Social and Ethnic Segregation Amongst the Smallest Hungarian Villages

ISSN 0354-8724 (hard copy) | ISSN 1820-7138 (online) Social and Ethnic Segregation amongst the Smallest Hungarian Villages András BaloghA, Péter BajmócyB*, Zsófia Ilcsikné MakraB Received: February 20, 2018 | Revised: July 04, 2018 | Accepted: July 21, 2018 DOI: 10.5937/gp22-16641 Abstract Social segregation is one of the most important social problems in Central-Eastern Europe not only in urban, but also rural areas. The social segregation usually coexists with ethnic segregation. In West- ern-Europe we can see segregation mainly in towns, but in Eastern-Europe also in villages, usually con- necting with Roma people. In the last decades number of population of small villages dropped dramat- ically and in some regions the most disadvantaged social groups appeared in these villages. Nowadays some of these villages have geographical, social and ethnic disadvantages together. To stop marginalization of people living in poverty is one of the biggest challenges nowadays in Hungary. According to the definition of Hungarian Statistical Office the whole settlement is regarded segregated if it has less than 200 inhabitants, therefore we also determined this limit. These settlements with population be- low 200 were the subject of this study. A complex indicator system was established containing six indicators (educational level, unemployment, comfort level of homes, etc.) These indicators served as the base of cluster analysis using the K-means algorithm resulted in five clusters. The 58 segregated settlements can be found mainly in peripheral areas of Northeastern- and Southwestern-Hungary. The proportion of Roma population is high in most of the segregated settlements. The aim of the paper is to describe the most important social problems of the smallest Hungarian villages, to find the groups of villages with social segregation and marginalization and to find context between marginalization, social and ethnic segregation amongst the tiny Hungarian villages. Keywords: social segregation; ethnic segregation; tiny villages; Hungary; Roma; peripheries; marginalization Introduction Stopping of marginalization of people living in pover- significantly _ since the late 1980’s. During this peri- ty is one of the biggest challenges nowadays in Hun- od the sociologists and geographers picked up on that gary. This also causes significant modification in the coherent crisis zones were formed in some regions of spatial structure of the country and smaller territori- the country due to emerging high-degree and perma- al units besides its many negative social and economic nent unemployment, ceasing of workplaces, impover- consequences. Although there were examples for es- ishment and massive migration of those who are in a tate-like coexistence and physical separation of cer- better social situation. The educational level and eth- tain social groups before the regime change, the spa- nic composition of people also contributed to this ap- tial location of the different social categories changed preciably. The spatial segregation within the different A Eötvös Loránd University, Savaria University Centre, 4 Károlyi Gaspar Square, 9700 Szombathely, Hungary; balogh.andras@sek. elte.hu B Department of Economic and Social Geography, University of Szeged, 2 Egyetem Street, 6722 Szeged, Hungary; bajmocy@ geo.u-szeged.hu, [email protected] * Corresponding author: Péter Bajmócy; e-mail: [email protected] 208 Geographica Pannonica • Volume 22, Issue 3, 208–218 (September 2018) András Balogh, Péter Bajmócy, Zsófia Ilcsikné Makra social status groups is realized not only within the ad- that lost the majority of their population by now. Col- ministrative boundaries (egg.: slumming quarters of lective neighbouring occurrence of such villages result- the cities) of some settlements but the situation ap- ed in formation of regions with multiple disadvantages, plies to the settlement as a whole. It means that settle- primarily in the north-east and south Transdanubian ments become segregated in their entire extent that is parts of the country. These settlements are bordered by fostered by the spatial positions and settlement mor- our own methodology we reveal the social economic phological facilities of the settlements. In unfavoura- reasons leading to their formation. We analyse the cur- ble cases, their close spatial location results in forming rent situation of these settlements and the possibilities bigger coherent disadvantaged regions. for development. We define the concept of segregation The subject of our study is the settlement-level seg- and the place of segregation, possibilities of characteri- regation in other words such small ghetto-like villages zation and outline its story in Hungary. Scope of