Relocating Disadvantage in Five Australian Cities: Socio-spatial Polarisation under Neo-liberalism

Randolph, Bill; Tice, Andrew

doi:10.1080/08111146.2016.1221337

Cited by 53 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Australia's cities have become increasing spatially polarised (Forster, ; Hugo, ; Randolph & Tice, ; Stimson, ). Population, housing, and employment dynamics that pushed population and employment away from city centres during the twentieth century have been ‘replaced by a centripetal force pulling economic activity and housing investment back into the centre’ (Randolph & Tice, , p.118). Inner‐ring suburbs, close to central business districts, are predominantly advantaged suburbs typified by higher education levels and incomes, and higher proportions with professional, managerial, and administrative occupations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping schools' NAPLAN results: a spatial inequality of school outcomes in Australia

Smith

Parr

Muhidin

2018

Geographical Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article identifies spatial dimensions of educational outcomes using maps of the 2016 Grade 5 reading results for Australia's National Assessment Program–Literacy and Numeracy for all Australian schools. A geographical information system (GIS) was used to overlay schools' results onto suburbs' advantage or disadvantage to visualise spatial patterns. We then examined the extent to which school results “cluster” in socio‐economically advantaged and disadvantaged suburbs and considered the consistency of spatial patterns for results across major cities. That work illustrates both how GIS can foreground educational inequality and how “the spatial” is more than corollary for student socio‐economic status. Results show substantial differences between urban and remote areas and towns of different size. Maps of cities visualise spatial “clustering” patterns of school results, with most schools in advantaged suburbs having high results and almost no schools in disadvantaged suburbs having high results. Educational outcomes strongly align to local socio‐demographic characteristics, and parallel host communities’ levels of advantage or disadvantage. Differences between public and private schools are less significant than within‐sector differences for schools in advantaged or disadvantaged locales. Patterns in all cities are consistent—schools in advantaged suburbs predominantly have high results, whereas non‐government schools generally perform better than government schools in disadvantaged suburbs. Most concerning is the persistent and increasing trajectory of results in advantaged, and more so in disadvantaged suburbs, of all cities since the first National Assessment Program–Literacy and Numeracy in 2008. Ameliorating spatial inequality between primary schools is one of the greatest challenges for Australians.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping schools' NAPLAN results: a spatial inequality of school outcomes in Australia

Smith

Parr

Muhidin

2018

Geographical Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rising inequality feeds through into the urban system, both in an increased desire for spatial distance to reflect socio-economic distance (Musterd et al, 2016), but also because of the increasing ability of higher income groups to outbid lower income ones in the housing market for desired neighbourhoods (Hulchanski et al, 2007;Randolph & Tice, 2017). Related to this is the continued restructuring of urban economies and labour markets under the dual influences of technological change and globalisation.…”

Section: Drivers Of Poverty Suburbanisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In recent decades, there have been signs in a number of countries of a gradual shift away from this situation, described as the "suburbanisation of poverty"; for the US, Kneebone and Berube (2014), Cooke (2010) and Cooke and Denton (2015); for Toronto in Canada, Hulchanski et al (2007); for Australia, Pawson, Hulse, and Cheshire (2015) and Randolph and Tice (2017); for England, Hunter (2014); and for the Netherlands, . The primary driver of change has been the fundamental shift in urban economies and labour markets under globalisation (Smith, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The suburbanisation of poverty in British cities, 2004-16: extent, processes and nature

Bailey

Minton

2017

Urban Geography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper tracks changes in relative centralisation and relative concentration of poverty for the 25 largest British cities, analysing change for poor and non-poor groups separately, and examining parallel changes in spatial segregation. The paper confirms that poverty is suburbanising, at least in the larger cities, although poverty remains over-represented in inner locations. Suburbanisation is occurring through both the reduction in low income populations in inner locations and the growth non-poor groups in these places, consistent with a process of displacement. Relative centralisation of poverty has fallen more stronglythan relative concentration of poverty, as the outward shift of poorer groups leaves them still living in denser neighbourhoods on average. The paper also shows that spatial segregation (unevenness) declined at the same time although it remains to be seen whether this indicates a long-term shift to less segregated urban forms or a transitional outcome before new forms of segregation emerge around suburban poverty concentrations. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

“…Our study contributes to the current debate on inner‐city reurbanisation as it highlights the key importance of the housing market on current and potential future developments of population development and reurbanisation: From an open residential market with oversupply of affordable housing in high‐demand locations that was a main driver of reurbanisation in the 2000s, today's residential market is a demand market with increasing rents and land prices in renovated and newly built houses and almost no vacancies. Thus, reurbanisation also leads to a further densification of the inner‐city area and generally increases the segmentation of the housing market and pushes residential segregation as shown by other recent contributions (Randolph & Tice, ; Schipper & Wiegand, ). The main socio‐demographic segments of the city are now (a) highly demanded older Wilhelminian time built‐up inner‐city areas plus infill of new constructed houses as typical inner‐city features of reurbanisation; (b) less demanded poorer districts at the edges of the city with previously large (socialist‐time) prefabricated housing estates that may develop into areas where low‐income households concentrate who have no access to more expensive housing market segments across the city anymore; (c) increased suburbanisation of highly educated family households in infrastructural well‐connected suburban districts but still within the city border; and finally, (d) so far “unlabelled” areas in the first and second ring around the city centre that have been less in the focus of immigration so far but have got into the focus recently.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Reurbanisation: A long‐term process or a short‐term stage?

Kabisch

Haase

2019

Population Space and Place

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reurbanisation was identified in European cities since the 1980s. It is a process in which cities stop losing population, stabilise, and regrow. It is however questioned whether reurbanisation represents a long‐term process of urban living or a short‐term stage. Using the city of Leipzig, Germany, we show that reurbanisation has been ongoing over the last 15 years. Reurbanisation has the potential to be a long‐term, consolidated process in Leipzig's inner‐city areas and even spread to other parts of the city creating novel socio‐demographic patterns. The local context—with key importance of the housing market—is crucial for the emergence and course of current urban development processes. Future research should investigate the underpinnings of housing market processes and policies and how they impact residential mobility, socio‐spatial differentiation, and transformation of urban space. Using a flexible selection of indicators, this will enable a comprehensive understanding of the spatio‐temporal dynamics of reurbanising cities.

show abstract

Relocating Disadvantage in Five Australian Cities: Socio-spatial Polarisation under Neo-liberalism

Cited by 53 publications

References 19 publications

Mapping schools' NAPLAN results: a spatial inequality of school outcomes in Australia

Mapping schools' NAPLAN results: a spatial inequality of school outcomes in Australia

The suburbanisation of poverty in British cities, 2004-16: extent, processes and nature

Reurbanisation: A long‐term process or a short‐term stage?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About