Dynamics of ethnic residential segregation in Göteborg, Sweden, 1995–2000

Abstract

Most explanatory frameworks within segregation research interpret patterns of ethnic residential segregation as the result of how members of different ethnic groups have moved (or not moved) within the city and to the city from the surrounding world. Yet, few attempts have been made to proceed beyond relatively static accounts based on descriptions and analysis of patterns of segregation, to address more directly the dynamics behind the patterns. In this article, a longitudinal, individual‐based data‐set is used in order to analyse the dynamics, in terms of migration and natural population change, that have reproduced and transformed patterns of segregation in Göteborg (Gothenburg), Sweden, between 1995 and 2000. The analysis deals with questions concerning changes in the degree of concentration and dispersal of different minority groups, and the role of the minority enclaves as ports of entry to the local housing market for different groups. The findings have relevance for wider theoretical issues related to the interpretation and explanation of ethnic residential segregation. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Selectivity and destinations of ethnic minorities leaving the main gateway cities of Estonia

“…Out‐migration from ethnic areas could also lead to new forms of spatial segregation outside gateway cities (Zelinsky and Lee, 1998; Ellis and Goodwin‐White, 2006). For example, ethnic minorities could prefer minority‐rich destinations because social networks and institutional resources are more likely to flourish in large, viable ethnic communities that allow easier access to employment and housing information for its members (Hou, 2007; Bråmå, 2008). For example, Li (1998) introduced the ‘ethnoburbs’ concept to characterise suburban ethnic neighbourhoods with vibrant ethnic economies for mainly white‐collar workers that are emerging in one of the main immigration centres in the US (Los Angeles).…”

Forty years of immigrant segregation in France, 1968–2007. How different is the new immigration?

“…Residential mobility and spatial dispersion are major phenomena, even in ethnically concentrated neighbourhoods (Simpson, 2004(Simpson, , 2005(Simpson, , 2007Simpson et al, 2008). In France, Sweden, Norway and the Netherlands, considerable spatial mobility has been documented, often into neighbourhoods with better characteristics for immigrants of all origins (Bråmå, 2008;Musterd and van Kempen, 2009;Pan Ké Shon, 2010;Andersson et al, 2010), thus suggesting an ongoing, progressive incorporation process. …”

Understanding Immigrant Population Growth Within Urban Areas: A Spatial Econometric Approach

“…By comparing different regions in the Netherlands, Zorlu and Mulder (2008) show how recent immigrants are located in areas where deprivation indicators, such as substandard housing, are high. In the case of Sweden, Bråmå (2008) and Åslund (2005) also introduce a number of housing market conditions. In short, for both of these countries, it is shown that, in general, new immigrants live in very different housing conditions from those of the native population.…”

“…Among the authors using spatially referenced data, only one researcher uses intra-metropolitan spatial data to analyze the dynamics of immigrant settlement patterns (Bråmå 2008). To our knowledge, no study has as yet introduced spatial effects to explain the growth of the immigrant population within urban areas.…”