Gideon Bolt

Linking integration and residential segregation

In the introduction to this special issue of JEMS, we question the strong link which is often made between the integration of minority ethnic groups and their residential segregation. In the literature on neighbourhood effects, the residential concentration of minorities is seen as a major obstacle to their integration, while the residential segregation literature emphasises the opposite causal direction, by focusing on the effect of integration on levels of (de-)segregation. The papers in this special issue, however, indicate that integration and segregation cannot be linked in a straightforward way. Policy discourses tend to depict residential segregation in a negative light, but the process of assimilation into the housing market is highly complex and differs between and within ethnic groups. The integration pathway not only depends on the characteristics of migrants themselves, but also on the reactions of the institutions and the population of the receiving society.

Social Cohesion in Post-war Estates in the Netherlands: Differences between Socioeconomic and Ethnic Groups:

In the Netherlands, the post-war housing estates are increasingly experiencing problems. Some of these relate to the concentration of households with a low socioeconomic status on these estates. The Big Cities Policy aims to improve liveability in deprived urban areas by increasing the number of high-income households and thereby decreasing the share of problem-causing households in the neighbourhood. The increased differentiation in education, ethnicity, income, home-ownership structure and lifestyle presents a challenge to social cohesion. This paper demonstrates how differences between socioeconomic and ethnic groups relate to different dimensions of social cohesion: social networks, common values and place attachment and identity. The issue is interesting since social cohesion can help enhance liveability and increase the tolerance between groups that is so often lacking in multiethnic neighbourhoods with residents from many different socioeconomic backgrounds. The paper is based on a fieldwork study undertaken on two estates in the cities of Utrecht and The Hague in the Netherlands. As expected, quantitative analyses show clear differences between native Dutch people and members of other ethnic groups. Contrary to expectations, socioeconomic characteristics do not lead on all dimensions of social cohesion to differences in the degree of social cohesion. The conclusion drawn is that increasing the diversity of socioeconomic or ethnic groups in deprived urban areas is likely to lead to less social cohesion.

Determinants of Neighbourhood Satisfaction and Perception of Neighbourhood Reputation

It has been suggested that the residential mobility behaviour and general well-being of residents of urban neighbourhoods are not only influenced by how residents themselves assess their neighbourhood, but also by how they think other city residents see their neighbourhood: the perceived reputation of the neighbourhood. There is a large body of literature on residents’ satisfaction with their neighbourhood, but much less is known about how residents perceive the reputation of their own neighbourhood. Such knowledge might give important clues on how to improve the well-being of residents in deprived neighbourhoods, not only by directly improving the factors that affect their own level of satisfaction, but also by improving the factors that residents think have a negative effect on the reputation of their neighbourhood. This paper examines whether there are differences in the determinants of neighbourhood satisfaction and the perceived reputation of the neighbourhood. Using data from a purpose-designed survey to study neighbourhood reputations in the city of Utrecht, the Netherlands, it is found that subjective assessment of the dwelling and neighbourhood attributes are more important in explaining neighbourhood satisfaction than in explaining perception of reputation. Objective neighbourhood variables are more important in explaining perception of reputation than in explaining neighbourhood satisfaction.

Ethnic Segregation and Residential Mobility: Relocations of Minority Ethnic Groups in the Netherlands

The degree of spatial segregation and concentration of minority ethnic groups in European cities is well documented. However, little is known about the residential mobility between neighbourhoods that brings about changes in the patterns of ethnic segregation. In this paper we analyse the residential mobility of minority ethnic groups from an assimilation perspective, according to which moving out of ethnic into predominantly white neighbourhoods can be seen as an indicator of immigrants’ incorporation into mainstream society. Residential mobility into white neighbourhoods is therefore expected to be a function of socio-economic mobility and acculturation at the individual level. The prospect for the long term is that differences in residential mobility behaviour based on ethnic status should gradually disappear. However, in our comparison between the biggest minority ethnic groups in the Netherlands and the native majority, we find only partial confirmation for the assimilation perspective.

