GGR 357 H1F Geography of Housing and Housing Policy

1
GGR 357 H1F Geography of Housing and Housing
Policy 
Session 5 May 28, 2008Segregation on the
housing market
DR. AMANDA HELDERMAN
2
Announcements

• http//individual.utoronto.ca/helderman
• Midterm
• You are not expected to reproduce author names
  and dates of publication
• No detailed numbers are expected to be reproduced
• You are expected to know general numbers such as
  the percentage of homeownership in Canada
• You are expected to understand the general
  functioning of the housing market, for as far as
  mechanisms have been reviewed during the first
  six sessions

3
Announcements (midterm)

• You are expected to be able to compare and
  reflect on additional readings
• Slides are important indications for relevance of
  topics and additional information
• Particularly relevant chapters of Hulchanski
  Shapcott listed in syllabus with additional
  readings
• 3 general short answer questions, 2 essayistic
  questions (pick 2 out of 3)

4
Learned from exclusion
5
Learned from exclusion

• Economic, political and social exclusion
• Depends largely on income and the degree of
  forced dependence on state benefits and services
• Social exclusion denial of social rights or
  non-realization of social rights
• Almost entirely an urban problem
• Applicability (different in time and space) of a
  paradigm of the welfare state matters for social
  exclusion context!

6
Learned from social exclusion and housing

• Housing is the main item on the household budget
• Fixes social location
• Housing is an arena of social exclusion and
  housing plays a role in social exclusion from
  other arenas
• 1. Failure to secure adequate accommodation
  (e.g. by discrimination)
• 2. Housing consumption may impair access to
  wider citizenship rights

7
Learned from social exclusion and housing

• Links between social exclusion and housing
• Tenure (wealth)
• Housing conditions (health, especially in
  childhood)
• Spatial mismatch of low-cost housing and job
  opportunities (Spatial mismatch hypothesis Kain,
  1968 confirmed by Smith Zenou, 2003)
• Process of spatial concentration of disadvantage
  -gt Spatial segregation/ Residential segregation

8
Introduction

• Residential segregation has received a lot of
  attention in both academic and popular media
• Massey Denton, 1993
• American Apartheid ? Residential segregation as
  the principal organizational feature of American
  society, creating an urban underclass or
  Hypersegregated areas (Frey, 1993)

9
Introduction

• Residential segregation
• What is it?
• Why is it good or bad for housing circumstances
  of Canadians?
• Many mechanisms/causes and theories!
• Many different circumstances of different groups
  of people
• Policy practices

10
Residential segregation

• Spatial effect of social exclusion
• Spatially disadvantaged communities concentrate
  exclusion, with mutually-reinforcing multiple
  deprivations - poor housing, poor education, poor
  employment opportunities and poor services -
  characteristic of many inner urban areas and
  peripheral estates
• Economic and racial divides are translated in
  spatial divides
• Segregation implies segmentation due to
  discrimination, but this is not always the case

11
Different backgrounds of segregation

• Unintended segregation discrimination
• Much literature about ethnic groups, suggesting
  that often other mechanisms than socioeconomic
  distinction are dominant
• Intended segregation immigrant support networks
  and community groups
• Intended segregation Gated communities
• Social class hypothesis
• Socio-demographic characteristics (education,
  income, language, status) explain 95 segregation
  for Hispanics, 50 Asian, 30 white or black
  households (Bayer et al., 2004)

12
Concentration of population groups

• Immigration
• Ethnic groups or Minorities (socially
  constructed, potentially problematic) often
  assumed correlated with poverty (some
  correlation, but should not be interchangeably
  used!)
• Toronto and Vancouver both accommodated
  approximately 38 visible minorities in 2001.
  Toronto 47 in 2006.
• Concentration of ethnic groups has several causes
  and mechanisms

