De-Segregation, Peripheralisation and the Social Exclusion of Immigrants: Southern European Cities in the 1990s

Abstract

The unfavourable evolution of social conditions and housing patterns of immigrants in contemporary Southern Europe challenges the association of social inclusion and integration with spatial dispersal. Recent housing and socio-urban changes, involving limited public-housing production and few opportunities for self-build housing, have triggered additional processes of socio-residential exclusion associated with peripheralisation, de-segregation in the context of urban renewal, and gentrification. Finally, the strength and specific composition of the major waves of immigrants in the 1990s and early 2000s have also contributed to narrowing migrants’ access to the housing market and promoting distinctive patterns of settlement. Focusing on the six metropolises of Lisbon, Madrid, Barcelona, Turin, Milan and Rome, we explore patterns and dynamics of socio-ethnic segregation in Southern Europe, paying particular attention to the processes of marginalisation through dispersal, and questioning the orthodox association between residential de-segregation and social inclusion. Despite data limitations and the fact that these examples may not be representative of all Southern European metropolises, this paper aims at a more accurate interpretation of the contemporary socio-urban dynamics associated with the presence of immigrants.

Keywords:

• Peripheralisation
• Segregation
• De-Segregation
• Social Exclusion of Immigrants
• Southern European Cities

Notes

1. Traditionally, self-build schemes were pivotal in enabling the span of owner-occupation amongst middle and low strata of S-EU societies, including the internal migrants of the 1950s–70s.

2. The simultaneous inclusion of municipal (Barcelona, Milan and Turin) and metropolitan (Lisbon, Madrid, Rome) areas is required by the significant presence of immigrants at both urban levels and by the necessity to visualise the scale of the metropolitan peripheralisation of the immigrants relative to their presence in the central and peri-central areas of the cities. Moreover, depending on the city, the data on immigrants’ distribution are available at either a metropolitan or a municipal level.

3. PALOP stands for Portuguese-Speaking African Country.

4. The SI or Segregation Index ranges between 0 (no segregation—equal geographical distribution of the group and the global resident population) and 100 (total segregation—population of the group under analysis lives concentrated and separated from the rest of the population).

5. By ‘strong’ ethnicity we mean a high level of internal cohesion within the ethnic group and a strong sense of belonging to a community that is culturally distinct—in terms of religion, values, etc.—from the majority of the population. On the issue of ethnicity levels and contrasts, see Machado (2002).

6. Precarious accommodation covers reception centres, illegal accommodation, guests of co-ethnics, hotels and guesthouses, as well as work-place accommodation.

7. The PER Programme was a governmental initiative, launched in 1993 by the National Institute of Housing. It affected more than 50,000 families in the Lisbon Metropolitan Area, and aimed to eradicate shanties by 2009.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Sonia Arbaci

Sonia Arbaci is Lecturer in Spatial Planning at University College London

Jorge Malheiros

Jorge Malheiros is Lecturer in Geography at the University of Lisbon