The measurement of segregation, the understanding of its drivers, and the effects of segregation are three interrelated issues that receive ample attention on both sides of the Atlantic. The comparative study of these subjects in Europe is not an easy task because the continent is highly fragmented and diversified. This regards the types of welfare state, but also the multitude of urban histories. Consequently, there is a lack of uniform information. Nevertheless, this paper makes an attempt to sketch the variety of ethnic and social segregation within Europe, using a large number of sources. It is shown that generally segregation levels in Europe are more moderate compared to what we can find in American cities, but these differences are not absolute. The paper also links the levels of segregation with a range of potential explanations and provides a window on European research focusing on effects of segregation.

No abstract

Socioeconomic inequality is on the rise in major European cities, as are concerns over it, since it is seen as a threat to social cohesion and stability. Surprisingly, relatively little is known about the spatial dimensions of rising socioeconomic inequality. This paper builds on a study of socioeconomic segregation in 12 European cities: Amsterdam, Athens, Budapest, London, Madrid, Oslo, Prague, Riga, Stockholm, Tallinn, Vienna, and Vilnius. Data used derive from national censuses and registers for 2001 and 2011. The main conclusion is that socioeconomic segregation has increased. This paper develops a rigorous multifactor approach to understand segregation and links it to four underlying, partially overlapping, structural factors: social inequalities, globalization and economic restructuring, welfare regimes, and housing systems. Taking into account contextual factors resulted in a better understanding of actual segregation levels, while introducing time lags between structural factors and segregation outcomes will likely further improve the theoretical model. ARTICLE HISTORY

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Chapters 1 and 15 of this book are available for free in PDF format as Open Access at www.tandfebooks.com. They have been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 3.0 license.

Will housing mix create social mix, and will social mix create social opportunity? This question is central in American and European urban debates. In Europe, however, there is a big gap between the political debates and actions regarding these issues and empirical research. In an effort to partly fill this gap, the authors critically evaluated the question above, applying a large-scale longitudinal Swedish data set covering the period 1991 to 1999 and available at the individual level for the entire population. The first part of the article reviews the various policies that are used in different European countries. The second part addresses the empirical analysis.

This paper mainly focuses on the determinants of housing and estate satisfaction in post-Second World War housing estates. Multi-level linear regression models were applied to estimate the impacts of individual, dwelling and estate characteristics on resident satisfaction levels, using a unique dataset from 25 post-Second World War estates in nine European countries. It is concluded that satisfaction with the dwelling is higher for the elderly and residents with higher incomes, and in situations where the dwelling has been renovated and is sufficiently large. The presence of children and a longer duration of stay have negative impacts, and renters are generally more negative than owners. Estate satisfaction is highest among immigrant households or when the dwelling is renovated, and among lower educated inhabitants. Individual characteristics and opinions on the estate are more important than estate characteristics in explaining estate satisfaction. The overall conclusion is that attempts to improve post-Second World War areas may result in new areas, but does not necessarily improve the overall satisfaction.

Gentrification and the suburbanization of poverty: changing urban geographies through boom and bust periods Hochstenbach, C.; Musterd, S. General rightsIt is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulationsIf you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: http://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. Many postindustrial cities across Europe and other contexts are marked by growing social-spatial inequalities, housing liberalization, and gentrification, which limit the housing options of lowincome households. We investigated changes in the residential moves of different low-income households (working poor, lowto-middle income, and unemployed) in the Amsterdam and Rotterdam urban regions for the time period 2004-2013. We found an overarching trend for the suburbanization of poverty toward the urban peripheries and surrounding regions. While this trend appears to be relatively crisis resistant in the tight Amsterdam housing context, it is more cyclical in Rotterdam and has slowed following the global financial crisis. Low-to-middle income and unemployed households are increasingly moving to the urban regions surrounding cities, particularly to higher density satellite towns. Nevertheless, a growing number of working poor households remain highly urbanized, employing various coping strategies to acquire housing. This paper reveals how the suburbanization of poverty is both a direct process of poor households moving from city to suburb, and a broader indirect process caused by exclusionary mechanisms such as the decreasing accessibility and affordability of inner-urban neighborhoods, which reflect broader changes in the geography and socioeconomic patterning of urban regions. ARTICLE HISTORY

No abstract