Separate Spaces, Separate Outcomes? Neighbourhood Impacts on Minorities in Germany
Identifieur interne : 001031 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 001030; suivant : 001032Separate Spaces, Separate Outcomes? Neighbourhood Impacts on Minorities in Germany
Auteurs : Anita I. DreverSource :
- Urban Studies [ 0042-0980 ] ; 2004-07.
English descriptors
- Teeft :
- American journal, Analysis results, Anita, Aussiedler, California press, Campus verlag, Census tracts, Cent level, Communication technology, Considerable debate, Continental european cities, Cultural difference, Cultural distance, Domicile satisfaction, Drever, Drever table, Economic integration, Economic research, Education income, Enclave, Ethnic, Ethnic background, Ethnic communities, Ethnic community ties, Ethnic concentration, Ethnic concentrations, Ethnic economies, Ethnic neighbourhood, Ethnic neighbourhoods, Ethnische kolonien, Family income, Family members, Foreign minorities, Foreign nationals, Foreign origin, Friedrich ebert stiftung, Gastarbeiter, German citizens, German citizenship, German culture, German descent, German institute, German panel, German society, Ghettos oder ethnische kolonien, Gsoep, Guestworker, Household income, Housing market, Housing stock, Immigrant, Infas geodaten, Integration process, International journal, Larger german society, Larger households, Leske budrich, Massey, Migrant, Minority communities, Minority concentration, Minority concentrations, Minority group, Minority neighbourhood, Minority neighbourhoods, Minority population, Minority populations, More time, Nding housing, Ndings, Neighbourhood, Neighbourhood boundaries, Neighbourhood effects, Neighbourhood environment, Neighbourhood level, Neighbourhood quality, Odds ratios, Origin culture, Overall neighbourhood quality, Past research, Past year, Population geography, Porte, Prov chi2, Quality housing, Quota system, Religious communities, School contacts, Separate outcomes, Separate spaces, Settlement bans, Settlement patterns, Social housing, Social networks, Socioeconomic characteristics, Spatial concentration, Spatial proximity, Subsidised housing, Suburban areas, Such neighbourhoods, Summary statistics, Temple university press, Turkish origin, Urban neighbourhood, Urban renewal, Urban studies, Verlag, Western europe, Zelinsky.
Abstract
In both the German and US literature on ethnic neighbourhoods, there is considerable debate as to whether living amongst co-ethnics hinders or furthers the integration process for immigrants. Using the detailed data on immigrant integration in the German Socio-economic Panel in combination with zip-code-level data on minority concentration and neighbourhood income levels, the research tests the extent to which ethnic neighbourhoods are economically, socially and/or culturally isolated spaces in Germany. The findings indicate that, although general neighbourhood quality is lower for minorities living within ethnic neighbourhoods, these persons are no more culturally isolated from Germans than their counterparts living outside these areas. Further, minorities living within ethnic neighbourhoods appear no more likely to maintain ties to their country of origin culture than those living outside ethnic neighbourhoods. This suggests that the correlation between social and spatial integration, assumed in much of the immigrant integration literature, requires more careful scrutiny.
Url:
DOI: 10.1080/0042098042000226939
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:9DD86430A6594F7D3010ED04171241DE93C5B506Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Separate Spaces, Separate Outcomes? Neighbourhood Impacts on Minorities in Germany</title><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Drever, Anita I" sort="Drever, Anita I" uniqKey="Drever A" first="Anita I." last="Drever">Anita I. Drever</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Geography, University of Tennessee, 304 Burchfiel Building, Knoxville, TN 37996-0925, USA,</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: adrever@diw.de</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:9DD86430A6594F7D3010ED04171241DE93C5B506</idno><date when="2004" year="2004">2004</date><idno type="doi">10.1080/0042098042000226939</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/9DD86430A6594F7D3010ED04171241DE93C5B506/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001031</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001031</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Separate Spaces, Separate Outcomes? Neighbourhood Impacts on Minorities in Germany</title><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Drever, Anita I" sort="Drever, Anita I" uniqKey="Drever A" first="Anita I." last="Drever">Anita I. Drever</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Geography, University of Tennessee, 304 Burchfiel Building, Knoxville, TN 37996-0925, USA,</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: adrever@diw.de</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Urban Studies</title><idno type="ISSN">0042-0980</idno><idno type="eISSN">1360-063X</idno><imprint><publisher>Sage Publications</publisher><pubPlace>Sage UK: London, England</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2004-07">2004-07</date><biblScope unit="volume">41</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">8</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="1423">1423</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="1439">1439</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0042-0980</idno></series><idno type="istex">9DD86430A6594F7D3010ED04171241DE93C5B506</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1080/0042098042000226939</idno><idno type="ArticleID">10.1080_0042098042000226939</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0042-0980</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>American journal</term><term>Analysis results</term><term>Anita</term><term>Aussiedler</term><term>California press</term><term>Campus verlag</term><term>Census tracts</term><term>Cent level</term><term>Communication technology</term><term>Considerable debate</term><term>Continental european cities</term><term>Cultural difference</term><term>Cultural distance</term><term>Domicile satisfaction</term><term>Drever</term><term>Drever table</term><term>Economic integration</term><term>Economic research</term><term>Education income</term><term>Enclave</term><term>Ethnic</term><term>Ethnic background</term><term>Ethnic communities</term><term>Ethnic community ties</term><term>Ethnic concentration</term><term>Ethnic concentrations</term><term>Ethnic economies</term><term>Ethnic neighbourhood</term><term>Ethnic neighbourhoods</term><term>Ethnische kolonien</term><term>Family income</term><term>Family members</term><term>Foreign minorities</term><term>Foreign nationals</term><term>Foreign origin</term><term>Friedrich ebert stiftung</term><term>Gastarbeiter</term><term>German citizens</term><term>German citizenship</term><term>German culture</term><term>German descent</term><term>German institute</term><term>German panel</term><term>German society</term><term>Ghettos oder ethnische kolonien</term><term>Gsoep</term><term>Guestworker</term><term>Household income</term><term>Housing market</term><term>Housing stock</term><term>Immigrant</term><term>Infas geodaten</term><term>Integration process</term><term>International journal</term><term>Larger german society</term><term>Larger households</term><term>Leske budrich</term><term>Massey</term><term>Migrant</term><term>Minority communities</term><term>Minority concentration</term><term>Minority concentrations</term><term>Minority group</term><term>Minority neighbourhood</term><term>Minority neighbourhoods</term><term>Minority population</term><term>Minority populations</term><term>More time</term><term>Nding housing</term><term>Ndings</term><term>Neighbourhood</term><term>Neighbourhood boundaries</term><term>Neighbourhood effects</term><term>Neighbourhood environment</term><term>Neighbourhood level</term><term>Neighbourhood quality</term><term>Odds ratios</term><term>Origin culture</term><term>Overall neighbourhood quality</term><term>Past research</term><term>Past year</term><term>Population geography</term><term>Porte</term><term>Prov chi2</term><term>Quality housing</term><term>Quota system</term><term>Religious communities</term><term>School contacts</term><term>Separate outcomes</term><term>Separate spaces</term><term>Settlement bans</term><term>Settlement patterns</term><term>Social housing</term><term>Social networks</term><term>Socioeconomic characteristics</term><term>Spatial concentration</term><term>Spatial proximity</term><term>Subsidised housing</term><term>Suburban areas</term><term>Such neighbourhoods</term><term>Summary statistics</term><term>Temple university press</term><term>Turkish origin</term><term>Urban neighbourhood</term><term>Urban renewal</term><term>Urban studies</term><term>Verlag</term><term>Western europe</term><term>Zelinsky</term></keywords></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">In both the German and US literature on ethnic neighbourhoods, there is considerable debate as to whether living amongst co-ethnics hinders or furthers the integration process for immigrants. Using the detailed data on immigrant integration in the German Socio-economic Panel in combination with zip-code-level data on minority concentration and neighbourhood income levels, the research tests the extent to which ethnic neighbourhoods are economically, socially and/or culturally isolated spaces in Germany. The findings indicate that, although general neighbourhood quality is lower for minorities living within ethnic neighbourhoods, these persons are no more culturally isolated from Germans than their counterparts living outside these areas. Further, minorities living within ethnic neighbourhoods appear no more likely to maintain ties to their country of origin culture than those living outside ethnic neighbourhoods. This suggests that the correlation between social and spatial integration, assumed in much of the immigrant integration literature, requires more careful scrutiny.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>sage</corpusName><keywords><teeft><json:string>neighbourhood</json:string><json:string>ethnic neighbourhoods</json:string><json:string>foreign origin</json:string><json:string>drever</json:string><json:string>gsoep</json:string><json:string>ethnic neighbourhood</json:string><json:string>enclave</json:string><json:string>aussiedler</json:string><json:string>separate outcomes</json:string><json:string>guestworker</json:string><json:string>porte</json:string><json:string>verlag</json:string><json:string>german panel</json:string><json:string>massey</json:string><json:string>zelinsky</json:string><json:string>gastarbeiter</json:string><json:string>neighbourhood effects</json:string><json:string>ndings</json:string><json:string>urban studies</json:string><json:string>separate spaces</json:string><json:string>ethnic communities</json:string><json:string>cent level</json:string><json:string>spatial concentration</json:string><json:string>german society</json:string><json:string>immigrant</json:string><json:string>social housing</json:string><json:string>ethnic concentration</json:string><json:string>urban neighbourhood</json:string><json:string>western europe</json:string><json:string>german culture</json:string><json:string>odds ratios</json:string><json:string>neighbourhood quality</json:string><json:string>infas geodaten</json:string><json:string>international journal</json:string><json:string>german citizenship</json:string><json:string>friedrich ebert stiftung</json:string><json:string>ethnic</json:string><json:string>ethnic concentrations</json:string><json:string>neighbourhood level</json:string><json:string>minority populations</json:string><json:string>minority neighbourhoods</json:string><json:string>turkish origin</json:string><json:string>housing market</json:string><json:string>housing stock</json:string><json:string>integration process</json:string><json:string>minority neighbourhood</json:string><json:string>summary statistics</json:string><json:string>german institute</json:string><json:string>temple university press</json:string><json:string>spatial proximity</json:string><json:string>ethnic economies</json:string><json:string>prov chi2</json:string><json:string>cultural distance</json:string><json:string>foreign minorities</json:string><json:string>campus verlag</json:string><json:string>population geography</json:string><json:string>anita</json:string><json:string>migrant</json:string><json:string>socioeconomic characteristics</json:string><json:string>german citizens</json:string><json:string>subsidised housing</json:string><json:string>communication technology</json:string><json:string>german descent</json:string><json:string>such neighbourhoods</json:string><json:string>religious communities</json:string><json:string>neighbourhood boundaries</json:string><json:string>family members</json:string><json:string>ethnic community ties</json:string><json:string>suburban areas</json:string><json:string>household income</json:string><json:string>quality housing</json:string><json:string>past research</json:string><json:string>larger households</json:string><json:string>more time</json:string><json:string>nding housing</json:string><json:string>school contacts</json:string><json:string>economic integration</json:string><json:string>urban renewal</json:string><json:string>minority concentration</json:string><json:string>drever table</json:string><json:string>neighbourhood environment</json:string><json:string>overall neighbourhood