The Spatial Articulation of Urban Political Cleavages

Abstract

Synthesizing and extending multiple literatures, this article develops a new approach for exploring the spatial articulation of urban political cleavages. We pursue three questions: (1) To what extent does electoral conflict materialize between rather than within neighborhoods? (2) How salient are group, place, and location in defining urban cleavages? (3) How do these sources inflect one another? To answer these questions, the article analyzes a novel longitudinal database of neighborhood-scale mayoral voting in Chicago, Toronto, and London. We find strong evidence of spatially articulated cleavages: in each city, voting patterns are equally or more geographically concentrated than the non-White population, income, and poverty. While group-based interests define Chicago’s cleavage structure, place and location are paramount in Toronto and London. We conclude by proposing a research agenda for investigating the spatiality of urban politics and advancing a preliminary typology of urban political cleavages and the conditions under which they may arise.

A Markov model of urban evolution: Neighbourhood change as a complex process

“…This typology resembles other neighbourhood classifications of Toronto derived by different methods [3,58]. These also identify three major clusters of neighbourhoods with similar geographical, socioeconomic, and demographic patterns.…”

“…Still, some research has used multivariate classification approaches to identify neighbourhood types in Toronto, such as Principal Component Analysis [3], Self Organizing Maps [61], or cluster analysis [35]. This and similar univariate work [58] tends to find that a three-part structure has largely persisted even amidst the city's ongoing transformations: a dense downtown core largely populated by young people and highly educated "creative class" professionals and aspirants; a traditional suburban areas with large single family homes often inhabited by members of Canada's historical Protestant elite, Toronto's main Jewish areas, as well as areas settled by newer Chinese immigrants; a relatively marginalized inner suburban areas in the Northeast and Northwest populated primarily by lower income non-white residents (in particular South Asian, Black, and Arab) along with older white, often Italian, working class communities.…”

“…As the fastest growing city in North America [1] and among the most ethnically diverse cities in the world [2], Toronto offers an important research site. While Toronto neighbourhoods have been widely studied [3], the more holistic approach afforded by these methods has been largely missing, as most studies rely on changes in single variables or indexes [4,5]. Where neighbourhood typologies have been explored [3], this has typically been restricted to a small number of types without examining changes among those types but instead looking at how fixed types change over time with respect to specific indicators like income or ethnic composition.…”

“…While Toronto neighbourhoods have been widely studied [3], the more holistic approach afforded by these methods has been largely missing, as most studies rely on changes in single variables or indexes [4,5]. Where neighbourhood typologies have been explored [3], this has typically been restricted to a small number of types without examining changes among those types but instead looking at how fixed types change over time with respect to specific indicators like income or ethnic composition. To mitigate the difficulty of qualitatively analyzing a higher number of neighbourhood types, we situate many neighbourhood types within a hierarchical classification.…”

A Markov model of urban evolution: Neighbourhood change as a complex process

“…As the fastest growing city in North America [ 1 ] and among the most ethnically diverse cities in the world [ 2 ], Toronto offers an important research site. While Toronto neighbourhoods have been widely studied [ 3 ], the more holistic approach afforded by these methods has been largely missing, as most studies rely on changes in single variables or indexes [ 4 , 5 ]. Where neighbourhood typologies have been explored [ 3 ], this has typically been restricted to a small number of types without examining changes among those types but instead looking at how fixed types change over time with respect to specific indicators like income or ethnic composition.…”