By Quentin Ramond and Gabriel Otero
Why examine the consequences of residential reputations on neighbourhood attachment?
In October 2019, Chile experienced a massive insurrection as thousands of people took to the streets in protest against the neoliberal system established during the military dictatorship (1973-1990) that’s perpetuated vast socioeconomic inequalities. The capital city, Santiago, as well as other major Chilean urban areas emerged as the hot spots of this social unrest, where public spaces became arenas of intense confrontation with the police.
The 2019 uprising is crucially linked to persistent high levels of socioeconomic residential segregation within Chilean cities, only comparable to those of ethnic-racial segregation in US cities. Residential segregation has created stark disparities in access to essential resources (eg, education, healthcare, culture) and economic opportunities between affluent and marginalised neighbourhoods, igniting the protests.
Spatial divides also crucially contribute to shaping contrasting images and representations of places, of which residents have become increasingly aware through their interactions with non-residents, the media, real-estate agents or other institutions. Neighbourhood negative reputations, also referred to as stigma, have significant negative consequences for mental health, labour market opportunities, access to social capital, and residential mobility, among other things. Residents often develop complex reactions to the spatial denigration of their neighbourhood, ranging from strategies of resistance and contestation to attitudes of submission, isolation and even dissimulation.
Moreover, the reputational structure of neighbourhoods extends beyond negativity, encompassing both highly esteemed neighbourhoods and relatively neutral images. Prestigious reputations are particularly interesting because they often signal wealth and exclusiveness that highlight the relevance of specific areas for the privileged. Territorial prestige also facilitates the provision of high-quality services and opportunities, thereby reinforcing class disparities in the urban landscape.
In this study, we argue that residential reputations may also have a significant influence on neighbourhood attachment – the degree to which a resident engages with their neighbourhood. Neighbourhood attachment encompasses several ingredients such as sense of belonging and identification with the neighbourhood, shared norms and values among residents, trust in neighbours, neighbourhood social relationships, local civic membership and solidarity among residents.
Specifically, we ask whether and to what extent do both positive and negative residential reputations affect neighbourhood attachment? Our research was guided by the idea that territorial stigma may erode neighbourhood attachment by fostering feelings of exclusion, frustration, injustice, and even shame and humiliation. Conversely, we would expect that positive reputation may enhance neighbourhood attachment by place of residence becoming a source of pride and a symbolic asset for claiming upper-class status.
The present study
We study this question in the context of Santiago Metropolitan Area, the capital city of Chile. Santiago has nearly seven million residents and has long been characterised by intense segregation and neighbourhood inequalities. We use data from four waves of the Chilean Longitudinal Social Survey (ELSOC, 2016- 2019) carried out by the Centre for Social Conflict and Cohesion Studies (COES). It’s a representative survey of the Chilean urban population aged 18–75. We merge this individual-level data with administrative information on neighbourhoods. Our sample includes 489 individuals who are distributed across 200 neighbourhoods within the Santiago Metropolitan Area.
We use regression analyses which seek to assess the impact of neighbourhood reputation (negative, neutral, and positive) on neighbourhood attachment, including four key dimensions: sense of belonging; neighbourhood relationships; commitment to the common good; and compliance with social rules and norms. To ensure that our analyses properly measure the influence of residential reputations, we control for neighbourhood objective characteristics (eg, social composition, ethnic-racial groups, quality of the built environment, crime) and several individual characteristics such as gender, age and education.
What we found: The damage of stigma, the benefits of prestige
The results indicate that, in general, residential reputations – both negative and positive – significantly affect neighbourhood attachment. Residential stigma hurts the level of attachment to neighbourhoods, while perceived residential prestige improves it. These results are stable after accounting for the influence of neighbourhood objective conditions and individual characteristics.
Yet, it’s crucial to note that residential reputations do not evenly affect every component of neighbourhood attachment. Residential reputations clearly affect the emotional dimension of place attachment and local social relationships. Stigma reduces residents’ sense of identification with the neighbourhood, physical rootedness as well as trust in neighbours and daily sociability, whereas the reverse is true for positive residential reputations. Moreover, people living in a notorious place more frequently declare experiencing norm-violating behaviour in the neighbourhood.
However, residential reputations seem not to enhance or to restrict the emergence of strong ties with neighbours (close relationships) or participation in neighbourhood organisations. One potential reason for these trends is that residents of stigmatised areas may maintain strong connections with neighbours to bring and receive care and support. They may also get involved in local organisations precisely to reverse the negative image attached to their place of residence. Conversely, mutual support and local participation could be less relevant – and less necessary – dimensions of neighbourhood attachment for people living in areas of prestige.
Lessons for research and public policy
Taken together, this study indicates that the long-standing neoliberal urban policies implemented in Santiago de Chile have promoted residential segregation and territorial inequalities that have shaped contrasting residential reputations which, in turn, significantly affect neighbourhood attachment, especially sense of belonging, local sociability and compliance with local social norms.
We believe that these results bear relevance for academic research and public policy. On the one hand, more research is needed to understand the ambivalences and complexities of residents’ experiences when dealing with territorial stigma or created by residential prestige. On the other hand, it becomes clear that positive experiences of resistance to residential stigma cannot be generalised to all deprived areas where residential reputations indeed produce negative effects on place attachment. As such, this study confirms that it’s urgent to reduce residential segregation and territorial inequalities, by implementing inclusive place-based policies that improve the resources and opportunities available in disadvantaged neighbourhoods.
Gabriel Otero is an Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Economics, Government and Communications, Universidad Central de Chile.
Quentin Ramond is an Assistant Professor at the Centre for Economics and Social Policy (CEAS), Universidad Mayor. Both are affiliated researchers to the Centre for Social Conflict and Cohesion Studies (COES).
The complete article has been published in Urban Studies and it is available here: https://tinyurl.com/4nud6nn7