13
Concentration of population groups

• Even though concentration is traditionally viewed
  as a disadvantaging situation, there also are
  advantages
• Three main theories that explain different
  mechanisms behind concentration of population
  groups
• Assimilation Perspective
• Place Stratification Perspective
• Ethnic Enclave/Resources Perspective

14
Spatial Assimilation Model

• Assumption newcomers start at the bottom of the
  socio-economic ladder
• Main principle ethnic minorities will leave
  their ethnic communities as soon as
  socio-economic status improves and cultural
  assimilation progresses
• Derived from human ecology theory (Taeuber
  Taeuber, 1965) migration history, housing stock,
  and employment (metropolitan context) influence
  racial and socio-economic configuration of
  population and neighbourhoods

15
Spatial Assimilation Model

• Critical approach towards spatial assimilation
  model
• Dominant in North-American literature (Park,
  1925 Gordon, 1964) but not unchallenged
• Possible changing relationship between
  residential segregation and social integration
• Occasionally found inappropriate for Canadian
  situation (Balakrishnan et al., 2005), especially
  for the cases of the Chinese and South-Asian
  population who are highly segregated but who have
  a long settlement history and incomes close to
  the national average

16
The case of Toronto, 2001 (Balakrishnan et al.,
2005)

• Segregation index UD Income
• Chinese 0.531 28.8 0.81
• South Asians 0.449 27.1 0.74
• Filipinos 0.404 32.2 0.66
• Blacks 0.397 9.2 0.66
• All Toronto - 22.9 1.00
• Canada - 15.4 0.92

17
Spatial Assimilation Model

• Low socio-economic status is compensated by the
  advantages of living in an ethnic community
• General process of socio-economic and cultural
  assimilation changes neighbourhood preferences
• Acculturation provides the desire, and social
  mobility the means, for immigrants to achieve
  spatial assimilation
• People act upon their highest achievable economic
  status
• Tested effects of suburbanization

18
Spatial Assimilation Model

• Measures of cultural assimilation (different
  between population groups)
• Language proficiency and language barriers
• Occupational skills
• Length of residence
• Social networks
• First of second generation?
• Citizenship

19
Spatial Assimilation Model

• Spatial integration moving outside ethnic
  concentration areas
• Measures of cultural assimilation Residential
  mobility
• Moving into non-concentration neighbourhood
  outflow
• Moving into another concentration neighbourhood
  filtering

20
Place Stratification Perspective

• Main principle acculturation unlikely leads to
  leaving concentration areas as long as
  discrimination persists
• Xenophobia of indigenous households
• Discrimination hampers ethnic groups residential
  mobility
• Discrimination by mortgage lenders, real-estate
  agents, landlords, resident organizations, local
  and national authorities

21
Place Stratification Perspective

• Having to rely on social support networks limits
  housing choice
• No widening of the gap in homeownership between
  black and white communities, but the gap in home
  values has widened (Collins Margo, 2001)
• Black communities in USA

22
Ethnic Enclave Model

• Main principle bonding with own community will
  not necessarily weaken in the course of time
• Minorities may not want to assimilate into the
  dominant (white) culture
• A higher income does not lead to changes in
  neighbourhood preferences
• People with a higher status may specifically want
  to show this to their own community
• Cultural distance between ethnic group and host
  society

23
Ethnic Enclave Model

• Advantages of ethnic ancestry in proximity
• Maximize social interaction
• Maintain group norms and values
• Threshold population present for
• Ethnic clubs
• Churches
• Language newspapers
• Specialty stores
• Opportunities for ethnic entrepreneurship

24
Ethnic Enclave Model

• Ties within ethnic group are kept alive by a
  constant influx of new immigrants
• Transnational communities part of the community
  lives in the country of origin
• The alternative route that the ethnic enclave
  model poses is upward mobility on the labour
  market (instead of housing market)
• Retention of identity and culture may hamper
  labour market participation of wider community

