This study examines how socio-spatial inequalities are associated with population concentration and de-concentration processes shaped by residential mobility. The study explores whether the patterns of residential mobility vary in different settlement system contexts. It reviews the cyclical urbanization models and the inequality of opportunities they provide in urban, suburban, and counter-urban contexts for individuals in various life stages. The theoretical models are tested by analysing individual-level data covering the entire populations of Estonia and Lithuania – two countries with similar social but different settlement system contexts. The study utilizes linked individual-level data from the 2011 and 2021 censuses, and harmonized variables in the two countries. The results show that individuals engaging in concentration, suburbanization, or de-concentration have distinct characteristics, with little differences between countries characterized with different settlement systems. While the life-course approach assumes that young people are most likely to urbanize (concentrate), those in family ages shift towards suburbanization, and older individuals tend to counter-urbanize (de-concentrate), our findings challenge these assumptions, demonstrating that young adults have a high likelihood of migration in all three directions. These findings call for more in-depth studies on the interplay between age and migration patterns that would go beyond the life-course approach and delve deeper into the residential decision-making of young people.@en

It has been nearly fifteen years since a large European Union–funded project called RESTATE explored challenges in housing estates throughout several European countries and served as a clearinghouse for the exchange of ideas for counteracting negative trends in large housing estates (van Kempen et al. 2005). Since that time, a series of riots in the Paris banlieues and in the “Million Homes Programme” suburbs in Stockholm have revealed that many problems remain. Major European newspapers, including The Guardian, frequently publish articles about deep social problems in housing estates, the poor image from which they suffer, and dissident groups that reside in them. Families with resources often move away from large housing estates, and housing estates contribute to increasing segregation levels in European cities (Tammaru et al. 2016a). Immigration currently introduces new groups to European cities, and their initial places of settlement are low-cost neighborhoods, often in large housing estates (Wessel 2016). Moreover, new challenges arise, such as the ongoing aging of buildings along with their environments, which necessitates new investments and raises challenges related to sustainability, energy reduction, and aging populations. With many cities operating on austerity budgets and lacking cash to invest in improving housing and neighborhoods, now is a good time to revisit the challenges faced by large housing estates in European cities. This essay presents the key findings of the book Housing Estates in Europe: Poverty, Ethnic Segregation and Policy Challenges, and is structured around ten takeaway messages. These messages convey, on the one hand, that few substantial changes have occurred in large housing estates in Europe since the RESTATE project, but they also carefully clarify some of the strategies for improvement that might help to secure a solid future for the dwellings and inhabitants of Europe’s large housing estates. Findings from past studies including High-Rise Housing in Europe (Turkington et al. 2004) and the RESTATE project (Van Kempen et al. 2005) provide in-depth evidence of the varieties of change in large housing estates in Europe through the mid-2000s. A recent book entitled Socio-Economic Segregation in European Capital Cities (Tammaru et al. 2016b) documents growing levels of segregation across Europe, suggesting an increasing overlap of ethnic and social segregation often to be found in large housing estates. Our current book focuses on the formation and later socio-spatial trajectories of large housing estates in Europe. The long-term growth in social inequalities in Europe, a growing number of immigrants in European cities seeking affordable housing, and the physical aging of apartment buildings form key policy challenges related to large housing estates in Europe. This essay provides comparative city- and metropolitan-level evidence of the origins, trajectories of change, and future prospects of large housing estates. It specifically investigates the actions needed to realistically improve the fortunes of housing estates experiencing downward trends and pathways to enhance life for the residents living in them. This chapter is organized around ten synthesized takeaway messages distilled from the sixteen chapters of the book Housing Estates in Europe: Poverty, Ethnic Segregation and Policy Challenges. @en

This comparative study of socio-economic segregation in European cities, involving researchers from 16 European countries, aims to examine the evolving geography of segregation over a 20-yeartimeframe and provide an up-to-date understanding of residential socio-economic segregation. By utilising three data points and a substantial number of case studies, this study stands out in its ability to offer a comprehensive observation and analysis of the levels and spatial dynamics of residential segregation in Europe. To achieve this, the study addresses the following research questions:

1. What are the current levels of residential socio-economic segregation in European cities? Do levels of segregation continue to increase?
2. How have the patterns of segregation changed over the past 20 years, and are these patterns and their trends of change similar between European cities?
3. What are the key factors contributing to the observed levels and spatial changes of residential segregation in European cities?

The paper includes the following case studies associated with the author teams with in-depth local knowledge and access to data: Amsterdam, Barcelona, Bratislava, Dublin, Helsinki, Lisbon, London, Oslo, Paris, Prague, Riga, Rome, Stockholm, Tallinn, Vilnius and Warsaw. To ensure comparability, researchers adopted a consistent definition of functional urban areas and used small spatial units to analyse segregation levels and spatial patterns, following a pre-established and unified methodology. The empirical analysis draws on census or register-based data, from approximately 2001, 2011, and 2021. Socio-economic groups are distinguished based on occupational status and classified into Top, Middle, and Bottom categories. The study is currently in advanced progress.@en

In 1969 Thomas C. Schelling published his paper “Models of Segregation” and in 1971 he published a follow-up paper introducing “Dynamic Models of Segregation”. Schelling's papers developed the theoretical models of interactive dynamics of individual residential choices, resulting in pronounced patterns of residential segregation at the city level. Even after 50+ years, the topic of residential segregation and sorting remains as relevant as when Schelling published his papers. The two Schelling papers have been cited more than 8000 times together, and have made a strong impact on the residential segregation literature and beyond. In this paper, we examine how Schelling's ideas have impacted empirical research on residential segregation, and thus contributed to a greater understanding of urban processes. We find that few empirical papers explicitly test the Schelling models in residential segregation studies, and there are a growing number of influential papers in the field of segregation that do not reference Schelling. However, the papers by Schelling have served as a source of inspiration for a diverse set of empirical studies, new ways of defining neighbourhoods and developing more comprehensive theories of segregation.

@en