The Perforated Welfare Space: Negotiating Ghetto-Stigma in Media, Architecture and Everyday Life

Abstract

The Danish postwar social housing developments originally epitomized the dawning welfare state, promoting ideals of equity and community. Today, a number of these neighborhoods have come to occupy the reverse role and are publicly represented as “parallel societies,” “ghettos” or even “holes in the map of Denmark,” thus perforating the welfare state as a socially coherent space. Based on a media analysis and field studies in the so-called “hard ghettos,” this paper relates current media representations of disadvantaged Danish neighborhoods to architectural and residential ways of coping with territorial stigma. We argue that media representations of these housing developments contribute to rendering them spatially and socially detached from the surrounding society and that the architectural attempts to open up these housing developments may, in some cases, reinforce the stigma, further perforating the neighborhoods. Residents contest the stigma, yet those who can do so tend to detach themselves from the stigmatized neighborhoods.

Keywords:

• disadvantaged neighborhoods
• architecture
• media
• place reputation
• territorial stigma
• residents’ perspective

Notes

1. The criteria defining developments included on the list have been changed several times, but are per December 1, 2020 defined as developments that have more than 1000 residents, of which over fifty percent of residents have non-Western nationality or heritage and adhere to two of the following four criteria: (1) Over forty percent of adults aged 18–64 are not engaged in employment or education (average over two-year period) (2) The share of residents aged 18 or over convicted for criminal, weapons or narcotics crimes is three times the national average (average over 2-year period) (3) The share of residents aged 30–59 with only basic school education or lower (includes undeclared education) is over sixty percent (4) Average pre-tax income for adults aged 18–64, not including unemployed, less than 55 percent of pre-tax income for administrative region (Transport og Boligministeriet: Liste over ghettoområder pr. 1. december 2020)

2. Indenrigs- og Boligministeriet, Blandede Boligområder — Næste Skridt i Kampen Mod Parallelsamfund. København: Indenrigs- og Boligministeriet, 2021.

3. Translation by the authors. Regeringen. Ét Danmark Uden Parallelsamfund – Ingen Ghettoer i 2030 (2018).

4. Translation by the authors. https://www.regeringen.dk/aktuelt/statsministerens-nytaarstale/lars-loekke-rasmussens-nytaarstale-1-januar-2018/

5. The eight cases were selected in order to cover the largest and most stigmatized Danish housing developments, yet also representing different geographical locations, different levels of national notoriety and different scales and architectural layouts (see Figure 2).

6. Frank Wassenberg, “Renewing Stigmatised Estates in the Netherlands: A Framework for Image Renewal Strategies,” Journal of Housing and the Built Environment 19, no. 3 (2004): 292.

7. Matthieu Permentier, “Neighbourhood Reputation,” in International Encyclopedia of Housing and Home, ed. M. Permentier, (Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2012).

8. Marie Stender, “Efter vi er blevet en ghetto…Dystopisk stedsbranding i udsatte boligområder.” Tidsskriftet Antropologi, no. 78 (2018): 15–33.

9. Annette Hastings, “Stigma and Social Housing Estates: Beyond Pathological Explanations,” Journal of Housing and the Built Environment 19, no. 3, (2004): 233–254; Sune Qvotrup Jensen and Dorte Christensen, “Territorial Stigmatization and Local Belonging,” City, 16, no. 1–2 (2012): 74–92; A. Haynes, E. Devereux, and M. J. Power, “Media Representations, Stigma and Neighbourhood Identity,” in Social Housing, Disadvantage and Neighbourhood Liveability. Ten Years of Change in Social Housing Neighbourhoods, ed. M. Norris (London & New York: Routledge, 2014), 192–234.

10. Loïc Wacquant, “Territorial Stigmatization in the Age of Advanced Marginality,” Thesis Eleven 91, no. 1 (2007): 66–77.

11. Ibid.

12. Ibid.

13. Ibid.

14. Ade Kearns, Oliver Kearns, and Louise Lawson, “Notorious Places: Image, Reputation, Stigma. The Role of Newspapers in Area Reputations for Social Housing Estates,” Housing Studies 28, no. 4 (June 1, 2013): 579–598.); Jensen and Christensen, “Territorial Stigmatization.”

15. Ibid.; Dallas Rogers, Michael Darcy, and Kathy Arthurson, “Researching Territorial Stigma with Social Housing Tenants: Tenant-led Digital Media Production about People and Place,” in Negative Neighbourhood Reputation and Place Attachment: The Production and Contestation of Territorial Stigma, eds. P Kirkness and A. Tije-Dra (Abingdon: Routledge 2017), 178–193.

16. Rogers et al., “Researching Territorial Stigma;” Talja Blokland, “‘You Got to Remember You Live in Public Housing’: Place‐making in an American Housing Project,” Housing, Theory and Society 25 no. 1, (2008): 31–46; Kathy Arthurson, “Social Mix, Reputation and Stigma: Exploring Residents’ Perspectives of Neighbourhood Effects,” in Neighbourhood Effects Research: New Perspectives, eds. M. van Ham, D. Manley, N. Bailey, L. Simpson, and D. Maclennan (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2012), 101–119.