25
Ethnic Enclave Model

• Two critical notes on spatial assimilation model
  from Ethnic Enclave perspective
• people may not want to assimilate (1), and
• assimilation and socio-economic mobility are not
  necessarily connected (2)

26
Ethnic Enclave Model

• Motives for staying in concentration area making
  use of own networks, solidarity, and retaining
  own culture
• Greater numbers of ethnic group ? increased
  interaction within community and decreased
  interaction outside community often found
• Ethnic Enclave Model does not rule out
  suburbanization

27
Homogeneity as a natural goal?

• People naturally seem to strive for homogenous
  residential areas
• Xenophobia
• Two worlds apart
• Undesirable if societal integration is hampered ?
  estrangement
• Social homogeneity is also a way of establishing
  well-functioning living environments
• Homogeneity facilitates parallel interests of
  residents and social cohesion
• Heterogeneity may increase social tensions

28
Concentrated and condemned?

• Not only question of how and why concentration
  occurs, but also why it most often is viewed as a
  negative phenomenon
• Concentration reduces participation opportunities
  and restricts participation in economic, social,
  and cultural spheres of society
• Concentration may reinforce social and ethnic
  distinctions and poor housing quality and
  neighbourhood reputation
• Concentration may fuel social inequality and lack
  of understanding between groups settled in
  different areas

29
Concentrated and condemned?

• Two theories explaining negative influences from
  concentration
• Stigmatization theory
• Socialization theory

30
Stigmatization theory

• Most literature explaining negative effects of
  concentration of population groups builds on this
  theory
• Negative image of area leads to discrimination of
  people from this area (e.g. employers)
• Stigmatization reduces the chances of residents
  in concentration areas

31
Socialization theory

• Identifying with individuals in the area may lead
  the characteristics of others becoming the norm
• Culture of poverty/ Poverty-cycle
• Limited presence of positive role models in
  concentration areas ? child development
• Social stability and cohesion
• Opportunities for informal assistance,
  solidarity, and ethnic entrepreneurship
• Social dynamics reduce social differences
• Social dynamics are fueled by economic processes,
  and social-democratic, institutional, historical,
  and cultural factors

32
The other side of concentration

• Indigenous people choose to segregate themselves
  in the most attractive areas in the inner city
  and in suburbs, if they can
• Indigenous people have the advantage that they
  may have an alternative outside the city
• Indigenous population can read local newspapers
  and often has a better local network for word of
  mouth
• Immigrants have less choice. On average larger
  families, lower incomes. Need large cheap
  apartments (scarce). Wait for social housing or
  quick alternative less desired by indigenous
  people

33
The other side of concentration

• Rich, western immigrants are successful in
  economically integrating themselves but are
  generally not very socially or spatially
  integrated
• High status ethnic groups are not seen as a
  problem, or even as ethnic groups!
• Increasingly important migrant groups in a
  globalizing economy new migrant population

34
Gated communities

• Gated communities Exclusivity or social
  segregation?
• Self-imposed exclusion
• Fortified enclaves with legal agreements
• Housing development that restricts public access
  through the use of gates, walls, fences
• Security staff and variety of services such as
  garbage collection, shops, road maintenance, and
  leisure activities
• Common fees for common services, buildings
• Common code of conduct

35
Gated communities

• Aimed at retired, wealthy people or those with
  portable work
• Gated communities are a response to the fear of
  crime (Atkinson et al., 2004)
• Aimed at people who have fear after 9/11 safety
  no longer in numbers in the large cities
• Privatization of public space
• Fortification of urban and residential space
• People seeking like-minded people, communitarian
  ideology

36
Gated communities

• Hinders political empathy
• Helps concentrate disadvantage of exclusion from
  employment and educational opportunity, and thus
  personal development
• Residents desire for anonymity and reluctance to
  participate in unnecessary social contact?
  governance left up to real estate companies

