Indicadores espaciales y no espaciales: un enfoque complementario para el análisis cuantitativo de la segregación residencial en la ciudad de Managua

Abstract

The polymorphism of its concept, as well as the complexity of its multiple spatial dimensions, make the measurement of segregation a challenging subject. Which is why, over the years, methodological approaches have been developed, which have produced different indicators to quantify the phenomenon. On the one hand, there are the traditional indicators, which have been criticized for the flaws attributed to them, among which their inability to reveal the way in which the phenomenon is spatially distributed stands out. On the other hand, there are spatial indicators, created from the development of spatial statistics and the availability of Geographic Information System (GIS) software, which are believed to be conceptually and operationally superior. This has led some Latin American researchers to propose abandoning the use of traditional indicators altogether, and to exclusively use the indicators considered as spatial. However, this article shows how, from a complementary approach, spatial and aspatial indicators can be articulated to reveal the different spatial dimensions of residential segregation, and thus reduce arbitrariness in their measurement, representation, and interpretation. While, at the same time, it addresses the limited availability of individual spatial data that characterizes Latin America. The results of the study of socioeconomic residential segregation in Managua, through the Dissimilarity Index and the Global Moran´s Index, show that the city exhibits small-scale segregation, and that the most segregated group in terms of concentration and grouping is the population with a college degree.It also reveals that although spatial indicators seek to capture the inherently geographical nature of residential segregation, their exclusive use fails to address the spatial multidimensionality of the phenomenon and can lead to gaps in its quantification.

Segregación residencial en dos ciudades de la macro región sur del Perú

“…A diferencia de otros estudios, los resultados de los índices sintéticos y espaciales, se mostraron complementarios, lo que demuestra la importancia de ahondar en el uso de distintos tipos de índices para comprender la SR (Sánchez y Gómez, 2021). Al igual que, en estudios sobre ciudades Los casos de Arequipa y Tacna, muestran cómo los factores históricos, institucionales y contextuales, definen el patrón urbano de segregación urbana.…”

“…O la relación entre segregación y desigualdades (Ruiz-Tagle y López, 2014;Sabatini et al, 2020). En términos metodológicos, surgen discusiones sobre índices sintéticos (como el índice de disimilitud) y espaciales (Sánchez y Gómez, 2021), operacionalización (Massey y Denton, 1998), y el impacto de la escala de análisis en los resultados (Marengo y Elorza, 2014;Sabatini et al, 2001), el uso de áreas de censal u otras delimitaciones. Además, se discute recientemente si los patrones de SR son similares o no, al comparar ciudades de distintas escalas y tamaños (Garreton et al, 2020;Krupka, 2007;Mayorga, 2021;Monkkonen, 2012).…”