as the transfer of weapons given inmates could be
living in segregated blocks one day, and before surveillance, be transferred to
a new block. Each individual is fighting for their own self in this race of
survival as their integration and segregation present with their own set of
problems (White 2017).
6.2
/ 6.4 Social mixture
Social mixing can be
used as a measure to stimulate cohesion in our society. It has been linked to
rising capital and helping a society grow (Busch-Geertsema 2007, p. 3-11). It is suggested that different
kinds of mixing be encouraged in a society, such as allowing more people the
chance of acquiring home ownerships, establishing homogenous blocks where many
inhabitants of different cultures can live together and lastly by establishing
work places that require intermingling of people. Community participation is integral to
making all straetgies for inclusivity work. Being a multidimensional issue, segregation requires a complex and thorough
understanding (Wissman 2006).
7. Outlook
Segregation is often a topic that despite being prevalent
globally is sometimes blatantly ignored. It has the ability to shape the lives
of the people who are directly affected by it and have been suffering the
consequences of it since decades. Despite having has Civil Rights Movements in
America to prevent the osctracizing of blacks, it has instead led to not only
freedom but a conflicted sense of tension and judgement because despite
numerous years of fighting and rallying, there is still violence and racial
prejudice which minorities are continuosly expreincing and suffering because of
off. To change and reduce the consequeces of segregation requires a staunch
belief and assurnace that such mistreatment of humans is not only inhumane but
also irrelevant and biased, then maybe the coming generations might not inspire
hate and vitriol as they grow, but instead respect one and all.
Statement
I assure you that I have independently written this work without
the help of third parties, that I have not used any other sources and aids than
those indicated, and that I have marked as such the places taken literally or
in terms of content from the sources used. This work has not yet been submitted
to any audit authority in the same or a similar form.
Alisch, Monika/Dangschat, Jens S. (1993): Die Solidarische Stadt, Ursachen
von Armut und Strategien für einen sozialen Ausgleich, Darmstadt: Verlag für
wissenschaftliche Publikationen.
Alisch,
Monika (2018): Sozialräumliche Segregation: Ursachen und Folgen. In: Huster,
Ernst-Ulrich/Boeckh, Jürgen/Mogge-Grotjahn, Hildegard (Hrsg.): Handbuch Armut
und Soziale Ausgrenzung, Wiesbaden: Springer VS, 503-522.
Bertelsmann Stiftung (2008): Demographie konkret – Soziale Segregation in
deutschen Großstädten, Gütersloh: Verlag Bertelsmann Stiftung.
Blasius, Jörg (1988): Indizes der Segregation. In:
Friedrichs/Jürgen (Hrsg.): Soziologische Stadtforschung. Kölner Zeitschrift für
Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie. Sonderheft 29/1988, Opladen: Westdeutscher
Verlag, 410-431.
Eckardt, Frank (2004): Soziologie der
Stadt, Bielefeld: Transcript.
El-Mafaalani, Aladin/Kurtenbach,
Sebastian/Strohmeier, Klaus P.
(2015): Auf die Adresse kommt es an… Segregierte Stadtteile als Problem- und
Möglichkeitsräume begreifen, Weinheim u.a.: Beltz Juventa.
El-Mafaalani, Aladin (2018): Das Integrationsparadox. Warum gelungene
Integration zu mehr Konflikten führt, Köln: Kiepenheuer&Witsch.
Farwick, Andreas (2001): Segregierte
Armut in der Stadt. Ursachen und soziale Folgen der räumlichen Konzentration
von Sozialhilfeempfängern, Opladen: Leske+Budrich.
Friedrichs, Jürgen (1988): Makro- und mikrosoziologische Theorien der
Segregation. In: Friedrichs/Jürgen (Hrsg.): Soziologische Stadtforschung.
Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie. Sonderheft 29/1988,
Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 56-77.
Friedrichs, Jürgen (1995):
Stadtsoziologie, Opladen: Leske+Budrich.
Friedrichs, Jürgen/Triemer, Sascha (2009): Gespaltene
Städte? Soziale und ethnische Segregation in deutschen Großstädten (2. Aufl.),
Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
Häußermann, Hartmut/Siebel, Walter (2002): Die Mühen der
Differenzierung. In: Löw, Martina (Hrsg.): Differenzierungen des Städtischen,
Opladen: Leske+Budrich, 29-68.