37
Gated community in Arizona
38
Contextual factors for segregation

• Welfare state paradigm
• Rights to housing legal immigrants same as
  indigenous people
• Historical tie of host nation with immigrant
  group
• Difference between community culture and culture
  of host society
• Availability (social) housing in certain
  location/ neighbourhood
• Out-migration level, elderly population moving to
  elderly housing, large (lower quality)
  developments

39
Role welfare states
Welfare states
Universal
Residual
Less segregation
More segregation
40
Role social housing
Promotes extreme marginalization
Prevents extreme marginalization
Social housing
41
Role welfare states

• Incentives
• Stepping in when market fails
• Combination supposed to offer best protection
  against ethnic stratification and the formation
  of underclass society
• But there are other nodes of integration than the
  state market exchange and reciprocity
• Shift to more liberal welfare, however, does pose
  threat of increasing social inequality but is not
  necessarily paired with stratification or
  condemnation

42
European welfare states

• Shift to more liberal welfare
• More market influence
• Retrenching government funding (also in social
  housing)
• Shrinking social housing stock
• Increasing income inequalities
• Decreasing social benefits
• More choice for affluent people
• Less choice for the less affluent people
• Causes for spatial concentration of people with
  less economic opportunities

43
European welfare states

• Social and income differences in North-West
  Europe half the size of those in North-America,
  so far (differences are increasing)
• Degree to which such differences are spatially
  translated also much lower
• Less socio-spatial differences in urban
  environments

44
Role state, other

• Multiculturalism policy is based on the idea that
  the best way of integrating immigrants in
  Canadas social system is to preserve and enhance
  multicultural heritage while working to achieve
  equality (Kymlica, 1998)

45
Measuring concentration

• Segregation indices compare the distribution of
  one group to the distribution of all other groups
• Gini index measures concentration of a group
• Index of dissimilarity measures the differential
  distribution of two groups
• See Balakrishnan Gyima, 2003!
• Paint a rough picture of residential separation
  of population groups

46
Measuring concentration

• Not useful at detailed spatial level assessed by
  people as their residential structure
• Hide dynamics as a result of residential mobility
• Older immigrants move out while new immigrants
  move into same neighbourhood, keeps concentration
  high

47
Measuring concentration with GIS

• Measuring the degree of poor people within 300 m
  of residential location of each individual
  (Musterd Deurloo, 2004 Johnson, 1984)
• Measuring share of poor people in an area, grid
  with 300 m buffer around each square (Isaaks
  Mohan, 1989)
• Advantages related to individuals and small
  residential structures that people can identify
  with
• Issues few people within each area ? validity?

48
Measuring segregation

• Five dimensions of residential segregation
  (Massey Denton, 1988)
• Unevenness (quality housing, neighbourhood and
  socio-economic characteristics)
• Isolation (indices of contact world outside
  area)
• Concentration (indices of density socio-economic
  indicators)
• Clustering (scattered minority neighbourhoods)
• Centralization (central cities)

49
Measuring economic integration

• Income of immigrants relative to Canadian born
• Often, not always, found to be related to
  duration of stay in Canada (see Spatial
  Assimilation Theory)
• Trend deterioration on entry level earnings
• Trend greater acceptance of ethnic diversity and
  intermarriage so segregation may be expected to
  decrease

50
Types of neighbourhoods

• Alternative measurement of residential
  segregation, preferably measured at several
  moments in time and in part related to rest of
  the city
• Ghetto
• Ethnic neighbourhood (minority/majority)
• Area of over-representation
• Majority-minority area

51
Ghetto

• In the original meaning of the word almost
  exclusively preserve of one ethnic group
• At least 80 of the population is from the same
  ethnic group
• Separate area for ethnic groups because majority
  population does not want to live in the same
  area, even if they are economically equal
• Modern usage of ghetto often refers to
  disadvantaged members in society and a harsh
  living environment
• Few or no ghettos in welfare states that foster
  integration

