Will housing mix create social mix, and will social mix create social opportunity? This question is central in American and European urban debates. In Europe, however, there is a big gap between the political debates and actions regarding these issues and empirical research. In an effort to partly fill this gap, the authors critically evaluated the question above, applying a large-scale longitudinal Swedish data set covering the period 1991 to 1999 and available at the individual level for the entire population. The first part of the article reviews the various policies that are used in different European countries. The second part addresses the empirical analysis.
Andersson, R.1998. Socio-spatial dynamics: Ethnic divisions of mobility and housing in Post-Palme Sweden. Urban Studies35 (3): 397-428.
2.
Andersson, R. 2000. Etnisk och socioekonomisk segregation i Sverige 1990-1998. SOU 2000:37, Arbetsmarknad, Demografi och Segregation, 223-66. Stockholm, Sweden: Fritzes Offentliga Publikationer.
3.
Andersson, R.2001. Spaces of socialisation and social network competition—A study of neighborhood effects in Stockholm, Sweden. In Social exclusion, social fragmentation and urban governance, edited by Hans Thor Andersen and Ronald van Kempen, 149-188. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
4.
Andersson, R., and Å. Bråmå. 2004. Selective migration in Swedish distressed neighborhoods: Can area-based urban policies counteract segregation processes?Housing Studies19 (4): 517-539.
5.
Atkinson, R., and K. Kintrea. 2001. Disentangling area effects: Evidence from deprived and non-deprived neighborhoods. Urban Studies38 (12): 2277-2298.
6.
Beckhoven, E. Van, and R. Van Kempen. 2003. Social effects of urban restructuring: A case study in Amsterdam and Utrecht, the Netherlands. Housing Studies18 (6): 853-875.
7.
Borevi, K. 2002. Välfärdsstaten i det mångkulturella samhället. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Skrifter utgivna av Statsvetenskapliga föreningen i Uppsala, 151. Uppsala, Sweden: Department of Political Science, Uppsala University.
8.
Briggs, X. de Souza. 1997. Moving up versus moving out: Neighborhood effects in housing mobility programs. Housing Policy Debate8 (1): 195-234.
9.
Buck, N.2001. Identifying neighborhood effects on social exclusion. Urban Studies38 (12): 2251-2275.
10.
Carpenter, J., Y. Chauviré, and P. White. 1994. Marginalization, polarization and planning in Paris. Built Environment20 (3): 218-230.
11.
Deurloo, M. C. 1987. A multivariate analysis of residential mobility. Ph.D. thesis, Utrecht University.
12.
Ellen, I. G., and M. A. Turner. 1997. Does neighborhood matter? Assessing recent evidence. Housing Policy Debate8 (4): 833-866.
13.
Esping-Andersen, G.1990. The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
14.
Farwick, A.2002. Segregierte Armut und Soziale Benachteiligung. In Stadt und Region; Dynamik von Lebenswelten, edited by A. Mayr, M. Meurer, and J. Vogt, 292-305. Leipzig, Germany: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Geographie.
15.
Friedrichs, Jürgen, George Galster, and Sako Musterd. 2003. Life in poverty neighborhoods. Special issue, Housing Studies18 (6).
16.
Galster, G.2002a. Trans-Atlantic perspectives on opportunity, deprivation and the housing nexus. Housing Studies17 (1): 5-12.
17.
Galster, G., ed. 2002b. Opportunity, deprivation and the housing nexus: Trans-Atlantic perspectives. Special issue, Housing Studies17 (1).
18.
Galster, G., and A. Zobel. 1998. Will dispersed housing programs reduce social costs in the U.S.?Housing Studies13 (5): 605-622.
19.
GeoSweden. 2002. Database. Uppsala, Sweden: Institute for Housing and Urban Research, Uppsala University.
20.
Goering, John, and Judith D. Feins, eds. 2003. Choosing a better life? Evaluating the moving to opportunity social experiment. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
21.
Granovetter, M.1995. Getting a job. A study of contacts and careers. 2nd ed.Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
22.
Integrationsverket (Board of Integration). 2003. Rapport integration 2002. Norrköping, Sweden: Integrationsverket.
23.