Häußermann, Hartmut/Siebel, Walter (2004): Stadtsoziologie.
Eine Einführung, Frankfurt/Main: Campus.
Häußermann, Hartmut (2012): Wohnen und
Quartiere: Ursachen sozialräumlicher Segregation. In: Huster,
Ernst-Ulrich/Boeckh, Jürgen/Mogge-Grotjahn, Hildegard (Hrsg.): Handbuch Armut
und Soziale Ausgrenzung, Wiesbaden: VS Verlag, 383-396.
Kalberg, Stephen (1981): Max Webers
Typen der Rationalität. Grundsteine für eine Analyse von Rationalisierungs-Prozessen
in der Geschichte. In: Sprondel, Walter M./Seyfarth, Constans (Hrsg.): Max
Weber und die Rationalisierung sozialen Handelns, Stuttgart: Enke, 9-38.
Kley, Stefanie (2016): Segregation. In:
Kopp, Johannes/Steinbach, Anja (Hrsg.): Grundbegriffe der Soziologie,
Wiesbaden: Springer VS, 296-300.
Löw, Martina (2001): Raumsoziologie,
Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp.
Löw, Martina/Steets, Silke/Stoetzer,
Sergej (2008): Einführung in die Stadt- und Raumsoziologie, Opladen u.a.:
Budrich.
Nassehi, Armin(2002): Dichte Räume.
Städte als Synchronisations- und Inklusionsmachinen. In: Löw, Martina (Hrsg.):
Differenzierungen des Städtischen, Opladen: Leske+Budrich, 211-232.
Wehrheim, Jan (2012): Die überwachte
Stadt. Sicherheit, Segregation und Ausgrenzung (3. Aufl.), Opladen u.a.:
Budrich.
WZB Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (2018): Wie
brüchig ist die soziale Architektur unserer Städte? Trends und Analysen der
Segregation in 74 deutschen Städten, Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für
Sozialforschung. Online im Internet: https://bibliothek.wzb.eu/pdf/2018/p18-001.pdf
[Stand: 26.10.2018].
Agnew, J.A., 2010. Slums, ghettos, and
urban marginality. Urban Geography, 31(2),
pp.144-147. Los Angeles. University of California
Anas,
A., 2006. A Companion to Urban Economics.
Anon.,
2018. Effects of poverty on health, children & society. Habitat
for Humanity. England and Wales.
Bråmå, Å., 2006. Studies
in the dynamics of residential segregation (Doctoral dissertation,
Kul-turgeografiska institutionen). Uppsala University. Sweden.
Britannica, 2018.
Poverty.
Batra,
A., 2008. Foreign Tourists' Motivation and Information Source(s) Influencing
Their Preference for Eating Out at Ethnic Restaurants in Bangkok. International
Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 9(1), pp. 1-17.
Taylor & Francis Online.
Bomani, N., 2018. Understanding
the difference between race and ethnicity. The Daily Dot.
Busch-Geertsema,
V., 2007. Measures to achieve social mix and their impact on access to
hous-ing for people who are homeless. European Journal of Homelessness,
1(7). Association for Innovative Social Research and Social Planning. Bremen,
Germany.
El-Mafaalani, A.,
2018. The integration paradox: Why successful integration leads to more
con-flicts, pp. 2-8.
Florida, R., 2015. America's biggest
problem is concentrated poverty, not inequality. The Atlantic.
Federal Ministry
for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety.
(2015). German Resource Efficiency Programme (ProgRess), pp.
24-25. Berlin, Germany.
Gilbert, 2013.
Poverty, inequality and social segregation in the city. The Oxford Handbook
of Cities in History, 1(1), pp. 683-699. Oxford Handbooks Online.
Graff, M., 2018.
This picture signaled an end to segregation. Why has so little changed?. The
Guardian. United States.
Haynes, B., 2019.
The Ghetto: Origins, History, Discourse. In: Symposium on the Ghetto. American
Sociological Association.
Lichter, D., 2019.
Residential Segregation - Stanford Center on Poverty and Inequality.
Massey, D.S., 2001.
Residential segregation and neighborhood conditions in US metropolitan areas.
