The Heterogeneous Nature of Urban Poor Families

Abstract

This paper addresses the scholarly debate on cultural homogeneity or heterogeneity of urban poor families. While authors such as Lewis (1959) or Wacquant (2000 ; 2001) claim that structural disadvantages are linked to a particular type of identity or culture, others such as Hannerz (1969) , Anderson (1999 ; 2002) , or Portes ( Portes and Manning, 1986 ; Portes and Jensen, 1989 ) believe that it is possible to find different behaviors, expectations, decision–making processes, and outcomes among people living in seemingly identical structural conditions ( Small et al., 2010 ). Using Santiago, Chile, as a case study, we differentiate five different cultures or identities among the poor. Those identities seem to be the product of different historical and political circumstances, as well as of different types of public policies. The paper ends with a discussion of the need for poverty reduction policies to consider these differences among the poor.

“For Now, We Are in Waiting”: Negotiating Time in Chile's Social Housing System

“…A poor peripheral municipality of 200,000 residents, La Pintana is an apt site to examine the politics of waiting, as it represents a least‐likely case for collective action in which we nonetheless find mobilization around time. While Santiago has seen broad demobilization of urban movements since the 1980s (Murphy ), enduring practices of collective action have concentrated primarily in historically “combative” neighborhoods formed through land occupations in the 1960s and 1970s (Salcedo and Rasse ). In contrast, districts like La Pintana, consolidated primarily through dictatorship‐era housing policies, have been marked by demobilization and declining civil society participation (Murphy ; Rodríguez and Sugranyes ).…”

La cotidianeidad de la periferia popular: Entre el olvido y la constante intervención

“…Mientras los primeros estudios sobre esto se centraron en las configuraciones espaciales y condiciones institucionales de producción del espacio, en un segundo momento la preocupación se trasladó al aislamiento de los hogares y sus consecuencias en empleo y bienestar (Kaztman, 2009;Saraví, 2008), las consecuencias de enfrentar un entorno social homogéneo en términos de cohesión social (Di Virgilio & Perelman, 2014;Segura, 2013;Wormald et al, 2012), y las estrategias para lidiar con una cotidianeidad marcada por las desigualdades territoriales (Salcedo & Rasse, 2012) y/o la violencia (Álvarez & Auyero, 2014).…”

How Interspersion Affects Class Relations

“…The other view is that the spatial proximity between enclaves and poor areas has improved class relations (Salcedo and Torres, ; Sabatini and Salcedo, ; Salcedo and Rasse, ). Examining the case of a gated community located near a rural settlement in Santiago, Chile, Salcedo and Torres () find that proximity allows for a degree of functional integration—greater social interaction mainly in the context of employment—that effectively softens class boundaries.…”