Скачать книгу

segregation by income level in various cities in the world. Different explanations are suggested to account for income residential segregation in different cities with diverse political structures. Beginning in the 1980s, a growing set of literature started exploring the spatial concentration of poverty in the United States, especially among racial minorities. Most scholars agreed that the cause of poverty concentration was involuntary, and two possible reasons emerged to explain the poverty concentration of African Americans. Wilson (1987) argued that the selective departure of middle-class African Americans from poor black neighborhoods had contributed to the geographic concentration of poverty among African Americans. Massey and his colleagues (Massey and Denton 1993; Massey, Gross, and Shibuya 1994) argued that the concentration was simply a result of an increasing number of poor people living in certain areas due to the residential segregation of African Americans in racially segmented housing markets. An extensive body of research suggests that racial/ethnic residential segregation creates adversity for individuals growing up and living in disadvantaged neighborhoods. The negative effects on the well-being of these residents, and reverberating effects on the entire city, are substantial.

      While continuing along the topic of physical segregation, Chapter 6 shifts the focus to the dynamics of the geographic concentration of ethnic groups. We discuss why and how ethnic groups are concentrated in certain locations and form ethnic communities. We focus on social, economic, and cultural explanations, and review research findings on ethnic communities in Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and European countries. Groups cluster for both voluntary and involuntary reasons. We outline the consequences of participating in ethnic community, including gaining social support, improving self-esteem, and assisting economic achievement. However, we also show how participating in ethnic community can sometimes lead to negative consequences.

      In the concluding chapter, we summarize and discuss the key lessons in the study of segregation in contemporary societies. Our discussion suggests that spatial and social segregation perpetuate and reinforce unequal resource distribution across racial and ethnic groups. However, unlike Galster and Sharkey (2017), we argue that segregation can have both positive and negative consequences for individuals and groups. A similar economic standing and own-group preference often attract people with similar racial/ethnic backgrounds; whereas discrimination pushes socially and economically different groups apart, which is usually associated with negative outcomes. Although segregation may occur in only one aspect of our lives, the sustained patterns of physical and social distance it creates with others have ripple effects on everyone’s economic, social, and psychological well-being. Thus, understanding and addressing segregation is critically important for both alleviating social stratification and fostering harmony in multicultural societies.

      1  1 Technically speaking, hypersegregation refers to a pattern of extreme segregation observed simultaneously along at least four of the major five dimensions of segregation (Massey and Denton 1989).

2
What Is Segregation?

      The primary purpose of this chapter is to introduce the concept of segregation, discuss classical and contemporary perspectives on it, and review the major theories scholars use to understand its causes and consequences. Segregation refers to the differential distribution and interaction of social groups in a social structure (Massey 2001). Differential distribution can occur across different geographic scales, such as neighborhoods, schools, and communities. Differential interaction of social groups can be observed in different forms of social interaction, including everyday interactions such as choosing a daycare center where parents tend to come from a similar background; peer group and friendship choices in school; and choosing partners for marriage. The spatial mismatch between groups in residential environments and other settings contributes to a lack of social contact. The segregation of different ethno-racial, linguistic, and immigration groups has received significant attention from scholars because of its relevance to social stratification and the life chances of individuals.

      The human ecology perspective hypothesizes that natural processes such as competition, invasion-succession (i.e. a number of households from one group move in and occupy and dominate a neighborhood which was previously occupied by another group), cooperation (i.e. groups support each other), and other adaptations shape the distribution of resources between groups. One of the main outcomes of these processes is to “sort” groups by socioeconomic and demographic factors into distinct neighborhoods and social environments. Over time, the ethno-racial composition of neighborhoods may “shift” due to these processes. This sorting and shifting of people into different neighborhoods is based on the assumption that some groups have more resources and are more capable of converting their resources into better neighborhood qualities. For example, the political and economic clout, as well as size, of some groups aids their efforts to retain control over the most desirable resources, leaving groups with fewer resources to occupy less desirable areas. The organization of the city that results from these processes creates patterns of interaction and segregation. Residential patterns characterized by physical and social distance between groups are often the outcomes of this social organization of the city.

Скачать книгу