quality</json:string><json:string>settlement patterns</json:string><json:string>family income</json:string><json:string>domicile satisfaction</json:string><json:string>considerable debate</json:string><json:string>foreign nationals</json:string><json:string>quota system</json:string><json:string>economic research</json:string><json:string>ethnic background</json:string><json:string>larger german society</json:string><json:string>past year</json:string><json:string>education income</json:string><json:string>analysis results</json:string><json:string>cultural difference</json:string><json:string>minority group</json:string><json:string>census tracts</json:string><json:string>american journal</json:string><json:string>settlement bans</json:string><json:string>ethnische kolonien</json:string><json:string>minority communities</json:string><json:string>ghettos oder ethnische kolonien</json:string><json:string>minority population</json:string><json:string>minority concentrations</json:string><json:string>leske budrich</json:string><json:string>continental european cities</json:string><json:string>origin culture</json:string><json:string>california press</json:string><json:string>social networks</json:string></teeft></keywords><author><json:item><name>Anita I. Drever</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Geography, University of Tennessee, 304 Burchfiel Building, Knoxville, TN 37996-0925, USA,</json:string><json:string>E-mail: adrever@diw.de</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><articleId><json:string>10.1080_0042098042000226939</json:string></articleId><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>research-article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>In both the German and US literature on ethnic neighbourhoods, there is considerable debate as to whether living amongst co-ethnics hinders or furthers the integration process for immigrants. Using the detailed data on immigrant integration in the German Socio-economic Panel in combination with zip-code-level data on minority concentration and neighbourhood income levels, the research tests the extent to which ethnic neighbourhoods are economically, socially and/or culturally isolated spaces in Germany. The findings indicate that, although general neighbourhood quality is lower for minorities living within ethnic neighbourhoods, these persons are no more culturally isolated from Germans than their counterparts living outside these areas. Further, minorities living within ethnic neighbourhoods appear no more likely to maintain ties to their country of origin culture than those living outside ethnic neighbourhoods. This suggests that the correlation between social and spatial integration, assumed in much of the immigrant integration literature, requires more careful scrutiny.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>7.288</score><pdfVersion>1.4</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>493 x 703 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractCharCount>1090</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>7654</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>51994</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>18</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>149</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Separate Spaces, Separate Outcomes? Neighbourhood Impacts on Minorities in Germany</title><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><host><title>Urban Studies</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><issn><json:string>0042-0980</json:string></issn><eissn><json:string>1360-063X</json:string></eissn><publisherId><json:string>USJ</json:string></publisherId><volume>41</volume><issue>8</issue><pages><first>1423</first><last>1439</last></pages><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre></host><categories><wos><json:string>social science</json:string><json:string>urban studies</json:string><json:string>environmental studies</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>applied sciences</json:string><json:string>built environment & design</json:string><json:string>urban & regional planning</json:string></scienceMetrix><inist><json:string>sciences humaines et sociales</json:string></inist></categories><publicationDate>2004</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2004</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1080/0042098042000226939</json:string></doi><id>9DD86430A6594F7D3010ED04171241DE93C5B506</id><score>1</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/9DD86430A6594F7D3010ED04171241DE93C5B506/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/9DD86430A6594F7D3010ED04171241DE93C5B506/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/9DD86430A6594F7D3010ED04171241DE93C5B506/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Separate Spaces, Separate Outcomes? Neighbourhood Impacts on Minorities in Germany</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Sage Publications</publisher><pubPlace>Sage UK: London, England</pubPlace><availability><p>SAGE</p></availability><date>2004</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Separate Spaces, Separate Outcomes? Neighbourhood Impacts on Minorities in Germany</title><author xml:id="author-1"><persName><forename type="first">Anita I.</forename><surname>Drever</surname></persName><email>adrever@diw.de</email><affiliation>Department of Geography, University of Tennessee, 304 Burchfiel Building, Knoxville, TN 37996-0925, USA,</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Urban Studies</title><idno type="pISSN">0042-0980</idno><idno type="eISSN">1360-063X</idno><imprint><publisher>Sage Publications</publisher><pubPlace>Sage UK: London, England</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2004-07"></date><biblScope unit="volume">41</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">8</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="1423">1423</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="1439">1439</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">9DD86430A6594F7D3010ED04171241DE93C5B506</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1080/0042098042000226939</idno><idno type="ArticleID">10.1080_0042098042000226939</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2004</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>In both the German and US literature on ethnic neighbourhoods, there is considerable debate as to whether living amongst co-ethnics hinders or furthers the integration process for immigrants. Using the detailed data on immigrant integration in the German Socio-economic Panel in combination with zip-code-level data on minority concentration and neighbourhood income levels, the research tests the extent to which ethnic neighbourhoods are economically, socially and/or culturally isolated spaces in Germany. The findings indicate that, although general neighbourhood quality is lower for minorities living within ethnic neighbourhoods, these persons are no more culturally isolated from Germans than their counterparts living outside these areas. Further, minorities living within ethnic neighbourhoods appear no more likely to maintain ties to their country of origin culture than those living outside ethnic neighbourhoods. This suggests that the correlation between social and spatial integration, assumed in much of the immigrant integration literature, requires more careful scrutiny.</p></abstract></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2004-07">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/9DD86430A6594F7D3010ED04171241DE93C5B506/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="corpus sage not found" wicri:toSee="no header"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:docType PUBLIC="-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" URI="journalpublishing.dtd" name="istex:docType"></istex:docType><istex:document><article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="2.3" xml:lang="EN"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="hwp">spusj</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">USJ</journal-id><journal-title>Urban Studies</journal-title><issn pub-type="ppub">0042-0980</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Sage Publications</publisher-name><publisher-loc>Sage UK: London, England</publisher-loc></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/0042098042000226939</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">10.1080_0042098042000226939</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Separate Spaces, Separate Outcomes? Neighbourhood Impacts on Minorities in Germany</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Drever</surname><given-names>Anita I.</given-names></name><aff>Department of Geography, University of Tennessee, 304 Burchfiel Building, Knoxville, TN 37996-0925, USA, <email xlink:type="simple">adrever@diw.de</email></aff></contrib></contrib-group><pub-date pub-type="ppub"><month>07</month><year>2004</year></pub-date><volume>41</volume><issue>8</issue><fpage>1423</fpage><lpage>1439</lpage><abstract><p><bold>In both the German and US literature on ethnic neighbourhoods, there is considerable debate as to whether living amongst co-ethnics hinders or furthers the integration process for immigrants. Using the detailed data on immigrant integration in the German Socio-economic Panel in combination with zip-code-level data on minority concentration and neighbourhood income levels, the research tests the extent to which ethnic neighbourhoods are economically, socially and/or culturally isolated spaces in Germany. The findings indicate that, although general neighbourhood quality is lower for minorities living within ethnic neighbourhoods, these persons are no more culturally isolated from Germans than their counterparts living outside these areas. Further, minorities living within ethnic neighbourhoods appear no more likely to maintain ties to their country of origin culture than those living outside ethnic neighbourhoods. This suggests that the correlation between social and spatial integration, assumed in much of the immigrant integration literature, requires more careful scrutiny.</bold></p></abstract><custom-meta-wrap><custom-meta xlink:type="simple"><meta-name>sagemeta-type</meta-name><meta-value>Journal Article</meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta xlink:type="simple"><meta-name>search-text</meta-name><meta-value>1423 Separate Spaces, Separate Outcomes? Neighbourhood Impacts on Minorities in Germany SAGE Publications, Inc.07/2004DOI: 10.1080/0042098042000226939 Anita I.Drever Department of Geography, University of Tennessee, 304 Burchfiel Building, Knoxville, TN 37996-0925, USA, adrever@diw.de [Paper first received, June 2003; in final form, February 2004] The author wishes to thank William A. V. Clark, Ronald Foresta, Mark Ellis, John A. Agnew, David L. Rigby, Roger Waldinger and five anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments. The research was supported by a fellowship from the SSRC Berlin Programme and by the Livingston Professorship Endowment. In both the German and US literature on ethnic neighbourhoods, there is considerable debate as to whether living amongst co-ethnics hinders or furthers the integration process for immigrants. Using the detailed data on immigrant integration in the German Socio-economic Panel in combination with zip-code-level data on minority concentration and neighbourhood income levels, the research tests the extent to which ethnic neighbourhoods are economically, socially and/or culturally isolated spaces in Germany. The findings indicate that, although general neighbourhood quality is lower for minorities living within ethnic neighbourhoods, these persons are no more culturally isolated from Germans than their counterparts living outside these areas. Further, minorities living within ethnic neighbourhoods appear no more likely to maintain ties to their country of origin culture than those living outside ethnic neighbourhoods. This suggests that the correlation between social and spatial integration, assumed in much of the immigrant integration literature, requires more careful scrutiny. Introduction Past research on spatial concentrations of minorities in western Europe and the US is rife with debate over how these areas impact social and economic integration for minorities (see, for example, Sanders and Nee, 1987; Portes and Jenson, 1989; Sanders and Nee, 1992; Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, 2000; HauBermann et al., 2000).1 The 'ghettoisation' literature agues that spatial separation of minority communities reinforces their social and economic isolation (see, for example, Clark, 1965; Hoffman-Nowotny and Hondrich, 1982; Esser, 1980; Massey and Denton, 1989, 1993; Goldsmith and Blakely, 1992; Wacquant, 1993; Clark, 1998).2 These findings are complemented by research that indicates living within impoverished neighbourhoods further reduces the life-chances of the poor (Atkinson and Kintrea, 2001; Buck, 2001; Brooks-Gunn et al., 1993). In contrast, the ethnic enclave literature posits that ethnic community ties, enabled by spatial proximity, provide a psychological buffer against feelings of social alienation and allow easier access to employment and housing information through informal networks (Wilson and Portes, 1980; Heckmann, 1981; Elwert, 1982; Portes and Bach, 1985; Waldinger et al., 1990; Portes and Rumbaut, 1996). Much of the present-day research in this area focuses on 'ethnic economies' and seeks to understand the extent to which employment 1424 therein furthers economic integration (see, for example, Zhou, 1992; Kapphan, 1997; Light and