{"title":"Urban segregation: contexts, domains, dimensions and approaches","authors":"S. Musterd","doi":"10.4337/9781788115605.00007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Collective outcomes of individual behaviour, whether driven by individuals themselves or by structural forces in wider global, economic and political settings, tend to produce certain levels of inequality, which in their turn impact certain types of spatial segregation. Although there would seem to be a general tendency for households to segregate themselves from one another based on a range of demographic, socioeconomic and cultural differences (Schelling, 1971; McPherson et al., 2001; Musterd et al., 2016; van Gent et al., 2019), this tendency also appears to be firmly affected by historical placespecific legacies in different contexts, as well as other contextual factors. In this regard, it is import to state that the relationship between households and their environment is mutual: households shape their environment, while environments trigger certain household behaviours. Apart from the historically grown, place-specific context, the economic context and the prevailing political economy also impact (spatial) inequality in cities. The influence of historical, economic and political contexts is reflected most clearly in the activity or inactivity of various institutions that play a role in supply-side interventions. The (lack of) interventions may stimulate segregation, or possibly reduce it, depending on the legacies at play and the willingness to intervene, the kinds of interventions used, the urban economic past and present, and the type of welfare state in which the city is embedded. Such welfare regimes range from liberal conservative to so-called social democratic, with various types in between (Esping-Andersen, 1990; Musterd and Ostendorf, 1998; Burgers and Musterd, 2002; Arbaci, 2019). Finally, and related to the abovementioned factors, the general societal atmosphere as expressed in diverse discourses, the public climate, and the way in which ‘problems’ are framed in public debates – and by whom – are also likely to contribute to the development of inequality, dualism and segregation. This may be firmly embedded in democratic governance, but it might also be driven by discrimination, stigmatisation or other motives. All of these issues will be dealt with in this volume. This volume consists of this Introduction (Chapter 1) and a concluding Epilogue (Chapter 24), with three parts in between. The first part focuses on the variety of segregation issues addressed worldwide; the second looks at the domains and dimensions of segregation that are manifest and discussed; the third part focuses on measuring and conceptualising segregation. The boundaries between these parts are not rigid but rather highly permeable, or even open, since many contributions pay attention to aspects of all the spheres that are central to the three parts. Nevertheless, this crude division helps us to address the wide variety of segregation in terms of contexts, domains, dimensions and approaches in a structured and comprehensive way.","PeriodicalId":334605,"journal":{"name":"Handbook of Urban Segregation","volume":"452 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Handbook of Urban Segregation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788115605.00007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
Abstract
Collective outcomes of individual behaviour, whether driven by individuals themselves or by structural forces in wider global, economic and political settings, tend to produce certain levels of inequality, which in their turn impact certain types of spatial segregation. Although there would seem to be a general tendency for households to segregate themselves from one another based on a range of demographic, socioeconomic and cultural differences (Schelling, 1971; McPherson et al., 2001; Musterd et al., 2016; van Gent et al., 2019), this tendency also appears to be firmly affected by historical placespecific legacies in different contexts, as well as other contextual factors. In this regard, it is import to state that the relationship between households and their environment is mutual: households shape their environment, while environments trigger certain household behaviours. Apart from the historically grown, place-specific context, the economic context and the prevailing political economy also impact (spatial) inequality in cities. The influence of historical, economic and political contexts is reflected most clearly in the activity or inactivity of various institutions that play a role in supply-side interventions. The (lack of) interventions may stimulate segregation, or possibly reduce it, depending on the legacies at play and the willingness to intervene, the kinds of interventions used, the urban economic past and present, and the type of welfare state in which the city is embedded. Such welfare regimes range from liberal conservative to so-called social democratic, with various types in between (Esping-Andersen, 1990; Musterd and Ostendorf, 1998; Burgers and Musterd, 2002; Arbaci, 2019). Finally, and related to the abovementioned factors, the general societal atmosphere as expressed in diverse discourses, the public climate, and the way in which ‘problems’ are framed in public debates – and by whom – are also likely to contribute to the development of inequality, dualism and segregation. This may be firmly embedded in democratic governance, but it might also be driven by discrimination, stigmatisation or other motives. All of these issues will be dealt with in this volume. This volume consists of this Introduction (Chapter 1) and a concluding Epilogue (Chapter 24), with three parts in between. The first part focuses on the variety of segregation issues addressed worldwide; the second looks at the domains and dimensions of segregation that are manifest and discussed; the third part focuses on measuring and conceptualising segregation. The boundaries between these parts are not rigid but rather highly permeable, or even open, since many contributions pay attention to aspects of all the spheres that are central to the three parts. Nevertheless, this crude division helps us to address the wide variety of segregation in terms of contexts, domains, dimensions and approaches in a structured and comprehensive way.
个人行为的集体结果,无论是由个人自身驱动,还是由更广泛的全球、经济和政治环境中的结构性力量驱动,往往会产生一定程度的不平等,进而影响某些类型的空间隔离。尽管基于一系列人口、社会经济和文化差异,家庭似乎普遍倾向于彼此隔离(Schelling, 1971;McPherson et al., 2001;Musterd et al., 2016;van Gent等人,2019),这种趋势似乎也受到不同背景下特定地点的历史遗产以及其他背景因素的坚定影响。在这方面,必须指出家庭与其环境之间的关系是相互的:家庭塑造其环境,而环境则引发某些家庭行为。除了历史上发展的、特定地点的背景,经济背景和普遍的政治经济也会影响城市的(空间)不平等。历史、经济和政治背景的影响最清楚地反映在在供应方面干预中发挥作用的各种机构的活动或不活动上。(缺乏)干预可能会刺激隔离,也可能会减少隔离,这取决于正在发挥作用的遗产和干预的意愿,所使用的干预措施的种类,城市经济的过去和现在,以及城市所处的福利国家的类型。这些福利制度的范围从自由保守主义到所谓的社会民主主义,以及介于两者之间的各种类型(Esping-Andersen, 1990;mussterd and Ostendorf, 1998;汉堡和杂烩,2002年;Arbaci, 2019)。最后,与上述因素相关的是,在不同话语中表达的一般社会氛围、公共气候以及在公共辩论中构建“问题”的方式——以及由谁来构建——也可能导致不平等、二元论和隔离的发展。这可能深深根植于民主治理之中,但也可能受到歧视、污名化或其他动机的驱使。所有这些问题都将在本卷中讨论。本卷由引言(第1章)和结束语(第24章)组成,中间有三个部分。第一部分着重于世界范围内解决的各种种族隔离问题;第二部分考察了隔离的领域和维度,这些领域和维度是显而易见的,并被讨论过;第三部分着重于隔离的度量和概念化。这些部分之间的边界不是刚性的,而是高度可渗透的,甚至是开放的,因为许多贡献都关注所有领域的各个方面,这些领域是这三个部分的中心。然而,这种粗略的划分有助于我们以结构化和全面的方式处理在背景、领域、层面和方法方面的各种各样的隔离。