segregation and place of segregation Segregation is a social phenomenon when the social spaces, even within one settlement. Typical examples distance among different groups becomes spatial dis- of these can be on one hand the housing estates of the tance as well. Segregation consolidates the inequality wealthy, on the other hand the slums. Segregated area of income conditions, infrastructure of the settlement (segregatum) is a relatively new expression to describe and access to the different services (Andorka, 2003; settlements or part of a settlement with inhabitants of Kadét & Varró, 2010; Milanković et al., 2015). Groups a low social status group. that have a stronger status restrict the opportunities Places of segregation are such geographical spaces to free choice of the weaker ones thus damaging _ developed by segregation where marginalized social equal opportunity of the last mentioned sending them groups are concentrated in a separate area. Therefore, to the status of total marginalization (Farwick, 2009; spatial separation is not the reason but the conse- Mező, 2013). The market conditions the first of all the quence of the increasing social differences. There housing market and the labour market, the mobility could be not only disadvantages (there is no social in- processes, the social and economic position, the so- tegration, deepening conflicts, increasing alienation, cial prejudices and discrimination play the main role and accumulation of constraints) but advantages of in the development of segregation (Cséfalvay, 1994; this process such as increased feeling of home (famil- Schönwalder, 2007). One of the most important in- iar rules, familiar micro environment) sense of secu- dicators of social marginalization and spatial segre- rity maintaining the values of the group and increas- gation is the low employment (Siptár & Tésits, 2014). ing group identity. In the social hierarchy the status of an individual or Generally speaking, a place of segregation is a ter- a group is strongly determined by the income or the ritorially separated deteriorated site inhabited mainly lack of it (Berényi, 1997). by the Roma. This pejorative meaning is strengthened Researches of segregation in sociology and ge- by politics and the perspectives of regional develop- ography are above all from a poverty and an ethni- ment and the official statistical methodology as well. cal point of view (Allison, 1978; Duncan & Duncan, According to the second edition of Urban Develop- 1955; Kliček & Lončar, 2016; Liberson, 1963; Taubner ment Handbook issued by the Ministry of National & Taubner, 1965; Steinnes, 1977). But it must be noted Development and Economic Affairs in 2009 delinea- that regarding the income dimension not only pover- tion of areas threatened by segregation can be based ty but material wealth can be resulted in spatial-mu- on one hand on census data in the following way: nicipal segregation of certain social groups. So it is minimum 50% of the working age population does absolutely typical not only for the spatial moving pro- not have regular labor income and the highest com- cess of the low social status inhabitants as opposed to pleted level of education does not exceed grade 8. Ar- the general view (Rácz, 2012). The expression margin- eas threatened by segregation are where this indica- al can be used for people who find themselves outside tor is between 40% and 50% (Rácz, 2012). On the other the mainstream behavioural pattern of society, but we hand, delineation can be based on regular social sup- have to be careful not to use it simply as a synonym for port schemes so that in proportion of those eligible for unfavourable, indigent or being in a disadvantaged support to the number of inhabitants/homes reaches position. Individuals and communities can be hap- double of the settlement average. The area is consid- py despite being far from the mainstream (Giddens, ered to be threatened in case of value 1,7. The Urban 1984; Balogh, 2002.). Looking at their spatial aspects Development Handbook also stipulates that the area all marginal groups can create unique geographical concerned must have at least 50 inhabitants in order Geographica Pannonica • Volume 22, Issue 3, 208–218 (September 2018) 209 Social and Ethnic Segregation amongst the Smallest Hungarian Villages to be treated as a place of segregation (Lennert et. al., thresholds were determined for the different size set- 2014). tlement and part of settlement. For example, an area Places of segregation were delineated in Hungary is considered to be segregated of some part of the dis- based on census data of 2001 using this methodology tricts of the capital city where the employment and by the Hungarian Central Statistical Office. Howev- income-based segregation index is 20% or

Load more