Gold, 2000). A growing number of researchers, however, are beginning to question an underlying assumption in research on both 'ghettos' and 'enclaves': that ethnic geography determines ethnic interaction. Recent research in population geography (Zelinsky and Lee, 1998; Zelinsky, 2001) argues that advances in transport and communication technology have weakened the link between spatial concentration and social network formation resulting in the growth of ethnic communities without propinquity. Further, in the German literature, Burkner (1987) argues that the role of residential location in the integration process has been overemphasised because workplace and school contacts, which may or may not be within the neighbourhood of residence, are more critical than contacts formed between neighbours. This point is further emphasised by Friedrichs (1991), who also argues that neighbourhood effects have been overemphasised in integration research. Although the consequences of living within an ethnic neighbourhood remain contested, German policy-makers have tended to view minority neighbourhoods as spaces of exclusion. During the 1970s and 1980s, this resulted in policies that prohibited migrants from settling in areas with a disproportionate number of minority residents. In the 1990s, these policies were replaced by more informal quotas within-for example, social housing units.3 Yet, are the comparatively few dense concentrations of minorities in Germany spaces of alienation? To what extent might persons of foreign descent benefit from living within these areas? Does living within an area of ethnic concentration affect either isolation or ethnic community ties? The recent release of zip-code information in the German Socio-economic Panel (GSOEP) provides an unprecedented opportunity to investigate these questions in further detail. The GSOEP is comprised of the results of a yearly survey of socioeconomic characteristics of approximately 6000 randomly sampled households in Germany, of which well over 1000 are of foreign origin. The zip code for each household in the GSOEP can be linked with city statistical office data for Germany's 20 largest cities4 and micro-marketing data from Infas GEOdaten.5 These data, when merged with the GSOEP, make it possible to determine the income level and nationality make-up of a panel household's zip-code area. In order to bring these data to bear on ethnic neighbourhood debates, three research hypotheses were developed (1) Immigrants living within ethnic neighbourhoods are less satisfied with their surrounding environment than those who do not live in such neighbourhoods. (2) Immigrants who live within ethnic neighbourhoods are more alienated from Germans and German culture than those who do not live within ethnic neighbourhoods. (3) Immigrants who live within ethnic neighbourhoods are more likely to practise their culture than those who do not live within ethnic neighbourhoods. The intent of the analysis is not only to determine whether or not living within an ethnic neighbourhood is associated with level of integration, but also to address the broader issue of the extent to which one's position within concrete, Cartesian space impacts one's interpersonal networks in a world where human relations are being rapidly transformed by advances in transport and communication technology. History of Ethnic Neighbourhoods in Germany During the latter half of the 1950s and throughout the 1960s, Germany experienced very high economic growth rates. As the economy expanded, labour reserves within the country dried up and the German government decided to implement a guestworker programme. Gastarbeiter (guestworkers) were initially recruited from EEC countries including Italy, Spain and Greece and later from Yugoslavia and Turkey. When Gastarbeiter first began arriving, many settled into 1425 barracks provided for them by their employers. Temporary housing sufficed so long as this population viewed its stay in Germany as transitory, but contracts were extended, families brought over and immigrants wanting to establish homes moved out into the general housing market. This was particularly the case after the Anwerbstop (recruitment stop) in 1973 when the worker recruitment programmes ended but foreign workers continued to be allowed to bring their families over to Germany. Like immigrants everywhere, Gastarbeiter moved into low-quality housing no longer acceptable to most of the German population. This tended to be in unrenovated, Altbau (pre-World War I) housing stock in central-city areas and in working-class housing near factory sites. Many of the units inhabited by Gastarbeiter families were coal heated, and toilet and bathing facilities were communal (Drever and Clark, 2002). Landlords often found it advantageous to rent units about to undergo urban renewal to non-citizens with little legal protection, who could be vacated at short notice (Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik, 1977). German policy-makers viewed with alarm the growing concentrations of immigrants resulting from the combination of forces pushing migrants into a limited portion of the housing market. During the early 1970s, the BDA or Confederation of German Employers' Associations voiced its concern that a 'distinct underclass' was developing in the 'foreigner ghettos' (Elsner and Lehmann, 1988, p. 252). In contrast to the US, where immigrants have contended with a largely private housing market and little in the way of government control over their settlement patterns, the German state attempted to disperse the minority populations through direct intervention. A two-tiered system of quotas, enforced by the German requirement that all households must register their whereabouts with the local government (Einwohnermel- dung), was enacted in 1975. At the upper tier, cities with a 'foreign' population of more than 12 per cent could elect to ban the further settlement of foreign nationals. This was justified on the basis that social services in these areas were 'overburdened' (Rist 1978). The lower tier of the quota system was at the neighbourhood level in areas such as Kreuzberg, Neukoeln and Wedding in Berlin. The concerns driving the implementation of the quota system at this lower level were worries about the possibilities for future urban unrest, driven by class as well as racial schisms. Despite these measures, immigrants continued to move into neighbourhoods already containing large concentrations of 'foreigners'. Rist (1978) points out that part of the reason for this was that half of all foreigners resident in Germany were exempted from the quotas. Immigrants not subject to the quotas included persons resident in Germany for five or more continuous years, those who had married Germans and those who were members of the EEC. What the policies did do was impede family reunification and make things more difficult for more recent immigrants, particularly persons from Turkey as they were not permitted to live near family and friends in the banned areas (Rist, 1978). Further, the settlement bans limited labour mobility because migrants could not legally take advantage of job opportunities where they were in effect. A number of researchers (Arin, 1991; Leitner, 1987; Rist, 1978) have voiced the sentiment that the policies only addressed the superficial manifestations of inequality as opposed to the underlying causes. They argue that the policies, instead of furthering integration, have led to greater isolation from social networks, illegality and further marginalisation of the minority population. Would-be migrants often had only two alternatives: live illegally in banned cities or neighbourhoods making it difficult to obtain a bank account, register children for school etc., or be separated from friends and family who could provide housing and job information as well as emotional support. All of the settlement bans were lifted by 1989, yet desegregation measures have continued to be implemented on a more informal basis. For example, social housing units, required to allocate a certain percentage of their units to foreigners, often use that per- 1426 centage as a cap above which they accept no additional foreign households. Wohungs- baugesellschaften (housing associations) informally limit the number of families of foreign origin they will accept so that their property continues to remain desirable to Germans (Eichener, 1988; Goddecke-Stell- mann, 1994). An additional force that discouraged the spatial concentration of the Gastarbeiter is Germany's heterogeneous housing stock. Unlike in America, where zoning has created neighbourhoods that are highly homogeneous in housing unit size, quality and af- fordability, Germany's housing stock is much more heterogeneous (O'Loughlin, 1987). Because the renovation of older building stock increases its value dramatically, it is not uncommon for families living in adjacent buildings to pay vastly different amounts for their housing. Minority concentrations have therefore arisen to a greater extent at the building as opposed to the neighbourhood level. Between 1988 and 1996, 2.3 million Aussiedler immigrated to Germany.6 Because access to German citizenship is based primarily on ancestry as opposed to country of residence, these newcomers were accorded the full rights of German citizens. In addition, they had access to language courses and occupational training programmes as well as subsidised housing (Seifert 1996).7 Because these migrants had access to social housing, their settlement patterns differed significantly from the Gastarbeiter before them who competed for housing primarily in the private market (Haul3ermann and Kap- phan, 2000). In sum, minorities in Germany are relatively dispersed. The literature repeatedly states that ethnic neighbourhoods in Germany cannot be considered ghettos on the basis of both indexes of dissimilarity and the fact that raw percentages of minorities in German neighbourhoods rarely approximate anything like the more segregated US neighbourhoods (O'Loughlin, 1987; Mustard and de Winter, 1998; Kemper, 1998). However, the fear that 'American-style' ghettos may indeed be developing in Germany's more segregated neighbourhoods haunts German policy-makers and is played upon by the German media (Mustard and de Winter 1998). This article investigates whether or not some of the negative social dynamics identified by research on minority neighbourhoods in America are present within Ger- many's ethnic neighbourhoods. It also explores possible positive consequences of living within these spaces. Analysis of Minority Neighbourhoods Data The German Socio-economic Panel (GSOEP) is a rich source of information on a wide array of socioeconomic characteristics of approximately 6000 randomly sampled households in Germany. The panel lends itself well to the analysis of Germany's immigrants as they are oversampled in the GSOEP (Wagner et al., 1993). Initially, in 1984, 1393 households of Turkish, Yugoslavian, Greek, Spanish and Italian origin were included in the sample. In 1994/95, a sample of 522 households who moved from abroad to Germany after 1984 was added. These households include a large number of immigrants of German descent (Aussiedler) as well as persons from all over the world, including the former guestworker countries. As a result, the immigrant sample within the GSOEP captures a broad spectrum of immigrant experiences within Germany. Sampling weights, calculated by the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW), are used to adjust for panel attrition and sample bias. It should be noted, however, that portions of the immigrant population, such as illegal immigrants and immigrants living in homes for asylum-seekers are not included in the sample. The analysis makes use of the recently released zip-code information available to researchers working within the German Institute for Economic Research.8 Having access to the zip codes makes it possible to link households in the GSOEP to information 1427 about the population within each household's zip-code area. In this analysis, GSOEP households were matched with zip-code-level information on national make-up and income. The data for these two variables were obtained from city statistical offices for Germany's 20 largest cities9 and from Infas GEOdaten,10 a company specialising in micromarketing data. Ethnic and Neighbourhood Variables The analysis population is 'persons of foreign origin' and in this population I am able to include persons who arrived in Germany after 1950, those who do not have German citizenship and those under 16 whose parents immigrated after 1950. I limited the sample to persons living in western Germany as few immigrant neighbourhoods exist in the formerly communist, eastern portion of the country. Although the analysis concentrates on persons of foreign origin generally, I pay closer attention to two sub-populations. First, I distinguish between persons of Turkish origin and all other groups. The reasoning for this is two-fold. The literature indicates that Turks have historically been the most disadvantaged nationality group within Germany (Munz et al., 1997). Further, Turks are the largest minority group in Germany and therefore their level of well-being has a pronounced effect upon German society as a whole. The second ethnic sub-population singled out in the analysis is the Aussiedler. Because this population has access to better services and housing by virtue of their German citizenship, combined with a sense of German identity stemming from their ancestry, their patterns of integration vary substantially from those of the guestworker population. In the analysis, this population was identified