The Measurement of Ethnic Segregation in the Netherlands: Differences Between Administrative and Individualized Neighbourhoods

Abstract

The debate on residential segregation often focuses on the concentration of migrant groups in specific neighbourhoods and its presumed effects on, e.g. personal life chances and social inclusion. However, cross-regional and international comparisons of segregation are hampered by differences in the size and delineation of the spatial units that are used for its measurement: the Modifiable Areal Unit Problem. This paper therefore measures segregation for scalable ‘individualized neighbourhoods’, defined by a predefined number of closest neighbours instead of by administrative or statistical boundaries. This approach allows for measuring segregation levels and patterns across different spatial scales, ranging from the micro-scale (50 neighbours) to larger spatial areas (51,200 neighbours). Using population register data from the Netherlands, we study the segregation of four different migrant origin groups across individualized neighbourhoods at eleven spatial scales. Outcomes are compared to those found using administrative neighbourhoods. We are especially interested in how levels and patterns of segregation change with an increase in scale level. Our findings indicate that segregation levels and patterns are different across various spatial scales, and the most relevant spatial scale is also group-specific. Measuring segregation while using scalable individualized neighbourhoods seems an appropriate way to deal with both the multiscalar nature of segregation and the large within-district variety associated with it.

Comparing Residential Segregation of Migrant Populations in Selected European Urban and Metropolitan Areas

“…Finally, there are several individual studies that, with different approaches and at various geographical scales, address the issue of residential segregation of the foreign population with reference to individual European countries. For example: Barbagli and Pisati (2012), Mazza et al (2018), and Benassi et al (2019) for the Italian case, Friedrichs and Triemer (2008) and Teltemann et al (2015) for Germany, Schönwälder and Söhn (2007), Hartog and Zorlu (2009) and Sleutjes et al (2018) for the Netherlands, Iglesias Pascual (2017) and Rubiales Pérez et al (2012) for Spain, Verdugo (2011) and Pan Ké Shon and Verdugo (2015) for France, Atkinson and Flint (2004) and Catney (2016Catney ( , 2018 for the UK, Vang (2010) for Ireland. Important are also some recent studies that link residential segregation to socio-economic characteristics in different European contexts (Tammaru et al 2016(Tammaru et al , 2020Nieuwenhuis et al 2020;Musterd et al 2017).…”

Comparing ethnic segregation across cities—measurement issues matter

“…Wong 1997;2003). Sleutjes et al (2018) compare findings on ethnic segregation for administrative units and an egocentric measurement for the Amsterdam Metropolitan area. They conclude that applying administrative districts likely results in a downward bias of exposure at a low spatial scale and an upward bias at larger scale levels.…”

“…when the level of ethnic segregation in a (group of) region(s) is concerned, is only occasionally considered. Among the rare exceptions is a study by Sleutjes et al (2018) who compare findings for administrative units with results, which base on an egocentric measurement. Existing evidence suggests that the MAUP, random unevenness and spatial clustering likely affect the findings.…”

Socio-economic segregation in European cities. A comparative study of Brussels, Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Oslo and Stockholm

“…In the last few years, increasing attention has been given to an innovative multiscalar approach that uses individualized neighborhoods instead of predefined administrative units (MacAllister et al 2001;Chaix et al 2005;Lee et al 2008;Reardon et al 2008Reardon et al , 2009Chaix et al 2009;Östh, Malmberg, and Andersson 2014;Östh, Clark, and Malmberg 2015;Clark et al 2015;Fowler 2016;Andersson, Lyngstad, and Sleutjes 2018;Costa and De Valk 2018;Malmberg et al 2018;Sleutjes, De Valk, and Ooijevaar 2018). Individualized neighborhoods are defined as neighborhoods based on a pre-determined number of nearest neighbors, independently of administrative borders.…”