America becoming: Racial trends and their consequences, 1(1),
pp.391-434. National Academy Press. Washington D.C.
Massey, D.S., 2017.
Why death haunts black lives. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, 114(5), pp.800-802. National Academy of Sciences.
McArdle, N. and
Acevedo-Garcia, D., 2017. Consequences of Segregation for Children’s
Op-portunity and Wellbeing.
McBride, A., n.d. Brown
v. Board of Education (1954). Landmark Cases: Thirteen Media with Impact.
Myers, K., 2018.
The Top 9 Causes of Global Poverty. Concernusa.org.
Powell, J., 2019.
Six policies to reduce economic inequality. Haas Institute.
Saltman, J., 1976.
Three strategies for reducing involuntary segregation. J. Soc. & Soc.
Wel-fare, 4, pp.806-818. Kent State University.
Shelton, S., 2016.
Effects of Poverty on Society. Borgenprojet.org
Silm, S., 2014. The
temporal variation of ethnic segregation in a city: Evidence from a mobile
phone use dataset. Social Science Research, 47(1), pp. 30-43.
Vasecka, M., 2012, Ghettoization
as a Social Problem. Workshop on Patterns of spatial and ethnic
inequalities in Slovakia, Czech Republic, and Hungary. pp. 1-12.
Wacquant, L., 2014.
Marginality, ethnicity and penality in the neo-liberal city: an analytic
cartog-raphy. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 37(10), pp.1687-1711. Taylor
& Francis Online.
White, P., 2017.
Measures to reduce segregation put prison safety at risk, union warns. The
Globe and Mail.
Wissman, A., 2006.
Social Mix Policy Approaches To Urban Segregation In Europe and Unit-ed
States. Doctoral Studies Program. Bonn Univeristy.
Zwiers,
M., Kleinhans, R. and van Ham, M., 2015. Divided cities: increasing
socio-spatial po-larization within large cities in the Netherlands.
Germany.
[NA1]Year
fixed.
This paragraph is more like an overview and analysis of what this section will contain. I have taken different sentences from different pages of this source. For example,
I have written “This section of the study will also include two important forms of segregation i.e. poverty and ethnicity”.
You can check the source provided which talks about housing segregation on mentioned pages.
Also, I have added “The higher levels of segregation have resulted in increased black isolation.” Which is a paraphrasing of sentence
“The combination of growing urban Black populations and higher levels of segregation could only produce one possible outcome—higher levels of Black isolation” from the text.
So I have taken different sentences and a general concept to define this topic.
This paragraph is more like an overview and analysis of what this section will contain. I have taken different sentences from different pages of this source. For example,
I have written “This section of the study will also include two important forms of segregation i.e. poverty and ethnicity”.
You can check the source provided which talks about housing segregation on mentioned pages.
Also, I have added “The higher levels of segregation have resulted in increased black isolation.” Which is a paraphrasing of sentence
“The combination of growing urban Black populations and higher levels of segregation could only produce one possible outcome—higher levels of Black isolation” from the text.
So I have taken different sentences and a general concept to define this topic.
[NA2]I
had put citation of “Wacquant because even this source referes that this
definition is given by Wacquant. However, I have fixed it as per your
suggestion.
[NA3]It
is available. I have highlighted. Also mentioned it here.
Florida, R., 2015. America's biggest problem is concentrated poverty, not inequality. The Atlantic.
Florida, R., 2015. America's biggest problem is concentrated poverty, not inequality. The Atlantic.
Check this source. This all information is there.
[NA4]This
is also correct. All information has been taken from this source.
Here is that sentence which talks about Massachusetts
“Massachusetts enacted an "Anti-.nob Zoning Law", which establishes a quota for low and moderate income housing for each town”. Check on page number 810 (last paragraph).
Here is that sentence which talks about Massachusetts
“Massachusetts enacted an "Anti-.nob Zoning Law", which establishes a quota for low and moderate income housing for each town”. Check on page number 810 (last paragraph).
[NA5]Added
source.
[NA6]It
is there in sources list.
It refers to “Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB)”. Source is given in endlist.
It refers to “Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB)”. Source is given in endlist.
[NA7]Fixed.
I read about Rosa Parks on some other source but can’t locate that now. You are
right. This source talks about Dorothy. Adjusted.
Comments
Post a Comment