Housing Policy, (De)segregation and Social Mixing: An International Perspective

Much of the academic and policy literature on residential segregation has emphasised the negative effects of the enduring concentration of households from particular ethnic or socio-economic groups. Often drawing directly on the US experience of ‘ghettoisation’, many contributors have pointed to persistent black minority segregation in particular as a benchmark of failure with regard to social and economic integration, and equality of opportunity in housing and the workplace (for example, Fortuijn et al., 1998; Johnston et al., 2002; Peach, 1996; van der Laan Bouma-Doff, 2007; Walks & Bourne, 2006). As Fortuijn et al. (1998, p. 367) have contended ‘the black ghetto in American cities symbolises the accumulation of the miseries of modern Western societies’.

On the social significance of spatial location; Spatial segregation and social inclusion

This article gives an overview of the positive and negative aspects of spatial concentration and segregation. We argue that much of the literature is biased; it emphasizes the drawbacks of spatial concentration and segregation of low-income groups in general and immigrants in particular. The opportunities offered by concentration and segregation, which almost always depend on the presence of local solidarity networks, are given less attention. These opportunities are mainly treated in the literature on ethnic entrepreneurs. Much of the literature on the effects of spatial concentration and segregation is based on research in the United States. Thus, we have to be very careful when we apply the results to West European countries. The overview concludes with some suggestions for further research.

Moving Up or Moving Down? Housing Careers of Turks and Moroccans in Utrecht, the Netherlands

In the Netherlands, the housing conditions of most ethnic minorities are still inferior to those of the native Dutch. The focus of the paper is the housing careers of Turks and Moroccans in the city of Utrecht. Despite some improvements and certain exceptions, they still find themselves in housing conditions inferior to those of the native Dutch. A career approach is necessary to explain these less favourable housing conditions because the present situation cannot be seen separately from decisions taken earlier. Some of these decisions are taken in the field of housing, but it is argued here that decisions taken on the labour market and with respect to the household itself are of major importance. It is also argued that the ethnic cultural approach, which stresses the housing preferences of minority ethnic groups, does not adequately explain the housing conditions and housing careers of the Turks and Moroccans in the Netherlands.

Same Neighbourhood … Different Views? A Confrontation of Internal and External Neighbourhood Reputations

Residents and non-residents are likely to think differently about a neighbourhoods reputation. Relatively little is known about the similarities and differences between these internal and external types of neighbourhood reputation or the relationship between reputations and ‘real’ or ‘objective’ neighbourhood characteristics. This paper addresses two points: first, the extent to which neighbourhood reputations differ between and within groups; second, the extent to which these neighbourhood reputations are associated with measured neighbourhood characteristics. Data from a specially designed survey carried out in 24 neighbourhoods in Utrecht, the fourth largest city in the Netherlands, are used. Analysis of the data showed that neighbourhood reputations are rated higher by residents and estate agents than by other city residents. Within the group of other city residents, differences were found in how neighbourhood reputations are rated by socio-economic status, ethnicity and educational background. Further, it was found that neighbourhood reputations are correlated with measured social characteristics of the neighbourhood, while physical and functional neighbourhood characteristics are of less importance.

Escaping poverty neighbourhoods in the Netherlands

While patterns of spatial segregation and concentration of ethnic minority groups in European cities have been well documented, more dynamic data on migration have been rare until now. In particular, little is known about the potential for different kinds of households to escape from poverty areas. Escaping these areas can be important in order to escape unwanted housing and living conditions. The analyses in this paper show that in the Netherlands the chance to escape such poverty neighbourhoods partly depends on ethnic descent: some immigrant groups are less able to escape than are Dutch households.

Ethnic segregation in the Netherlands: new patterns, new policies?

An impressive set of welfare state arrangements has kept ethnic segregation and concentration in Dutch cities to a relatively low level. Indices of segregation have also been relatively stable over the last two decades. This does not mean, however, that concentrations of ethnic minority groups are stable. Some types of neighbourhoods seem to have become less important as housing areas for ethnic minority groups, while others are becoming their main housing areas, especially for Turks and Moroccans. While in some cities this shifting pattern has already been characteristic for more than a decade, in other cities it is of more recent origin. We describe these shifting patterns of ethnic minority groups in the largest cities in the Netherlands (Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague and Utrecht). We then focus on the policy response to these patterns and we briefly evaluate this response. Our main conclusion is that ethnic concentrations are not problematic in themselves, but that policy can significantly enhance the situation of (the inhabitants of) specific neighbourhoods. Copyright Royal Dutch Geographical Society 2002.