Using local statistics and neighbourhood classifications to portray ethnic residential segregation: a London example

Abstract

Much has been written about ethnic residential segregation in urban areas, a great deal of it deploying single-index numbers to measure its intensity. These give very little detailed appreciation of the extent to which different ethnic groups live apart from each other, and where, within the city, generating the need for an approach that establishes the extent to which ethnic groups are concentrated in particular areas. This paper suggests that a combination of measures derived from local spatial statistics, which identify the geography of clustering, and a typology of residential areas, which describes the population composition of each area, provides much greater insight into the nature and extent of segregation/concentration. Data for London in 2001 illustrate the potential of this approach.

Ethnic Disparities in Neighbourhood Selection: Understanding the Role of Income

“…In Britain, political interpretations of ethnic residential patterns have tended to emphasize minorities' self-segregating choices rather than other demographic dynamics or the unequal constraints that limited resources, racialized space perceptions and unequal housing markets can impose on residential decision making (Robinson, 2005;Simpson, 2007;Phillips and Harrison, 2010). Yet the popular narrative that Britain is 'sleepwalking' towards pernicious levels of segregation where people from different backgrounds lead 'parallel lives' has been extensively challenged Peach, 2009;Poulsen et al, 2011). Census data show that ethnic diversity is increasing in many locales as minorities decentralize from metropolitan gateways to non-traditional locations (Peach, 2009;Rees and Butt, 2004;Catney, 2016a;2016b).…”

Trajectories of ethnic neighbourhood change: Spatial patterns of increasing ethnic diversity

“…Borjas, ) and the presence of immigrant networks (Logan, Zhang, & Alba, ). Studies on ethnic segregation have focussed on the question of how ethnic minorities are sorting into different neighbourhoods in these cities and to what extent they live together or apart from the native population (e.g., Bolt & Van Kempen, ; Johnston, Poulsen, & Forrest, , ; Poulsen, Johnston, & Forrest, ). Although segregation is most often viewed as a condition of neighbourhoods and cities at a certain point in time, ethnic segregation is not a static phenomenon but is a dynamic process that develops through time without a specific end point (Johnston et al .…”

“…, ). An emerging body of research is therefore focussed on investigating segregation from the perspective of the changing ethnic population composition in neighbourhoods (e.g., Johnston et al, ; Poulsen et al, ). Analysing what types of neighbourhoods experience change in the ethnic population composition and identifying the drivers of these changes is crucial to our understanding of processes of ethnic segregation.…”

London: A dividing city, 2001–11?

“…Because it has the same distribution as the well-known Z statistic, if the value of G * exceeds 2.58 this indicates only a 1-in-100 or less chance that the clustering of high average values has occurred by chance; if the value is less than 22.58, there is almost certainly a non-random clustering of OAs with values significantly below the London-wide average. (For full details of the application of G * mapping to intraurban clustering, see Johnston, Poulsen, and Forrest 2009, 2013a, 2013bPoulsen, Johnston, and Forrest 2011. ) The mapped G * values establish whether there are substantial blocks of territory within London where one class is concentrated, and changes in those values between 2001 and 2011 indicate neighbourhoods whose socio-economic character has altered.…”