17. Wacquant, “Territorial Stigmatization,” 68.

18. Blokland, “You Got to remember”; Jensen and Christensen, “Territorial Stigmatization”.

19. Wassenberg, “Renewing Stigmatised Estates”; Kathy Arthurson, “Mixed Tenure Communities and the Effects on Neighbourhood Reputation and Stigma: Residents’ Experiences from Within,” Cities 35 (2013): 432–438; Hans Skifter Andersen, “Excluded Places: The Interaction Between Segregation, Urban Decay and Deprived Neighbourhoods,” Housing, Theory and Society 19(3–4), (2002): 153–169; Permentier, “Neighbourhood Reputation.”

20. Mark Swenarton, Tom Avermaete, and Dirk van den Heuvel, ed., Architecture and the Welfare State (London: Routledge, 2014).

21. Claus Bech-Danielsen, Marie Stender, and Mette Mechlenborg, eds., “Architectural Transformation of Disadvantaged Housing Areas,” Nordic Journal of Architectural Research 31, no. 1 (2019): 5–8.

22. Translation by the authors. ”Fem Motalavej-unge idømt over syv års fængsel for vold,” Sjællandske Nyheder, 5. Nov, 2019.

23. Translation by the authors. “Indvandreruro trækker politikræfter til Motalavej,” Sjaellandske Slagelse, 29. Aug, 2019

24. Haynes, Devereux, and Power, “Media Representations, Stigma and Neighbourhood Identity.”

25. Hastings, “Stigma and Social Housing Estates.”

26. Translation by the authors. “Betonfacaden ud mod Taastrupgårdsvej står massivt og uigennemtrængelig som et fængsel, der holder verden ude og livet inde.” Berlingske, December 2, 2018.

27. Translation by the authors. Rene Aunsbjerg Fogh “Familien Baek Bydsø: ‘Man føler sig tryg,’” Uge-Avisen Ribe, October 23, 2018.

28. Translation by the authors. Pia Egeberg, “På besøg på Resedavej og Lupinvej: Bor du i en ghetto?” Midtjyllands Avis, December 5, 2018.

29. Interview with resident, Mjølnerparken, May, 2020.

30. Interview with resident, Taastrupgård, May 2019.

31. Interview with resident, Mjølnerparken, May, 2020.

32. Wacquant, “Territorial Stigmatization,” 68.

33. Interview with resident, Motalavej, June 2020.

34. Interview with resident, Gellerupparken, February 2019.

35. Wassenberg, “Renewing Stigmatised Estates.”

36. Interview with resident, Bispehaven, June 2019.

37. Interview with resident, Vollsmose, June 2019.

38. Interview with resident, Finlandsparken, August 2020.

39. Translation by the authors. Regeringen. Ét Danmark Uden Parallelsamfund.

40. Andersen, “Excluded Places;” Marie Stender and Claus Bech-Danielsen, “Bridging Social Gaps: Transforming Disadvantaged Areas by Linking Them to the City,” Nordic Journal of Architectural Research, 31, no. 1 (2019) 33–59.

41. The official resume of the 2018 ghetto legislation has the following headline: “Ghetto Areas Must Look Different” (translated from Danish: “Ghettoområder skal se anderledes ud”), https://www.regeringen.dk/nyheder/2018/ghettoudspil/fysisk-forandrede-parallelsamfund/

42. Interview with project manager in housing association, Gellerupparken, March 2019.

43. Interview with architect, Gellerupparken, March 2019.

44. Interview with resident, Gellerupparken, February 2019.

45. Interview with representative of the housing association, Finlandsparken, March 2020.

46. Wacquant, “Territorial Stigmatization,” 69.

47. Jensen and Christensen, “Territorial Stigmatization.”

48. Ibid., 88.

49. Ibid., 89.

50. Ibid.; Mette Louise E Johansen and Steffen B Jensen, “‘They Want Us Out’: Urban Regeneration and the Limits of Integration in the Danish Welfare State,” Critique of Anthropology 37, no. 3 (2017): 297–316.

51. Johansen and Jensen, “They Want Us Out,”

52. Ibid., 301.

53. Ibid.

54. Ibid., 314.

55. Swenarton, Avermaete, and van den Heuvel, Architecture and the Welfare State, 17.

56. Johansen and Jensen, “They Want Us Out,” 299.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Marie Stender

Marie Stender is an anthropologist and senior researcher in the Department of the Built Environment at Aalborg University. She is the head of the research group Transformation of Housing and Places and the founder and project manager of the Nordic Research Network for Architectural Anthropology. Her research focuses on architectural anthropology, disadvantaged neighborhoods, place-making, social sustainability, and the relationship between social life and built environments. She is enrolled in the research project Regeneration of Danish Disadvantaged Neighborhoods: Long-term Evaluation (2019–2028), where she is responsible for developing the qualitative study of residents’ experiences.

Mette Mechlenborg

Mette Mechlenborg has a Master of Arts in Literature and Modern Culture and is a senior researcher in the Department of the Built Environment at Aalborg University. She has profound knowledge of everyday life practices, homemaking, and place development. Her interest is in theories on space and the entanglement of the physical, social, and cultural aspects of everyday life. She has been enrolled in various international and national projects within housing culture, place transformation, and residential practices. She is enrolled in the research project Regeneration of Danish Disadvantaged Neighborhoods: Long-term Evaluation (2019–2028), where she has developed media analysis methods.