52
Ethnic neighbourhood

• There may be several ethnic groups residing in
  the neighbourhood, but one group is the largest
• Majority ethnic neighbourhood 50-80 same ethnic
  group
• Minority ethnic neighbourhood less than 50 same
  ethnic group

53
Area of over-representation

• The main ethnic group is not dominant, but is
  over-represented
• More than two standard deviations of the share of
  the population of the city as a whole resides in
  the neighbourhood

54
Majority-minority area

• No single ethnic group is over 50 of the
  population
• All minority groups together make up 50 of the
  population at least
• Majority-minority area overlaps with area of
  over-representation

55
Consequences of segregation

• Ongoing out-migration of indigenous people from
  older and newer concentration areas
• White flight
• Danger that segregated groups will mobilize
  against excluded groups viewed as outsiders
  religious or racial minorities, travellers, or
  indeed homeless young people and single parents
  from outside the area, unconnected with its
  established families

56
Consequences of segregation

• Health inequality
• Poverty, over-crowdedness, housing quality,
  social disintegration, limited access to health
  care
• Fairly recent interest in research (since 2000)
• TB/ HIV and AIDS/ STDs/Measles
• Individual history having had measles, having
  been infected with HIV etc ? susceptibility
• Direct probability of coming into contact with
  disease
• Indirect bad quality living environment
  (over-crowding, ventilation)

57
Policy instruments

• Tenant based rental assistance
• Increases resident safety (crime) according to
  some studies

58
Policy instruments

• Planners and urban managers aim to prevent
  segregation by
• Adjustment of the composition of the housing
  stock
• Size of the social housing sector
• Allocation mechanisms stricter allocation of
  limited suitable affordable rented housing stock
  necessary
• Lower rents should be made available to the
  weakest socio-economic groups
• Danger marginalization of social rented segment

59
Policy instruments

• Developing housing to achieve socio-economic mix
  in neighbourhood
• Create a better mix of housing tenures by
  encouraging sustainable homeownership and
  creating new affordable housing
• Limited or no success achieved in avoiding
  spatial segregation of income groups by adjusting
  housing stock (e.g. Cowan, 2006)
• Value of property is partly determined by
  situation/ immediate environment of home
• More expensive home in less valued neighbourhood
  will not be as attractive as the same home in
  another environment

60
Policy instruments

• Upgrading of residential area does not lead to
  socially mixed residential environment. Instead
  higher quality homogeneous environment
• Social housing in desired locations lead to low
  dynamics people continue living in cheap housing
  while being able to afford higher quality housing
• Continued support for housing ? good results for
  social mobility

61
Policy instruments

• Distribution of socio-economic and ethnic groups
  contradicts many constitutions and does not help
  population groups in many ways access to jobs,
  housing, social contacts, services, and amenities
• Two categories of instruments to prevent
  segregation of poor people
• Preventing poverty and encouraging social
  mobility (education and access to job market,
  increases housing options)
• Preventing large income differences

62
Policy instruments

• Limited income differences implies that people
  depend on more similar services and limited
  housing budgets, and more similar housing stock
• More accessible labour market implies a more
  polarized labour market
• Preventing large income differences thus most
  straightforward policy goal?
• According to several sources this is the most
  important reason why income differences are
  smaller in North West Europe than in North America

63
Policy instruments

• Dilemma Improving access to labour market may
  increase individual opportunities to improve
  ones situation and prevent segregation but
  income differences will increase ? more
  segregation
• Is there a middle road?