as those persons whose country of origin was in the former Soviet Union and who were currently in possession of German citizenship.ll As previously mentioned, neighbourhood boundaries are defined at the scale of the zip code. In total, there are about 7000 zip codes in all of Germany, 250 in all of Berlin and 8 in Kreuzberg. One of the advantages of using zip-code boundaries is that they correspond very closely to neighbourhood boundaries; so much so that some neighbourhoods in Berlin are even known by the last two digits of their zip code. Zip-code areas generally contain around 10 000 persons. I use the percentage of 'foreign' persons living in a zip-code area to create a binary variable ethnic neighbourhood/not an ethnic neighbourhood for each zip code in Germany. Although this means that neighbourhoods where different nationality groups are overrepresented will be combined into one category, this is a justifiable division in Germany's case. The persons defined as migrants for the purposes of this study arrived during roughly the same historical era, were mostly either guestworkers or family members of guestworkers and they generally came from fairly similar socioeconomic backgrounds. Neighbourhood demographic data were obtained from city statistical offices for the 20 largest German cities and, for less urbanised areas, data were purchased from Infas GEOdaten. The cutoff level at which a zip-code area was determined to be an area of ethnic concentration was made with the help of subjective data from the GSOEP (see Figure 1). The GSOEP sample was broken down by percentage of non-citizens in an individual's s neighbourhood. Then, the percentage of each group stating that 'many' foreigners lived in their neighbourhood (as opposed to 'a few' or 'none', with those saying 'don't know' removed) was calculated and then broken down by German and foreign origin. Because about 90 per cent of persons of foreign origin and 65 per cent of Germans living in neighbourhoods between 25 per cent and 30 per cent felt that they were living in neighbourhoods with 'many foreigners', 25 per cent foreign seemed the best point at which to define an area as an ethnic neighbourhood. To have made the cutoff at 20 per cent would clearly not have made sense given that non-citizens make up 28 per cent, 23 per cent and 24 per cent of the populations of Frankfurt, Munich and Stuttgart respectively. Had the 1428 Figure 1. Perceived vs actual number of non-citizens in neighbourhood. cutoff point been made at a percentage higher than 25 per cent, sample sizes would have become prohibitively small.12 Because there is considerable debate in the literature as to whether the disadvantages experienced by persons living in minority concentrations are due to race or income (see, for example, HauBermann et al., 2000, pp. 190-191), a binary variable identifying zip-code areas as either low-income/not-low- income was created. The variable was derived from zip-code data on mean purchasing power produced by Infas GEOdaten. The numerical data were divided by region, ranked and then the bottom 15 per cent of those neighbourhoods were designated as 'poor'. A relative as opposed to absolute measure of poverty was chosen because there are strong regional variations in purchasing power such that lower-middle-income neighbourhoods in Berlin are on par with lower-income neighbourhoods in Frankfurt. Neighbourhoods were also classified as urban, suburban or non-urban. Suburban areas contain a heterogeneous population in Germany because this is where one finds both single-family homes and large housing estates. The breakdown was made by designating neighbourhoods in Germany's 20 largest cities as either urban or suburban and the division between these two categories was made by including areas considered part of the Innenstadt (inner city) as urban and all other parts of the city as suburban. In the analysis, I also include a number of socioeconomic and demographic variables to control for factors other than neighbourhood effects that have been shown to influencing housing access. I included net household income as this affects access to quality housing and past research has found a connection between income and feelings of belonging (Barlow et al., 2000). The log of income was used because-for example, an additional 100 DM per month has a much greater effect on the well-being of a family currently netting only 1500 DM per month as opposed to one that is already netting 5000 DM. Household size was incorporated because past research indicates that larger households have a more difficult time finding housing in Germany (Frick, 1995). Education serves as a proxy for class while tenure is used as a proxy for wealth, important because it reflects the ability to buy into better neighbourhoods. Finally, the research controls for era of migration to Germany by comparing those who arrived during 1974-89 (the post Anwerbstop (recruitment stop), pre post-So- viet-era migrants), those who arrived after 1989 and persons without German citizenship born in Germany with those who arrived between 1950 and 1973 during the guestworker recruitment phase. The analysis relies in most cases on subjective evaluations of neighbourhood quality, degree of contact with 'native Germans' and extent to which culture is practised. The analysis therefore privileges minorities' own perception of their situation as opposed to external valuations thereof. The argument could be made that minorities may refrain 1429 Figure 2. National make-up of persons of foreign origin living in and outside of neighbourhoods that are 25 per cent or more 'foreign'. from being critical of their own living conditions because they are habituated to them. Four counter points can be raised though. First, minorities within ethnic neighbourhoods in German cities are not as isolated as their ethnic counterparts in the US. They are not as segregated, nor does the bulk of the minority population live within an ethnic neighbourhood. Minorities in Germany are therefore likely to be fairly aware of and sensitive to intraurban differences in living conditions. Secondly, living conditions vary greatly within neighbourhoods in Germany. Up-scale condominiums line the canals in Kreuzberg, and Germany's most segregated neighbourhood near the central train station in Frankfurt borders on the city's financial district. Thirdly, it is much more difficult to find German than US data on neighbourhood quality and asking panel participants themselves is one way to accommodate this. Finally, minorities living within ethnic neighbourhoods do perceive their standard of living to be significantly lower, indicating that they are not satisfied with their neighbourhoods even if they are the most socially comfortable places for them to live. Analysis and Results The analysis proceeds in two stages. Before formal tests of the hypotheses regarding the outcomes associated with living in a minority neighbourhood, summary statistics are provided for the variables that will be used as controls in the analysis. In many cases, the distribution of these variables reveals important differences between the ethnic populations living in and outside minority neighbourhoods. These differences in turn underline the necessity of controlling for these factors when attempting a better understanding of neighbourhood effects. Graphs of the population make-up of minorities living within and outside ethnic neighbourhoods in Figure 2 indicate that persons of Turkish origin are the ethnic group most likely to be living in ethnic neighbourhoods and that these are largely Turkish spaces in Germany. However, persons from countries where the majority of the population is of west European origin made up similar proportions of the population inside and outside ethnic concentrations. The literature indicates that this is primarily because foreign business persons without family prefer to live in central-city locations near their work which also tend to be areas of ethnic concentration (Glebe, 1997). Finally, these results are significant for the analysis because they indicate that certain ethnic groups are much more likely to be located in ethnic neighbourhoods, thus necessitating the need to separate ethnic group effects from neighbourhood effects. According to Table 1, recent arrivals actu- 1430 Table 1. Era of arrival for persons of foreign origin living in and outside neighbourhoods that are 25 per cent or more 'foreign' (percentages) a Includes citizens of other countries born in Germany and persons under 16 whose parents did not originate from Germany. ally make up a greater proportion of the population living outside non-citizen concentrations than inside. This is probably due in part to the greater ethnic and economic diversity of new immigrants, to a shift in the location of vacancies within the housing market and to the fact that one of the largest immigrant groups of 1990s, Aussiedler, were entitled to the same housing assistance available to long-standing German citizens. The summary statistics in Table 2 for education and unemployment measures indicate that, although persons of foreign origin living within ethnic concentrations appear on average to be slightly less educated, the differences between the two populations are not statistically significant. This is important because it means one of the prime contributors to negative, self-reinforcing behaviour patterns, a high unemployment rate, does not appear to be more prevalent among those living within ethnic neighbourhoods. However, there is a large and significant income difference between the two populations. The net household income difference can probably largely be explained by the greater labour force participation rates of women living outside concentrations. Tests of the Hypothesis for Neighbourhood Effects The summary statistics reveal that the minority populations living in and outside ethnic neighbourhoods differ with respect to their income levels, ethnic make-up and era of arrival in Germany. In light of this fact, it is obvious that any further comparison of measures associated with integration by neighbourhood make-up could be confounded by factors such as the high percentage of Turkish persons and weaker socioeconomic position of those living there. Logistic regression is therefore used strategically to distil minority neighbourhood effects from a range of factors which could be driving differences in neighbourhood quality, integration and ties to country of origin culture. The regression analyses are grouped into three sections according to the hypothesis they address and the independent variables shift from analysis to analysis to reflect variations in relevant causal factors. Hypothesis 1: Immigrants living within ethnic neighbourhoods are less satisfied with their surrounding environment than those who do not live in such neighbourhoods The first hypothesis tested is that migrants perceive the quality of their neighbourhood environment to be lower within areas of ethnic concentration. This hypothesis addresses directly the assumption laid out in the ghettoisation literature that living within an ethnic neighbourhood is an obstacle towards achieving a satisfactory standard of living (see Clark, 1965; Massey and Denton, 1993). The analysis examines whether or not living within an ethnic neighbourhood results in perceived isolation from services, generates greater fear of crime and is associated with perceptions of lower housing quality and a lower standard of living, even after income effects are accounted for. In the first set of analyses, perceptions of overall neighbourhood quality are the outcome variables. Neighbourhood location with respect to urban centres, neighbourhood income level and whether or not the neighbourhood is more or less than 25 per cent 'foreign' are the independent variables. Living in a minority neighbourhood has a large and significant influence on neighbourhood 1431 Table 2. T-tests for household income, unemployment and education levels for minorities living in and outside ethnic neighbourhoods a Indicates that differences between the two populations are significant at the 5 per cent level. Source: GSOEP. satisfaction for immigrants (see Table 3). Further, busy central-city neighbourhoods made up of older housing stock seem to be less desirable than less crowded more recently formed suburbs or more rural areas. Satisfaction with access to goods and services appears not to be captured by the broad neighbourhood categories included in the analysis. Further, in contrast to findings for some minority neighbourhoods in the US, persons of foreign origin in ethnic neighbourhoods in Germany are not significantly less satisfied with their access to goods and services; this is probably a reflection of the thriving ethnic economies in many of Ger- many's inner-city ethnic neighbourhoods. And finally, despite the criminal reputation of a number of ethnic neighbourhoods in Germany, residents of ethnic concentrations are no more likely to be concerned about crime. In fact, minorities living within suburban neighbourhoods seem to be particularly concerned about crime. Until recently, minorities and their German socioeconomic counterparts were kept spatially separated by policies that gave citizens preferential access to social housing. However, in recent years, as more German citizens have moved out of social housing, growing numbers of migrants have been allowed to move into the large, socially subsidised housing blocks. The result has been a rise in interethnic tensions as minorities find themselves living amongst one of Germany's least-tolerant populations. The low-income neighbourhood variable was