Coexist but not co-mingle: a new definition of segregation?
The Mayor of New York City ran his campaign exploiting the trope of the “Tale of Two Cities,” calling out the extreme disparity between the wealthy 1-percent and the urban poor. This thinking and perhaps reality is not uncommon in cities across the globe. A recent study was conducted in Hong Kong using cell phone data to track mobility. Similar to NYC, Hong Kong, on the southeastern coast of China, is a densely populated economic hub with an expansive transportation system and high levels of tourism. Through an activity tracking app, geolocations from “70 participants every five minutes throughout the day for seven days” were collected along with self-reported activity logs of 30 minutes or longer interactions at one given location.
The study showed patterns of mobility through a color coded dotted map to indicate where an activity took place. Red shows activities conducted at home, yellow indicates activities at work or school, and green represents all other activities neither at home or work/school. The findings were that: (1) Geographically, the majority of activities were clustered in hubs mainly near the center of the city as well as in some towns in the suburbs and, more interestingly, (2) Majority of activities were conducted neither at home or work/school, as shown in swaths of green throughout the map. In fact, “81 percent of participants recorded no activities in their home neighborhood.”
In addition to tracking mobility, the study also examines interactions by tracking 1,073 moves of participants between neighborhoods. Participants were grouped into three categories: “poor households (the bottom 30 percent), rich households (the top 30 percent), and middle income households (everything in-between).” Neighborhoods were also characterized by their socio-economic status. The study suggests that though Hong Kong residents have high levels of mobility, levels of interaction between people of “different economic status is limited.” Higher-income individuals tend to spend most of their time in wealthier neighborhoods. Lower-income participants, though conducted their daily lives mostly in less-advantaged areas, would also spend time in wealthier neighborhoods, mainly for retail, entertainment and other amenities.
The implications of this study offers another look at the trend of gentrification. Contrary to what may be expected, residents of Hong Kong may venture out to poorer neighborhoods for dining options but are likely to move into those areas in the future. By bringing in socio-economic status and the interactions of people of different income-levels into the conversation complicates the issue and even the definition of segregation in an urban environment. Could a city be considered segregated if its residents coexist but not co-mingle?
This kind of segregation may also impact affordable housing policies, another challenge for global cities. In New York, the DeBlasio administration’s ambitious housing plan utilizes zoning regulations and tax incentives to secure and build more housing options for low-income persons and families. The method is not as nearly as controversial as the decision on where to build. One school of thought finds that having mixed-income units within a new development in a wealthier neighborhood would be a more ideal and equitable housing option. While another would disagree and would encourage development in a less-dense neighborhood in the other-boroughs that can benefit from investment. In both cases, the implications of class and access are undeniable.
http://www.citylab.com/tech/2016/04/cell-phone-data-segregation-mobility-hong-kong/476901/
