Social implications of housing diversification in urban renewal: A review of recent literature

Kleinhans, Reinout

doi:10.1007/s10901-004-3041-5

Cited by 245 publications

(231 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

198

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Urban policies in the Netherlands as well as other Western countries promote housing differentiation and state-led gentrification in order to create socioeconomically mixed neighbourhoods (see Kleinhans 2004;Andersson et al 2007;Lees 2008;van Kempen and Bolt 2009;Arthurson 2010). These policies seem to be informed by (academic) concerns about the alleged negative effects of poverty concentration.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does living in a poor neighbourhood result in network poverty? A study on local networks, locality-based relationships and neighbourhood settings

Eijk

2010

J Hous and the Built Environ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines whether and how living in a poor neighbourhood results in ''network poverty''. Through a detailed analysis of the formation of personal networks of people living in a poor neighbourhood and those living in an affluent neighbourhood in Rotterdam, I examine the role of the neighbourhood in the formation of personal networks. I address three issues. First, whether resource-poor people who live in a poor neighbourhood form relationships with fellow-residents to compensate for their otherwise small network. I find that they do not and that their small network is primarily caused by non-participation in settings such as study, work, leisure and associations. Second, I distinguish locally maintained relationships that have originated in other settings from locality-based relationships that originated in the neighbourhood. The study shows that high network localness is more a matter of maintaining relationships in the neighbourhood than forming many new locality-based relationships with fellow-residents. Third, I examine how the neighbourhood facilitates relationship formation and conclude that this happens not in ''the neighbourhood'' but in neighbourhood settings, which attract a particular segment of a neighbourhood population. I conclude that the problem of network poverty is not in the first place spatial but rather lies in lack of participation in certain settings. Furthermore, social mixing policies can only be successful if they are accompanied by initiatives to draw a mixed population to neighbourhood settings and facilitate routine encounters between resource-rich and resource-poor people.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does living in a poor neighbourhood result in network poverty? A study on local networks, locality-based relationships and neighbourhood settings

Eijk

2010

J Hous and the Built Environ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While the trigger for the Rotterdamlaw was the increasing ethnic concentration in Rotterdam, the law is not directly addressing the minority ethnic groups (Bolt, 2004). Indirectly, however, they are affected disproportionately more than the established population (Kleinhans, 2004).…”

Section: Countering Segregation: Urban Policies In the Netherlandsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Minority Ethnic Groups in the Dutch Housing Market: Spatial Segregation, Relocation Dynamics and Housing Policy

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Social mixing is expected to lead to a range of positive outcomes, like social cohesion, social mobility opportunities, more social capital, better services, less crime, an improved neighbourhood reputation, and more residential stability (see e.g., Arthurson 2002;Kleinhans 2004;Tunstall 2003). Many of the associations between these outcomes and mixing policy lack a convincing empirical underpinning (Joseph et al 2007), but for the purpose of this paper, we will only focus on the link between social mix and social cohesion.…”

Section: The Link Between Social MIX and Social Cohesionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Social cohesion turned out to have evolved more positively in the other neighbourhoods than in the restructuring neighbourhoods. 1 Most studies on neighbourhood diversification examine the degree of social interaction between several groups within the neighbourhood (see Atkinson 2005;Joseph et al 2007;Kleinhans 2004 for an overview). Many researchers have found that renters and owneroccupiers have totally different activity patterns and hardy any contact with each other (see, e.g., Jupp 1999;Van Beckhoven and Van Kempen 2003;Arthurson 2007).…”

Section: The Link Between Social MIX and Social Cohesionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the United States in particular it has been found that there is almost no interaction between different income groups in mixed neighbourhoods (see, e.g., Rosenbaum et al 1998;Popkin et al 2002). This leads to the conclusion that spatial proximity is not a sufficient condition for social interactions (Kleinhans 2004). Differences in lifestyle make it not very likely that people with different characteristics will develop social relationships.…”

Section: The Link Between Social MIX and Social Cohesionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Social cohesion, social mix, and urban policies in the Netherlands

Kempen

Bolt

2009

J Hous and the Built Environ

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urban policy in the Netherlands has long been focused on improving disadvantaged urban districts. In the last 13 years policy has become particularly area-based. Here the spatial concentration of low-income households has been seen as a highly problematic issue. Because of this negative view of these concentrations, a housing mix in the problematic urban areas has been considered to be one of the most promising solutions. A housing mix would result in a social mix and more social cohesion within the district. Strikingly, numerous researchers point out that the social mix might not resolve the problems in those areas, while at the same time central and local government holds on to the idea of the mix. We give some background of urban policy in the Netherlands and focus on the relationship between social mix and social cohesion. After a brief review of the literature on this relationship, we give an account of recent Dutch urban policies, particularly on the role of social mix and social cohesion within them. This review yields some important inferences for future urban policies in the Netherlands and other West European countries.

show abstract

Social implications of housing diversification in urban renewal: A review of recent literature

Cited by 245 publications

References 29 publications

Does living in a poor neighbourhood result in network poverty? A study on local networks, locality-based relationships and neighbourhood settings

Does living in a poor neighbourhood result in network poverty? A study on local networks, locality-based relationships and neighbourhood settings

Minority Ethnic Groups in the Dutch Housing Market: Spatial Segregation, Relocation Dynamics and Housing Policy

Social cohesion, social mix, and urban policies in the Netherlands

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About