insignificant in all three models here and it continues to be in many of the analyses that follow. One of the reasons for this is the heterogeneity of the German housing stock. Zoning regulations and housing subsidies have limited the spatial concentration of low-income households. Secondly, many lower- income neighbourhoods are located close to city centres and are therefore in close proximity to a wide variety of goods and services. The next set of logistic regression models focuses on the household as opposed to the neighbourhood. This shift in scale requires additional variables to control for personal characteristics that impact access to quality housing (see Table 4). Net family income was therefore brought into the analysis, as was the log of net family income. The Aussiedler variable was included as it separates those immigrants who were given citizen status upon arrival and thus received preferential access to subsidised housing. Historically, larger households have had a more difficult time finding housing in Germany (Frick, 1995) as have Turkish households (Gans, 1987); therefore, variables to identify both these groups were included. Finally, those who have accumulated the financial means to own their own homes have access to a much greater portion of the better-quality housing stock than do renters. Most of the variables one would expect to be associated with domicile satisfaction were indeed significant. However, after controlling for other variables related to domicile satisfaction, living in a segregated neighbourhood no longer had a significant effect on percep- 1432 Table 3. Determinants of neighbourhood quality for persons of foreign origin (odds ratios) a Interpretation of binary variables: if only one of the two values of the binary variable is described in the table, that value is equal to 1 and its opposite is equal to 0; if two values are described, the first is equal to 1 and the second to 0. b STATA uses McFadden's pseudo-r' which is calculated by subtracting from 1 the likelihood that all coefficients, except for the constant are 0 divided by the likelihood of the model. It is not possible to interpret the pseudo-r' in the same way as the r' in linear regression. Generally, pseudo-r' values tend to be lower than their 1-2 counterparts. ** indicates statistical significance at the 5 per cent level. Source: The German Socio-economic Panel. tion of domicile quality. Further, minorities living within ethnic neighbourhoods were not more likely to fear losing their dwelling. This seems to indicate that they are less likely to be concentrated in the generally dilapidated housing about to undergo urban renewal than was the case in the past (see O'Loughlin 1987). However, persons of foreign origin living within segregated neighbourhoods were significantly more likely to feel that their standard of living was being compromised. Hypothesis 2: Immigrants who live within ethnic neighbourhoods are more alienated from Germans and German culture than those who do not live within ethnic neighbourhoods The second research hypothesis is that persons living within ethnic neighbourhoods feel more alienated from German society as a whole than do persons of foreign origin living outside these areas. The analysis reveals a number of very interesting trends (see Table 5). First, after controlling for socio-demographic factors, in none of the models is living within an ethnic neighbourhood significant. Instead, the strongest predictor of cultural distance is whether or not a migrant is of Turkish or ethnic German origin. The perception that living within a minority neighbourhood makes integration more difficult seems at least in part due to the greater concentration of persons of Turkish origin there as opposed to ethnic neighbourhood externalities impeding the integration process. The analysis reveals that once variations in ethnic background are controlled for, residence within an ethnic neighbourhood does not determine degree of isolation from the larger German society. Secondly, the analysis reveals interesting relationships between length of stay and interaction with German society. As one would expect, more recent arrivals tend to feel less German and more discriminated against, while foreign nationals born in Germany are 1433 Table 4. Determinants of satisfaction with standard of living for persons of foreign origin (odds ratios) ** indicates statistical significance at the 5 per cent level. Source: The German Socio-economic Panel. much more likely to speak German well and have visited Germans in the past year than their parents' generation. Recent arrivals, however, are more likely to be planning to remain in Germany than those who arrived during previous decades. As expected, higher levels of education appeared to reduce cultural distance in a number of areas. Personal and neighbourhood income had little effect on interaction with German society, except in the puzzling instance of the log of income having a significant association with reduced identification with German culture Living outside central-city areas where immigrants tend to cluster did not appear to have much of an impact, except that minorities living in suburban areas are more likely to be planning to remain in Germany. This probably reflects the greater likelihood of suburbanites being home-owners. In sum, the hypothesis that living within an ethnic neighbourhood leads persons of migrant origin to feel more alienated from German culture is not tenable. Instead, it is particular ethnic origin, length of stay in Germany and education that are the most significant predictors of cultural alienation. One might counter by arguing that perhaps these findings are the result of ethnic neigh- bourhoods being defined at a relatively low level of minority concentration. Yet residents living in zip codes that are 25 per cent-30 per cent 'foreign' do feel that 'many' non- Germans are living in the area and that these are the country's ethnic spaces. One might then argue that maybe the issue is one of scale and that, if the analysis had been undertaken at the block-group level instead of at the zip-code level, perhaps the neighbourhood effects would have been more pronounced. Yet the neighbourhood heterogeneity one finds at the zip-code level in Germany emerges at the block level as well. As previously mentioned, in Germany, rents and ethnic make-up vary a great deal from building to building-depending upon level of renovation and the Hausmeister's s (building manager's) willingness to take in immigrants. Hypothesis 3: Immigrants who live within ethnic neighbourhoods are more likely to practise their culture than those who do not live within ethnic neighbourhoods. Researchers on both sides of the Atlantic who view ethnic concentrations in a positive light argue that the clustering of co-ethnics 1434 s 0 ~. ~ 0 s & Vj N ~ 's 0 0 '~ f~ 0 CfJ M w >. 0 f~ s ~ M 0 ~. 60 ~. M ~_ g 0 w s 0 ~ 0 w 0 f~ 'S ~ s M Q w s H --4 M > M u (J u ~—: V) U 0 ~ cz -s ~ cz * 8 C) o cz I C) ¡:: ~ !! p () = I? 's .2 oo u z% ~ C oj ¡:: .S 1-1 cz ~ ~, lo , u S~ ~~ I i! I.J * 0 * c~ 1435 Table 6. Determinants of preservation of ethnic traditions for persons of foreign origin (odds ratios) ** indicates statistical significance at the 5 per cent level. Source: GSOEP. aids in the preservation of national traditions. The positive side of segregation is that concentration allows the group to maintain cultural cohesion through spatial concentration. It maintains cultural values; it strengthens social networks; it permits the passing of critical numerical thresholds for institutions and shops. Within the urban sphere, it is possible to maintain group cohesion through spatial concentration (Peach, 1996). Being able to practise one's culture is thought to reinforce self-worth and ease the transition into a new society. Religion is included as a variable because of the importance of religious institutions in maintaining the communal life of ethnic communities (Warner, 1998; Zelinsky, 2001). The analysis reveals, however, that spatial proximity to co-ethnics does not increase the likelihood that a household will make efforts to preserve the culture of their country of origin (see Table 6). Instead, as in the previous analysis, ethnic background is the most consistent predictor of preservation of cultural traditions. Turks are much more likely than other immigrant groups to practise their religion and culture and Aussiedler are much less likely. Surprisingly, era of arrival is not a strong predictor; however, generation is. Further, although income is not a significant predictor of cultural distance from country of origin, education is. Distance from central-city areas-and therefore reduced access to the goods and institutions that make the preservation of traditions easier-did not have a significant impact. The third hypothesis, that immigrants who live within ethnic neighbourhoods are more likely to preserve the culture of their country of origin than those who do not live in these spaces, is therefore untenable. Neighbourhood-level proximity to co-ethnics does not seem to be correlated with the likelihood of eating food, listening to music or reading 1436 newspapers from one's country of origin. Further, living within an ethnic neighbourhood is not associated with a deeper involvement in one's religion. The findings suggest that it may be necessary to rethink the ways in which ethnic neighbourhoods are assumed to provide a cultural buffer. Discussion The test of the hypothesis that living in an ethnic neighbourhood affects satisfaction with the neighbourhood environment reveals that where minorities in Germany live does matter. Persons of foreign origin living in ethnic neighbourhoods are less satisfied with their standard of living and their neighbourhood more generally. On a more optimistic note, however, minorities living in neighbourhoods that were more than 25 per cent 'foreign' were no more likely to feel isolated from goods and services, to feel concerned about crime or to be living in buildings on the verge of renovation. Further, tests of the second and third hypotheses reveal that minorities living within ethnic neighbourhoods are no more likely to feel isolated from German society or to have a closer connection with the culture of their country of origin. These results suggest that the foundational assumption in both the ghettoisation and ethnic enclave literature-that the ethnic make-up of where one lives plays a determining role in one's social interactions-does not necessarily hold true in all contexts. The analysis results also lend further credence to Burkner's (1987) point that that workplace and school contacts are likely to have a greater impact on one's level of integration and ties to culture of country of origin than one's neighbours. What then do the findings mean for how we should think about ethnic neighbourhoods in Germany? First, the perception that these spaces somehow nurture cultural difference appears to be driven by the fact that Germany's least-integrated minority group has a higher probability of living within these spaces, rather than by the fact that independent dynamics within ethnic neighbourhoods are nurturing difference. Turks in Germany are one of the minority groups most discriminated against in western Europe (Pettigrew, 1998) and the perceptions of this group's alienation are no doubt translated onto and reinforced by the neighbourhoods in which they live. In addition, previous research indicates that minorities tend to occupy some of Germany's most marginal housing (Drever and Clark, 2002). The fact that living within an ethnic neighbourhood further diminishes the standard of living for persons of foreign origin is an issue of serious concern, not only because of quality-of-life issues, but also because of the negative stereotypes among Germans into which it feeds. Policies aimed at improving overall neighbourhood quality in ethnic neighbourhoods would not only make a big difference in the lives of residents of these areas, but would also alter how the rest of society thinks of these spaces. The findings also point to a change in the manner in which space configures ethnic communities. A hundred years ago, one was likely to work, shop and socialise all within the neighbourhood near one's home. Ethnic communities were thus sustained by members living in spatial proximity. In this day and age, ethnic communities are held together by phone cables and public transit systems as much as by residential proximity. An ethnic grocer across town can easily be reached by bus once a week; friends or family members can be called every few days; and important community gatherings can be attended anywhere in the region on occasion. The analysis results seem to confirm this shift and reinforce Zelinsky's point that, increasingly, ethnic groups are forming communities without propinquity in their areas of settlement (Zelinsky and Lee, 1998; Zelinsky, 2001). On a more fundamental level, the results resonate with the work of social theorists who argue that an accurate understanding of the way in which places influence social relations requires that places be con- ceptualised as nodes within transport and communication networks, rather than in terms of purely Cartesian, containerised 1437 space (Massey, 1991; Castells, 2000; Sassen, 2002). However, it is by no means the intention of this paper to argue that ethnic neighbourhoods are not of vital importance to minority communities in Germany. Rather, it seems likely that the rich social infrastructure present within these neighbourhoods is accessible to immigrants living throughout the region as opposed to just those living within the confines of a few blocks. Ethnic communities in Germany are therefore best conceived of as webs that extend across city-regions with nodes in areas of residential concentration, as opposed to entities that rely on residential propinquity to preserve cultural difference. Notes 1. I use the terms 'immigrant', 'minority' and persons of 'foreign origin' interchangeably to refer to the population that migrated to Germany after 1955 and their descendants. 