64
Literature (session 5)

• Balakrishnan, T.R. S. Gyimah (2003), Spatial
  Residential Patterns of Selected Ethnic Groups
  Significance and Policy Implications. Canadian
  Ethnic Studies, Vol. XXXV, No. 1, pp. 113-134.
• Bauder, H. C. Sharpe (2002), Visible minorities
  in Canadas gateway cities. The Canadian
  Geographer 46/3, pp. 204-222.
• Bourne, L.S. (1981), Market failures and housing
  problems. In The geography of housing. Chapter
  8. p. 169-189.
• Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2006),
  The Housing Situation and Needs of Recent
  Immigrants in the Toronto CMA. CMHC

65
Balakrishnan Gyimah (2003)

• This paper is focusing on spatial residential
  patterns of immigrant groups in major Canadian
  cities. The societal relevance is the assumption
  that when certain groups are segregated, they are
  most likely not fully integrated in society and
  will not be participating fully in housing and
  labour markets.
• Various measures of concentration and segregation
  are examined. The bottom line is that different
  ethnic groups have different degrees of
  segregation which are very persistent across
  generations.
• Three hypothesis are tested the social class
  hypothesis, the social distance hypothesis
  (discrimination), and the ethnic identity
  hypothesis (involuntary housing choice through
  social class and social status) adaptation on
  the theories discussed earlier today for the
  Canadian context, but still similar.
• Past studies have shown that the relationship
  between social distance and segregation holds
  even when social class is controlled for. Note
  discrimination has not been measured effectively.
  A proxy is used, and the authors also do not have
  sufficient socio-economic indicators.

66
Balakrishnan Gyimah (2003)

• Ethnic segregation is not strictly along social
  class lines.
• Measures of concentration Gini index, index of
  dissimilarity, index of segregation
• Comparisons between gateway cities Montreal,
  Toronto and Vancouver similar patterns, but
  different degrees of segregation
• New immigrants choose to live near their
  previously established immigrant friends and
  relatives, a process referred to as "chain"
  immigration.

67
Bauder Sharpe, 2002

• Paper analyzes residential patterns of visible
  minority populations in three cities
• Uncover differences in residential patterns
• Identify immigration as reason for fragmentation
  and ethical separation
• Hypotheses segregation explained by the
  ecological model (assimilation), by the reaction
  to discrimination (either as a defence mechanism
  and as a result of discrimination on the housing
  market), by socio-economic status, and finally by
  limited interest to move out of their own
  community
• Conclusion The housing stock of neighbourhoods
  and the different responsiveness of visible
  minority groups to housing market characteristics
  are important. Circumstances of immigration,
  settlement policies, and geographical and
  historical context of the city are all relevant.

68
Bauder Sharpe, 2002

• Alternative approach Bourne social mosaic
  hypothesis (social differentiation, increasing
  number of subgroups, resulting in a less rigid
  spatial pattern)
• Economic and residential decentralization.
  Immigrants skipping downtown immigrant reception
  area has moved outward dispersed city
  hypothesis
• Both new hypothesis are powerful but have limited
  explanatory power
• Good/ bad segregation (voluntary, enforced)
• Differences in the housing markets
• Literature exposes the following factors housing
  distribution, history of metropolitan
  development, support networks, discourse on race
  and ethnicity
• Isolation index, Dissimilarity index, Location
  quotients
• Control for housing market characteristics.

69
Bourne, 1981

• Expectations regarding living standards
• Geographical dispersion of housing types
• Equal blame on market imperfections, policy
  inefficiencies, and inefficient outcomes of
  laissez-faire model in which housing generally is
  produced for profit
• Crowding
• Voluntary/ involuntary segregation
• Link between segregation and access to housing
• Racial discrimination and housing premiums (
  motives)
• Maintenance disincentives in housing
  improvements ? prisoners dilemma
• Abandonment

70
CMHC report

• Background of 3 Canadian cities and their
  neighbourhoods and housing stock
• Immigrant household compositions
• Socio-economic status of immigrant households
• Crowding
• Immigrants housing situations progress over time,
  life course
• Structural differences in the housing situations
  of European-origin and visible minority immigrants

71
Next week Midterm

• Monday
• June 2, 2008
• 5-7 pm
• Room 158
• Lash Miller

Good luck!