1. Housing markets and ethnic segregation in the Nordic countries Hans Skifter Andersen Affiliated professor Danish Building Research Institute at Aalborg University

2. The NODES project about ethnic segregation NODES = Nordic welfare states and the dynamics and effects of ethnic residential segregation Research on causes of ethnic segregation in the Nordic countries and how it is influenced by housing policies and housing markets Financed by the NORFACE research programme on migration Co-operation between 12 researches in four countries 2010-2014

3. Content of the presentation Some conclusions from the research literature on causes of social and especially ethnic segregation Empirical findings on some of the causes from the Nordic countries Discussion in short of the connection between housing policies, housing markets and ethnic segregation A NODES analysis of this connection in the four capital cities

4. Aspects of spatial segregation 1.Different social or ethnic groups are separated from each other in the cities 2.Some neighbourhoods have a high concentration of certain social or ethnic groups 3.Especially concentrations of low income groups and ethnic minorities are for different reasons seen as problematic

5. Causes of segregation and concentration 1.Socio-economic inequality and ethnic/cultural differences Groups with higher income can choose to live in the most attractive places and avoid others – low-income groups can not Different social and ethnic groups might prefer to live close to people that are alike themselves, or avoid other specific groups 2.Inequality among different neighbourhoods in the city (spatial inequality) Differences in housing supply Differences in attractiveness of the physical and social environment, social status, access to services, transportation etc. 3. Segregation and spatial inequality interacts because concentrations of low-income groups and ethnic minorities make these neighbourhoods less attractive

6. Special causes of ethnic segregation and concentration Ethnic minorities have lower incomes. Social segregation produces also ethnic segregation, but studies show no straight-forward connection Immigrants often prefer to rent because they are uncertain about their future limitations on where to live Ethnic minorities have often difficulties in getting access to private renting they move to social housing (in Norway co-operatives) Especially new immigrants prefer to settle nearby an ethnic social network where they can get support they often move into ‘ multi-ethnic neighbourhoods’ But preferences change over time and some ethnic minorities move out again (called spatial assimilation ) Natives move away or avoid moving to multi-ethnic neighbourhoods ( White flight and avoidance )

7. Reduced probability among immigrants for moving into homeownership compared to ‘natives’

8. Development with years of stay in per cent of Non- Western immigrants living in social housing (DK)

9. Number of multi-ethnic neighbourhoods in Denmark with different proportions of Non-Western ethnic minorities Average proportion of Non-Western ethnic minorities = 7.2 % in 2008

10. The development in ethnic concentration Per cent of immigrants from Non-Western countries living in multi- ethnic neighbourhoods

11. Development with duration of stay in Denmark for living in multi-ethnic neighbourhoods for all NW immigrants since 1984 and for newly moved. (increased statistical probability compared to situation at arrival)

12. Four kinds of selective moving behaviour creating and maintaining spatial concentrations of ethnic minorities (multi-ethnic neighbourhoods) White Flight : Natives tend more often to move away from multi-ethnic neighbourhoods White Avoidance : Natives tend to avoid moving to multi- ethnic neighbourhoods Ethnic Attraction : Ethnic minorities tend more often to move into multi-ethnic neighbourhood Ethnic Retention : Ethnic minorities tend less often to move away from multi-ethnic neighbourhoods

13. Size of segregation processes in Denmark depending on ethnic composition of neighbourhood (based on statistical estimations of ‘normal ‘moves)

14. Reasons for leaving neighbourhood Percentage of ‘native’ leavers stating ethnic composition of neighbourhood and schools as important reason

15. Important for choosing neighbourhood Percentage of native movers stating ethnic and social composition of neighbourhood and schools as important for choice

16. The effects of housing markets on segregation Housing market segmentation : Different social and ethnic groups are separated in different housing tenures Spatial segregation of housing tenures : Tenures are separated in different neighbourhoods in the city. Large urban areas with uniform tenures have been created Strong housing market segmentation and strong segregation of tenures results in strong social or ethnic segregation But segregation within housing tenures is also important, especially in homeownership

17. Main features of Nordic housing systems Major social housing sectors in Denmark, Finland and Sweden, small in Norway Social housing in Denmark and Sweden open to all, in Norway and Finland they are reserved for low-income groups Norway and Sweden have large market based co-operative sectors. Norway based on homeownership and have relatively few rented dwellings, mostly in private renting. Private renting and co-operatives in Denmark are under rent control, queues and non-market distribution

18. Immigrants (foreign born) in the four Nordic capital regions 2008 The capital regionsCopenhagenHelsinkiOsloStockholm Population in regions, 1000 inhabitants1.3691.0221.0791.849 Proportion of population born outside the country. per cent11.78.814.321.3 Per cent of population. coming from Eastern Europe1.93.53.03.5 Per cent of population coming from Non-European countries6.83.69.311.1 Non-Western immigrants total8.77.112.314.6

19. Housing markets in Nordic capitals Copen- hagenHelsinkiOslo Stock- holm Distribution of population on tenureper cent Owner-occupied 4257 34 Co-operatives 1632229 Private renting 16 1517 Social housing 2522317 Other 1224 Total 100

20. Non-Western immigrants distributed on housing tenures in the Nordic capital regions Distribution % CopenhagenHelsinkiOsloStockholm Housing tenures Non-Western immigrants Owner-occupied191827 14 Co-operatives8- 30 20 Private renting141625 24 Social/public housing 5862 13 41 Other144 0 Total100 99100 Over-representation Owner-occupied-55-69-52-59 Co-operatives-48-65 37 -31 Private renting -11 4 66 41 Social/public housing 131182 306 141 Other182370 57 Index of tenure segmentation33423032

21. Measures of uneven spatial distribution of different housing tenures across neighbourhoods in the Nordic capitals (Index of segregation). CopenhagenHelsinkiOsloStockholm Owner-occupied single.56.62.32.55 Owner-occupied flats.47.12.39 Co-operatives.50.43.36 Private renting.42.27.21.45 Social/public housing.56.33.35.52 Combined index of tenure segregation.51.23.33.46

22. Illustration of ethnic segregation and concentration : Proportion of Non-Western immigrants in neighbourhoods ordered in deciles after increasing proportion

23. Ethnic segregation in Nordic capitals (Index of dissimilarity)

24. Segregation of Non-Western immigrants, and proportion caused by the housing market ( statistical analyses ) Copen- hagen Hel- sinkiOslo Stock- holm Index of tenure segmentation33423032 Segregation of tenures.51.23.33.46 Segregation : Index of dissimilarity.36.27.40.48 - caused by tenure segmentation and -segregation 48 %70 % 65 % 61 % Other causes 52 %30 %35 %39 %

25. Conclusions on the effects of housing systems for ethnic segregation Nordic Welfare States have important differences in housing policies, which affect the ethnic (and social) segmentation of their housing markets Also the spatial structure of the housing markets differ, to some extent because of differences in urban policies The effect of ethnic segmentation of housing tenures can be overruled by the way tenure composition varies across neighbourhoods, which seems to have a stronger effect Housing policy and housing market have a major influence on the spatial distribution of immigrants and on ethnic segregation, but the effects differ across countries and cities, probably because the extent of social, ethnic and spatial inequality differs