2. Marcuse (1997), Peach (1996) and Heckmann (1998) describe 'ghettos' as spaces where a minority group in a subordinate political and economic position is highly and often involuntarily concentrated. In contrast, they characterise ethnic enclaves as places where minority populations are not the overwhelming majority; location there is voluntary and residing within one of these spaces can be argued to promote the welfare of the inhabitants. 3. The more recent exception here are the Quartiersmanagement programmes that seek to build up networks in disadvantaged German neighbourhoods. 4. Each of Germany's larger cities (with the exception of the 'city-states') has its own statistical office. These offices have more geographically detailed data available than the state statistical offices. 5. Infas GEOdaten is a firm that specialises in producing micro-marketing data. Their data sources include government statistical offices, local authorities, KBA (Federal Motor Transport Authority), marketing research and academic institutes as well surveys conducted by Infas GEOdaten itself. 6. Persons of German descent who until that time had been living in the former Soviet Union and eastern Europe, primarily in Russia, Romania and Kazakhstan. 7. In Germany, the state will heavily subsidise Wohnungsbaugesellschfent (home-building associations) in return for the ability to regulate rent increases and nominate needy families to fill vacancies. 8. Zip codes indicate mail delivery areas. Zip codes were first used in Germany in 1943 in order to direct outgoing mail to one of 20 'Oberpostdirektionen' (upper-level postal management offices). In 1962, a four-digit zip code was introduced that lasted until 1993 when the system was overhauled to incorporate eastern Germany and five-digit zip codes were introduced. The overhaul of the zip-code system also meant that each zip code included fewer people than previously and was often detailed enough for the zip-code to correspond to an individual carrier's route. 9. See note 4. 10. See note 5. 11. I would have liked to have analysed each of the major nationality groups in Germany separately, however, I was restricted by sample size and lack of access to nationality data at the zip-code level. Similarly data were not available from the city statistical offices to look at anything more than percentage foreign as opposed to percentage Turkish at the neighbourhood level. 12. It should be noted that zip-code areas are considerably larger than US census tracts, the source of the bulk of quantitative neighbourhood studies (German zip-code areas contain ∼ 10 000 persons versus ∼ 5000 persons in US census tracts). With increased size comes greater heterogeneity, therefore the blocks nearest an immigrant's home could be considerably more or less diverse. References Arin, C. (1991) The housing market and housing policies for the migrant labor population in West Berlin, in: E. Huttman (Ed.) Urban Housing Segregation of Minorities in Western Europe and the United States pp. 199-214. Durham, NC: Duke Press University. Atkinson, R. and Kintrea, K. (2001) Disentangling area effects: evidence from deprived and non-deprived neighbourhoods, Urban Studies, 38, pp. 2277-2298. Barlow, K., Taylor, D. Lambert, W. (2000) Ethnicity and feeling American, Journal of Psychology, 134, pp. 581-597. Brooks-Gunn, J., Duncan, G., Klebanov, P. and Sealane, N. (1993) Do neighborhoods influence child and adolescent development?, American Journal of Sociology, 99, pp. 353-395. 1438 Buck, N. (2001) Identifying neighbourhood effects on social exclusion, Urban Studies, 38, pp.2251-2275. Buerkner, H.-J. (1987) Die soziale and sozialraemliche Situation tuerkischer Migranten in Goettingen , in: Schriften des Instituts für Entwicklungsforschung, ch. 2. Saarbrücken: Wirtschafts- und Sozialplanung GmbH. Bürkner, H.-J. (1998) Was ist aus der Binnenintegrationsthese Geworden? Uberlegungen zu ihrer Praxisrelevanz und zum Stand der Forschung, in: F.-J. Kemper and P. Cans (Eds) Ethnische Minoritäten in Europa und America-Geographische Perspektiven und empirische Fallstudien, pp.5-16. Berlin: Geographisches Institut der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin. Castells, M. (2000) The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Clark, K. (1965) Dark Ghetto: Dilemmas of Social Power. New York: Harper & Row. Clark, W. (1998) The California CauLdron: Immigration and the Fortunes of Local Communities. New York: The Guilford Press. Drever, A. and Clark, W. (2002) Gaining access to housing in Germany: the foreign minority experience, Urban Studies, 39, pp. 2439-2454. Eichener, V. (1988) Ausländer im Wohnbereich: Theoretische Modelle, empirische Analysen, und politisch-praktische Maßnahmenvorschläge zur Eingliederung einer gesellschaft-lichen Außenseitergruppe. Regensburg : Transfer Verlag. Elsner, L. and Lehmann, J. (1988) AusLandische Arbeiter unter dem deutschen Imperialismus 1900 bis 1985. Berlin: Dietz Verlag . Elwert, G. (1982) Probleme der Auslanderintegration: Gesellschaftliche Integration durch Binnenintegration?, Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpyschologie, 34, pp. 717-731. Esser, H. (1986) Ethnische Kolonien: 'Binnenintegration' oder gesellschaftliche Isolation?, in: J. Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik (Ed.) Segregation und Integration: Die Situation von Arbeitsmigranten im Aufnahmeland, pp. 106-117. Berlin: Forschung Raum und Gesellschaft. Frick, J. (1995) Lebenslagen im Wandel: Determinanten kleinräumlicher Mobilität in West-deutschland. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (2000) Ghettos oder ethnische Kolonien? Entwicklungschancen von Stadtteilen mit hohem Zuwanderanteil. Bonn: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. Friedrichs, J. (1991) Interethnische Strukturen und stadtische Beziehungen , in: H. Esser and J. Friedrichs (Eds) Generation und Identität , pp. 305-320. Opladen : Westdeutscher Verlag. Gans, P. (1987) Intraurban migration of foreigners in Kiel since 1972, in: G. Glebe and J. O'Loughlin (Eds) Foreign Minorities in Continental European Cities, pp. 116-138. Wiesbaden: Steiner-Verlag. Glebe, G. (1997) Statushohe auslandische Migranten in Deutschland , Geographische Rundschau, 49, pp. 406-412. Göddecke-Stellman, J. (1994) Raumliche Implikationen der Zuwanderung von Aussiedlern und Auslandern, Informationen zur Raumentwicklung, 5/6, pp. 373-386. Goldsmith, W. and Blakely, E.J. (1992) Separate Societies: Poverty and Inequality in U.S. Cities. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. Häußermann, H. and Kapphan, A. (2000) Berlin: von der geteilten zur gespaltenen Stadt? Opladen: Leske + Budrich. Häußermann, H., Ipsen, D., Krämer-Badoni, T. et al. (2000) Ausgrenzungsprozesse und die Spaltung der Städte. Opladen: Leske + Budrich . Heckmann, F. (1981) Die Bundesrepublik: Ein Einwanderungsland? Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta. Heckmann, F. (1998) Ethnische Kolonien: Schonraum für integration oder Verstarker der Ausgrenzung?, in: Ghettos oder ethnische Kolonien? Düsseldorf: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung . Hoffman-Nowotny, H.J. and Hondrich, K.O. (1982) Ausländer in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und in der Schweiz. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag. Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik, J. (1977) Gastarbeiter im Sanierungsgebiet. Hamburg: Christians Verlag. Kapphan, A. (1997) Russisches Gewerbe in Berlin, Zuwanderung und Stadtentwickelung , Leviathan Sonderheft, 17, pp. 121-137. Kemper, F.-J. (1998) Restructuring of housing and ethnic segregation: recent developments in Berlin, Urban Studies, 35, pp. 1765-1789. Leitner, H. (1987) Regulating migrants' lives: the dialectic of migrant labor and the contradictions of regulatory and integration policies in the Federal Republic of Germany, in: G. GLEBE and J. O'LoUGHLIN (Eds) Foreign Minorities in Continental European Cities, pp. 71-89. Wiesbaden : Steiner-Verlag. Light, I. and Gold, S. (2000) Ethnic Economies. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Marcuse, P. (1997) The enclave, the citadel, and the ghetto: what has changed in the post-Fordist U.S. city, Urban Affairs Review , 33(2), pp 228-264. Massey, D.B. (1991) A global sense of place, Marxism Today, June, pp. 24-29. Massey, D. and Denton, N. (1989) Hypersegregation in U.S. metropolitan areas: Black and Hispanic segregation along five dimensions, Demography , 26, pp. 373-393. Massey, D. and Denton, N. (1992) Racial identity and the spatial assimilation of Mexicans in the United States, Social Science Research, 21, pp. 235-256. 1439 Massey, D. and Denton, N. (1993) American Apartheid. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Münz, R., Seifert, W. and Ulrich, R. (1997) Zuwanderung nach Deutschland . Frankfurt/ Main: Campus Verlag. Mustard, S. and de Winter, M. (1998) Conditions for spatial segregation: some European perspectives, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 22, pp. 665-673. O'Loughlin, J. (1987) Chicago an der Ruhr or what? Explaining the location of immigrants in European cities, in: G. Glebe and J. O'Loughlin (Eds) Foreign Minorities in Continental European Cities, pp. 52-70. Wiesbaden : Steiner-Verlag Peach, C. (1996) Good segregation, bad segregation, Planning Perspectives, 11, pp. 379-398. Pettigrew, T. (1998) Reactions toward the new minorities of Western Europe, Annual Review of Sociology, 24, pp. 77-103. Portes, A. and Bach, R.L. (1985) Latin Journey: Cuban and Mexican Immigrants in the U.S. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Portes, A. and Jensen, L. (1989) The enclave and the entrants: patterns of ethnic enterprise in Miami before and after Mariel, American Sociological Review, 54, pp. 929-949. Portes, A. and Rumbaut, R. (1996) Immigrant America. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Rist, R. (1978) Guestworkers in Germany: The Prospects for Pluralism . New York: Praeger Publishers . Sanders, J. and Nee, V. (1987) Limits of ethnic solidarity in the enclave economy , American Sociological Review, 52, pp. 745-773. Sanders, J. and Nee, V. (1992) Problems in resolving the enclave economy debate , American Sociological Review, 59, pp. 415-418. Sassen, S. (2002) Global Networks, Linked Cities. New York: Routledge. Seifert, W. (1996) Occupational and social integration of immigrant groups in Germany, New Community, 22, pp. 417-436. Wacquant, L. (1993) Urban outcasts: stigma and division in the black American ghetto and the French urban periphery, International Journal of Urban and Regional Planning, 17, pp. 366-383. Wagner, G. ET AL. (1993) The English language public use file of the German Socio-economic Panel, The Journal of Human Resources , 28, pp. 429-433. Waldinger, R., Aldrich, H., Ward, R. ET AL. (1990) Ethnic Entrepreneurs: Immigrant Business in Industrial Societies. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Warner, S. (1998) Immigration and religious communities in the United States, in: S. Warner and J. Wittner (Eds) Gatherings in Diaspora: Religious Communities and the New Immigrantion, pp. 3-34. Philadelphia, PA : Temple University Press. Warner, W.L. and Srole, L. (1945) The Social Systems of American Ethnic Groups. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Wilson, K. and Portes, A. (1980) Immigrant enclaves: an analysis of the labor market experiences of Cubans in Miami, American Journal of Sociology , 8, pp.135-160. Wright, R. and Ellis, M. (2000) Race, region and the territorial politics of immigration in the US, International Journal of Population Geography, 6, pp. 197-211. Zelinsky, W. (2001) The Enigma of Ethnicity: Another American Dilemma . Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa Press. Zelinsky, W. and Lee, B. (1998) Heterolocalism: an alternative model of the sociospatial behaviour of immigrant ethnic communities, International Journal of Population Geography, 4, pp.281-298. Zhou, M. (1992) Chinatown: The Socioeconomic Potential of an Urban Enclave. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.</meta-value></custom-meta></custom-meta-wrap></article-meta></front><back><notes><p><list list-type="order"><list-item><p>1. I use the terms 'immigrant', 'minority' and persons of 'foreign origin' interchangeably to refer to the population that migrated to Germany after 1955 and their descendants.</p></list-item><list-item><p>2. Marcuse (1997), Peach (1996) and Heckmann (1998) describe 'ghettos' as spaces where a minority group in a subordinate political and economic position is highly and often involuntarily concentrated. In contrast, they characterise ethnic enclaves as places where minority populations are not the overwhelming majority; location there is voluntary and residing within one of these spaces can be argued to promote the welfare of the inhabitants.</p></list-item><list-item><p>3. The more recent exception here are the <italic>Quartiersmanagement</italic> programmes that seek to build up networks in disadvantaged German neighbourhoods.</p></list-item><list-item><p>4. Each of Germany's larger cities (with the exception of the 'city-states') has its own statistical office. These offices have more geographically detailed data available than the state statistical offices.