Jacquier, C.2001. Urbanfragmentation and revitalization policies in France: A new urban governance in the making. In Social exclusion, social fragmentation and urban governance, by Hans Thor Andersen and Ronald van Kempen, 321-346. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
24.
Johnson, M. P., H. F. Ladd, and J. Ludwig. 2002. The benefits and costs of residential mobility programs for the poor. Housing Studies17 (1): 125-138.
25.
Kaupinen, T. M.2002. The beginning of immigrant settlement in the Helsinki metropolitan area and the role of social housing. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment17:173-197.
26.
Kearns, A.2002. Response: From residential disadvantage to opportunity? Reflections on British and European policy and research. Housing Studies17 (1): 145-150.
27.
Kearns, A., and A. Parkes. 2003. Living in and leaving poor neighborhood conditions in England. Housing Studies18 (6): 827-851.
28.
Kempen, E. Van, and S. Musterd. 1991. High-rise housing reconsidered: Some research and policy implications. Housing Studies6 (2): 83-95.
29.
Korpi, T.1994. Escaping unemployment. Studies in the individual consequences of unemployment and labour market policy. Institutets för social forskning avhandlingsserie nr 24. Stockholm, Sweden: Almqqvist och Wiksell International.
30.
Korpi, T., and S-Å. Stenberg. 2001. Massarbetslöshetens Sverige -arbetslöshetens karaktär och effekter på individers levnadsförhållanden. In Välfärd och arbete i arbetslöshetens årtionde, edited by J. Fritzell, M. Gähler, and O. Lundberg, 31-77. Stockholm, Sweden: Kommittén Välfärdsbokslut.
31.
Leventhal, T., and J. Brooks-Gunn. 2000. The neighborhoods they live in: The effects of neighborhood residence on child and adolescent outcomes. Psychological Bulletin126 (2): 309-337.
32.
Massey, D. S., and N. A. Denton. 1993. American apartheid. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
33.
Musterd, S.2002. Response: Mixed housing policy: A European (Dutch) perspective. Housing Studies17 (1): 139-143.
34.
Musterd, S.2003. Segregation and integration: A contested relationship. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies29 (4): 623-641.
35.
Musterd, S., and R. Andersson. 2003. Employment, social mobility and neighborhood effects. Paper presented at the RC21, ISA conference, Milan, Italy, October.
36.
Musterd, S., W. Ostendorf, and S. De Vos. 2001. Armoedeconcentraties en sociale effecten in dynamisch perspectief; de relatieve concentratie van huishoudens met een zwakke sociaal-economische positie en de effecten daarvan op hun sociale mobiliteit: de ontwikkeling tussen 1989 en 1994. Amsterdam: AME, Universiteit van Amsterdam.
37.
Musterd, S., W. Ostendorf, and S. De Vos. 2003. Environmental effects and social mobility. Housing Studies18 (6): 877-892.
38.
Ostendorf, W., S. Musterd, and S. De Vos. 2001. Social mix and the neighborhood effect: Policy ambitions and empirical evidence. Housing Studies16 (3): 371-380.
39.
Rapport Integration. 2003. Yearbook on ethnic integration issued by the Swedish Board of Integration. Norrköping, Sweden: Integrationsverket.
40.
Robson, Brian, Michael Parkinson, Martin Boddy, and Duncan Maclennan. 2000. The state of English cities. London: Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions.
41.
Sampson, R. J., J. D. Morenoff, and T. Gannon-Rowley. 2002. Assessing “neighborhood effects”: Social processes and new directions in research. Annual Review of Sociology28:443-478.
42.
Sveriges Riksdag (Swedish Parliament). 2004. Debatt & beslut/Rixlex. Snabbprotokoll 2004/05:29. Monday November 15, Anförande 15 and 31 Samhällsbyggnadsminister Mona Sahlin (s).
43.
Urban Task Force. 1999. Towards an urban renaissance. London: E. and F. N. Spon.
44.
Whitehead, Chr. M. E.2002. Response: Housing, tenure and opportunity. Housing Studies17 (1): 63-68.
45.
Wilson, W. J.1987. The truly disadvantaged, the inner city, the underclass and public policy. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