</p></list-item><list-item><p>5. Infas GEOdaten is a firm that specialises in producing micro-marketing data. Their data sources include government statistical offices, local authorities, KBA (Federal Motor Transport Authority), marketing research and academic institutes as well surveys conducted by Infas GEOdaten itself.</p></list-item><list-item><p>6. Persons of German descent who until that time had been living in the former Soviet Union and eastern Europe, primarily in Russia, Romania and Kazakhstan.</p></list-item><list-item><p>7. In Germany, the state will heavily subsidise <italic>Wohnungsbaugesellschfent</italic> (home-building associations) in return for the ability to regulate rent increases and nominate needy families to fill vacancies.</p></list-item><list-item><p>8. Zip codes indicate mail delivery areas. Zip codes were first used in Germany in 1943 in order to direct outgoing mail to one of 20 'Oberpostdirektionen' (upper-level postal management offices). In 1962, a four-digit zip code was introduced that lasted until 1993 when the system was overhauled to incorporate eastern Germany and five-digit zip codes were introduced. The overhaul of the zip-code system also meant that each zip code included fewer people than previously and was often detailed enough for the zip-code to correspond to an individual carrier's route.</p></list-item><list-item><p>9. See note 4.</p></list-item><list-item><p>10. See note 5.</p></list-item><list-item><p>11. I would have liked to have analysed each of the major nationality groups in Germany separately, however, I was restricted by sample size and lack of access to nationality data at the zip-code level. Similarly data were not available from the city statistical offices to look at anything more than percentage foreign as opposed to percentage Turkish at the neighbourhood level.</p></list-item><list-item><p>12. It should be noted that zip-code areas are considerably larger than US census tracts, the source of the bulk of quantitative neighbourhood studies (German zip-code areas contain ∼ 10 000 persons versus ∼ 5000 persons in US census tracts). With increased size comes greater heterogeneity, therefore the blocks nearest an immigrant's home could be considerably more or less diverse.</p></list-item></list></p></notes><ref-list><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Arin, C.</surname></name> (<year>1991</year>) <source>The housing market and housing policies for the migrant labor population in West Berlin</source>, in: <name name-style="western"><surname>E. Huttman</surname></name> (Ed.) <source>Urban Housing Segregation of Minorities in Western Europe and the United States</source> pp. <fpage>199</fpage>-<lpage>214</lpage>. <publisher-loc>Durham, NC</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Duke Press</publisher-name> University.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Atkinson, R.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Kintrea, K.</surname></name> (<year>2001</year>) <article-title>Disentangling area effects: evidence from deprived and non-deprived neighbourhoods, Urban</article-title><source>Studies</source>, <volume>38</volume>, pp. <fpage>2277</fpage>-<lpage>2298</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Barlow, K.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Taylor, D.</surname></name><name name-style="western"><surname>Lambert, W.</surname></name> (<year>2000</year>) <article-title>Ethnicity and feeling American</article-title>, <source>Journal of Psychology</source>, <volume>134</volume>, pp. <fpage>581</fpage>-<lpage>597</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Brooks-Gunn, J.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Duncan, G.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Klebanov, P.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Sealane, N.</surname></name> (<year>1993</year>) <article-title>Do neighborhoods influence child and adolescent development?</article-title>, <source>American Journal of Sociology</source>, <volume>99</volume>, pp. <fpage>353</fpage>-<lpage>395</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Buck, N.</surname></name> (<year>2001</year>) <article-title>Identifying neighbourhood effects on social exclusion, Urban</article-title><source>Studies</source>, <volume>38</volume>, pp.<fpage>2251</fpage>-<lpage>2275</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Buerkner, H.-J.</surname></name> (<year>1987</year>) <source>Die soziale and sozialraemliche Situation tuerkischer Migranten in Goettingen</source> , in: <source>Schriften des Instituts für Entwicklungsforschung, ch. 2</source>. <publisher-loc>Saarbrücken</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Wirtschafts- und Sozialplanung GmbH</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Bürkner, H.-J.</surname></name> (<year>1998</year>) <source>Was ist aus der Binnenintegrationsthese Geworden? Uberlegungen zu ihrer Praxisrelevanz und zum Stand der Forschung</source>, in: <name name-style="western"><surname>F.-J. Kemper</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>P. Cans</surname></name> (Eds) <source>Ethnische Minoritäten in Europa und America-Geographische Perspektiven und empirische Fallstudien</source>, pp.<fpage>5</fpage>-<lpage>16</lpage>. <publisher-loc>Berlin</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Geographisches Institut</publisher-name> der Humboldt-Universitat zu <publisher-loc>Berlin</publisher-loc>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Castells, M.</surname></name> (<year>2000</year>) <source>The Rise of the Network Society</source>. <publisher-loc>Oxford</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Blackwell Publishers</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Clark, K.</surname></name> (<year>1965</year>) <source>Dark</source><publisher-loc>Ghetto</publisher-loc>: Dilemmas of Social Power. <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Harper & Row</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Clark, W.</surname></name> (<year>1998</year>) <source>The California CauLdron: Immigration and the Fortunes of Local Communities</source>. <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>The Guilford Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Drever, A.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Clark, W.</surname></name> (<year>2002</year>) <article-title>Gaining access to housing in Germany: the foreign minority experience, Urban</article-title><source>Studies</source>, <volume>39</volume>, pp. <fpage>2439</fpage>-<lpage>2454</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Eichener, V.</surname></name> (<year>1988</year>) <source>Ausländer im Wohnbereich: Theoretische Modelle, empirische Analysen, und politisch-praktische Maßnahmenvorschläge zur Eingliederung einer gesellschaft-lichen Außenseitergruppe</source>. <publisher-loc>Regensburg</publisher-loc> : Transfer <publisher-name>Verlag</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Elsner, L.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Lehmann, J.</surname></name> (<year>1988</year>) <source>AusLandische Arbeiter unter dem deutschen Imperialismus 1900 bis 1985</source>. <publisher-loc>Berlin</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Dietz Verlag</publisher-name> .</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Elwert, G.</surname></name> (<year>1982</year>) <article-title>Probleme der Auslanderintegration: Gesellschaftliche Integration durch Binnenintegration?</article-title>, <source>Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpyschologie</source>, <volume>34</volume>, pp. <fpage>717</fpage>-<lpage>731</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Esser, H.</surname></name> (<year>1986</year>) <source>Ethnische Kolonien: 'Binnenintegration' oder gesellschaftliche Isolation?</source>, in: <name name-style="western"><surname>J. Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik</surname></name> (Ed.) <source>Segregation und Integration: Die Situation von Arbeitsmigranten im Aufnahmeland</source>, pp. <fpage>106</fpage>-<lpage>117</lpage>. <publisher-loc>Berlin</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Forschung Raum und Gesellschaft</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Frick, J.</surname></name> (<year>1995</year>) <source>Lebenslagen im Wandel: Determinanten kleinräumlicher Mobilität in West-deutschland</source>. <publisher-loc>Frankfurt</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Campus Verlag</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Friedrich Ebert Stiftung</surname></name> (<year>2000</year>) <source>Ghettos oder ethnische Kolonien? Entwicklungschancen von Stadtteilen mit hohem Zuwanderanteil</source>. <publisher-loc>Bonn</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Friedrich Ebert Stiftung</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Friedrichs, J.</surname></name> (<year>1991</year>) <source>Interethnische Strukturen und stadtische Beziehungen</source> , in: <name name-style="western"><surname>H. Esser</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>J. Friedrichs</surname></name> (Eds) <source>Generation und Identität</source> , pp. <fpage>305</fpage>-<lpage>320</lpage>. <publisher-loc>Opladen</publisher-loc> : <publisher-name>Westdeutscher Verlag</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Gans, P.</surname></name> (<year>1987</year>) <source>Intraurban migration of foreigners in Kiel since 1972</source>, in: <name name-style="western"><surname>G. Glebe</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>J. O'Loughlin</surname></name> (Eds) <source>Foreign Minorities in Continental European Cities</source>, pp. <fpage>116</fpage>-<lpage>138</lpage>. <publisher-loc>Wiesbaden</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Steiner-Verlag</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Glebe, G.</surname></name> (<year>1997</year>) <article-title>Statushohe auslandische Migranten in Deutschland</article-title> , <source>Geographische Rundschau</source>, <volume>49</volume>, pp. <fpage>406</fpage>-<lpage>412</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Göddecke-Stellman, J.</surname></name> (<year>1994</year>) <article-title>Raumliche Implikationen der Zuwanderung von Aussiedlern und Auslandern</article-title>, <source>Informationen zur Raumentwicklung</source>, <volume>5</volume>/<volume>6</volume>, pp. <fpage>373</fpage>-<lpage>386</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Goldsmith, W.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Blakely, E.J.</surname></name> (<year>1992</year>) Separate <source>Societies: Poverty and Inequality in U.S. Cities</source>. <publisher-loc>Philadelphia, PA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Temple University Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Häußermann, H.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Kapphan, A.</surname></name> (<year>2000</year>) <source>Berlin: von der geteilten zur gespaltenen Stadt?</source><publisher-loc>Opladen</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Leske + Budrich</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Häußermann, H.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Ipsen, D.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Krämer-Badoni, T.</surname></name> et al. (<year>2000</year>) <source>Ausgrenzungsprozesse und die Spaltung der Städte</source>. <publisher-loc>Opladen</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Leske + Budrich</publisher-name> .</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Heckmann, F.</surname></name> (<year>1981</year>) <source>Die Bundesrepublik: Ein Einwanderungsland?</source><publisher-loc>Stuttgart</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Klett-Cotta</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Heckmann, F.</surname></name> (<year>1998</year>) <source>Ethnische Kolonien: Schonraum für integration oder Verstarker der Ausgrenzung?</source>, in: <source>Ghettos oder ethnische Kolonien?</source><publisher-loc>Düsseldorf</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Friedrich Ebert Stiftung</publisher-name> .</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hoffman-Nowotny, H.J.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Hondrich, K.O.</surname></name> (<year>1982</year>) <source>Ausländer in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und in der Schweiz</source>. <publisher-loc>Frankfurt</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Campus Verlag</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik, J.</surname></name> (<year>1977</year>) <source>Gastarbeiter im Sanierungsgebiet</source>. <publisher-loc>Hamburg</publisher-loc>: Christians <publisher-name>Verlag</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kapphan, A.</surname></name> (<year>1997</year>) <article-title>Russisches Gewerbe in Berlin, Zuwanderung und Stadtentwickelung</article-title> , <source>Leviathan</source><publisher-loc>Sonderheft</publisher-loc>, <volume>17</volume>, pp. <fpage>121</fpage>-<lpage>137</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kemper, F.-J.</surname></name> (<year>1998</year>) <article-title>Restructuring of housing and ethnic segregation: recent developments in Berlin, Urban</article-title><source>Studies</source>, <volume>35</volume>, pp. <fpage>1765</fpage>-<lpage>1789</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Leitner, H.</surname></name> (<year>1987</year>) <source>Regulating migrants' lives: the dialectic of migrant labor and the contradictions of regulatory and integration policies in the Federal Republic of Germany</source>, in: <source>G. GLEBE and J. O'LoUGHLIN (Eds) Foreign Minorities in Continental European Cities</source>, pp. <fpage>71</fpage>-<lpage>89</lpage>. <publisher-loc>Wiesbaden</publisher-loc> : Steiner-<publisher-name>Verlag</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Light, I.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Gold, S.</surname></name> (<year>2000</year>) <source>Ethnic Economies</source>. <publisher-loc>San Diego, CA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Academic Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Marcuse, P.</surname></name> (<year>1997</year>) <article-title>The enclave, the citadel, and the ghetto: what has changed in the post-Fordist U.S. city</article-title>, <source>Urban Affairs Review</source> , <volume>33</volume>(<issue>2</issue>), pp <fpage>228</fpage>-<lpage>264</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Massey, D.B.</surname></name> (<year>1991</year>) <article-title>A global sense of place</article-title>, <source>Marxism Today</source>, June, pp. <fpage>24</fpage>-<lpage>29</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Massey, D.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Denton, N.</surname></name> (<year>1989</year>) <article-title>Hypersegregation in U.S. metropolitan areas: Black and Hispanic segregation along five dimensions</article-title>, <source>Demography</source> , <volume>26</volume>, pp. <fpage>373</fpage>-<lpage>393</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Massey, D.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Denton, N.</surname></name> (<year>1992</year>) <article-title>Racial identity and the spatial assimilation of Mexicans in the United States</article-title>, <source>Social Science Research</source>, <volume>21</volume>, pp. <fpage>235</fpage>-<lpage>256</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Massey, D.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Denton, N.</surname></name> (<year>1993</year>) <source>American Apartheid</source>. <publisher-loc>Cambridge, MA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Harvard University Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Münz, R.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Seifert, W.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Ulrich, R.</surname></name> (<year>1997</year>) <source>Zuwanderung nach</source><publisher-loc>Deutschland</publisher-loc> . <publisher-loc>Frankfurt/ Main</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Campus Verlag</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Mustard, S.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>de Winter, M.</surname></name> (<year>1998</year>) <article-title>Conditions for spatial segregation: some European perspectives</article-title>, <source>International Journal of Urban and Regional Research</source>, <volume>22</volume>, pp. <fpage>665</fpage>-<lpage>673</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>O'Loughlin, J.</surname></name> (<year>1987</year>) <source>Chicago an der Ruhr or what? Explaining the location of immigrants in European cities</source>, in: <name name-style="western"><surname>G. Glebe</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>J. O'Loughlin</surname></name> (Eds) <source>Foreign Minorities in Continental European Cities</source>, pp. <fpage>52</fpage>-<lpage>70</lpage>. <publisher-loc>Wiesbaden</publisher-loc> : <publisher-name>Steiner-Verlag</publisher-name></citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Peach, C.</surname></name> (<year>1996</year>) <article-title>Good segregation, bad segregation</article-title>, <source>Planning Perspectives</source>, <volume>11</volume>, pp. <fpage>379</fpage>-<lpage>398</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Pettigrew, T.</surname></name> (<year>1998</year>) <article-title>Reactions toward the new minorities of Western Europe</article-title>, <source>Annual Review of Sociology</source>, <volume>24</volume>, pp. <fpage>77</fpage>-<lpage>103</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Portes, A.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Bach, R.L.</surname></name> (<year>1985</year>) <source>Latin Journey: Cuban and Mexican Immigrants in the U.S</source>. <publisher-loc>Berkeley, CA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>University of California Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Portes, A.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Jensen, L.</surname></name> (<year>1989</year>) <article-title>The enclave and the entrants: patterns of ethnic enterprise in Miami before and after Mariel</article-title>, <source>American Sociological Review</source>, <volume>54</volume>, pp. <fpage>929</fpage>-<lpage>949</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Portes, A.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Rumbaut, R.</surname></name> (<year>1996</year>) <source>Immigrant America</source>. <publisher-loc>Berkeley, CA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>University of California Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Rist, R.</surname></name> (<year>1978</year>) <source>Guestworkers in Germany: The Prospects for Pluralism</source> . <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Praeger Publishers</publisher-name> .</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Sanders, J.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Nee, V.</surname></name> (<year>1987</year>) <article-title>Limits of ethnic solidarity in the enclave economy</article-title> , <source>American Sociological Review</source>, <volume>52</volume>, pp. <fpage>745</fpage>-<lpage>773</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Sanders, J.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Nee, V.</surname></name> (<year>1992</year>) <article-title>Problems in resolving the enclave economy debate</article-title> , <source>American Sociological Review</source>, <volume>59</volume>, pp. <fpage>415</fpage>-<lpage>418</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Sassen, S.</surname></name> (<year>2002</year>) <source>Global Networks, Linked Cities</source>. <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Routledge</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Seifert, W.</surname></name> (<year>1996</year>) <article-title>Occupational and social integration of immigrant groups in Germany</article-title>, <source>New Community</source>, <volume>22</volume>, pp. <fpage>417</fpage>-<lpage>436</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Wacquant, L.</surname></name> (<year>1993</year>) <article-title>Urban outcasts: stigma and division in the black American ghetto and the French urban periphery, International Journal of Urban and Regional</article-title><source>Planning</source>, <volume>17</volume>, pp. <fpage>366</fpage>-<lpage>383</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Wagner, G.</surname></name> ET AL. (<year>1993</year>) <article-title>The English language public use file of the German Socio-economic Panel</article-title>, <source>The Journal of Human Resources</source> , <volume>28</volume>, pp. <fpage>429</fpage>-<lpage>433</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Waldinger, R.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Aldrich, H.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Ward, R.</surname></name> ET AL. (<year>1990</year>) <source>Ethnic Entrepreneurs: Immigrant Business in Industrial Societies</source>. <publisher-loc>Newbury Park, CA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Sage</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Warner, S.</surname></name> (<year>1998</year>) <source>Immigration and religious communities in the United States</source>, in: <name name-style="western"><surname>S. Warner</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>J. Wittner</surname></name> (Eds) <source>Gatherings in Diaspora: Religious Communities and the New Immigrantion</source>, pp. <fpage>3</fpage>-<lpage>34</lpage>. <publisher-loc>Philadelphia, PA</publisher-loc> : <publisher-name>Temple University Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Warner, W.L.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Srole, L.</surname></name> (<year>1945</year>) <source>The Social Systems of American Ethnic Groups</source>. <publisher-loc>New Haven, CT</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Yale University Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Wilson, K.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Portes, A.</surname></name> (<year>1980</year>) <article-title>Immigrant enclaves: an analysis of the labor market experiences of Cubans in Miami</article-title>, <source>American Journal of Sociology</source> , <volume>8</volume>, pp.<fpage>135</fpage>-<lpage>160</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Wright, R.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Ellis, M.</surname></name> (<year>2000</year>) <article-title>Race, region and the territorial politics of immigration in the US</article-title>, <source>International Journal of Population Geography</source>, <volume>6</volume>, pp. <fpage>197</fpage>-<lpage>211</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Zelinsky, W.</surname></name> (<year>2001</year>) <source>The Enigma of Ethnicity: Another American Dilemma</source> . <publisher-loc>Iowa City, IA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>University of Iowa Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Zelinsky, W.</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Lee, B.</surname></name> (<year>1998</year>) <article-title>Heterolocalism: an alternative model of the sociospatial behaviour of immigrant ethnic communities</article-title>, <source>International Journal of Population Geography</source>, <volume>4</volume>, pp.<fpage>281</fpage>-<lpage>298</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Zhou, M.</surname></name> (<year>1992</year>) <source>Chinatown: The Socioeconomic Potential of an Urban Enclave</source>. <publisher-loc>Philadelphia, PA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Temple University Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref></ref-list></back></article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Separate Spaces, Separate Outcomes? Neighbourhood Impacts on Minorities in Germany</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" lang="en" contentType="CDATA"><title>Separate Spaces, Separate Outcomes? Neighbourhood Impacts on Minorities in Germany</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Anita I.</namePart><namePart type="family">Drever</namePart><affiliation>Department of Geography, University of Tennessee, 304 Burchfiel Building, Knoxville, TN 37996-0925, USA,</affiliation><affiliation>E-mail: adrever@diw.de</affiliation></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article" displayLabel="research-article"></genre><originInfo><publisher>Sage Publications</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Sage UK: London, England</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2004-07</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2004</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">In both the German and US literature on ethnic neighbourhoods, there is considerable debate as to whether living amongst co-ethnics hinders or furthers the integration process for immigrants. Using the detailed data on immigrant integration in the German Socio-economic Panel in combination with zip-code-level data on minority concentration and neighbourhood income levels, the research tests the extent to which ethnic neighbourhoods are economically, socially and/or culturally isolated spaces in Germany. The findings indicate that, although general neighbourhood quality is lower for minorities living within ethnic neighbourhoods, these persons are no more culturally isolated from Germans than their counterparts living outside these areas. Further, minorities living within ethnic neighbourhoods appear no more likely to maintain ties to their country of origin culture than those living outside ethnic neighbourhoods. This suggests that the correlation between social and spatial integration, assumed in much of the immigrant integration literature, requires more careful scrutiny.</abstract><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Urban Studies</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><identifier type="ISSN">0042-0980</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1360-063X</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">USJ</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID-hwp">spusj</identifier><part><date>2004</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>41</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>8</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>1423</start><end>1439</end></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">9DD86430A6594F7D3010ED04171241DE93C5B506</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1080/0042098042000226939</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">10.1080_0042098042000226939</identifier><recordInfo><recordContentSource>SAGE</recordContentSource></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Sarre/explor/MusicSarreV3/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001031 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001031 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Sarre
|area= MusicSarreV3
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:9DD86430A6594F7D3010ED04171241DE93C5B506
|texte= Separate Spaces, Separate Outcomes? Neighbourhood Impacts on Minorities in Germany
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.33. |  |