Ethnic Dwelling Segregation in ROSENGÅRD Vezire Shala Rebecca Quainoo
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Hälsa och samhälle 2007-12-27 Ethnic Dwelling Segregation IN ROSENGÅRD Vezire shala Rebecca Quainoo Examensarbete i socialt arbete Malmö högskola 10 p Hälsa och samhälle Socionomprogrammet 205 06 Malmö Dec-2007 0 Preface First, we would like to thank our informants who have helped us out. We also express warm thanks to Aje Carlblom our supervisor for his availability and guidance. Another person whom we want to thank is Lars Lindholm who has read our study and supplied us with meaningful feedback. We also appreciate the efforts of the estate managers and thank them sincerely for their consent to contribute to the study. We have to admit that without the contribution of these people our study would not have been fruitful. 1 Abstract The purpose of this study is to find out why so many immigrants live in Rosengård, Malmö. We are even curious to find out how they experience living within these precincts in the wake of controversial media cover of the area. Our study was prompted by the results of other researchers who have made studies in that particular area. Some arrived at the conclusion that it was due to racism, others claim it was based on stigma, but we want to argue from a different perspective which is the concept of individualistic and collectivistic society/culture. Our result of the study is in general that many choose to settle there of their own volition, but there are even other factors such as economy and space. All informants like living in Rosengård, but two out of five have a different opinion about their future at the place. Key words : Collectivistic, Culture, Immigrants, Individualistic, Integration, Segregation, Stigmatisation 2 Table of Content 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................ 5 2 FORMULATING THE PROBLEM .......................................................... 6 2.1 PURPOSE AND QUESTIONS ............................................................ 6 2.2 CHOICE OF METHOD AND DATA COLLECTING ........................ 7 2.3 SELECTION ........................................................................................... 8 2.4 METHODOLOGICAL REFLECTIONS ............................................ 10 i) Validity ........................................................................................................................................... 10 ii) Reliability .................................................................................................................................... 10 iii) Ethical aspects ....................................................................................................................... 11 3. EARLIER RESEARCH .......................................................................... 11 4. KEY CONCEPTS ................................................................................... 14 i) Immigrants ................................................................................................................................... 14 ii) Segregation ................................................................................................................................ 15 iii) Stigmatisation ......................................................................................................................... 15 iv) Integration ................................................................................................................................. 16 v) Individual Society (culture) ................................................................................................ 16 vi) Collectivist Society (Cultures) ........................................................................................ 17 5. HISTORY ................................................................................................ 18 5.1 The Million Programme .................................................................................................... 19 5.2 Mass media then and now ............................................................................................... 21 5.3 Rosengård then and now .................................................................................................. 21 6. THE INFORMANTS .............................................................................. 23 3 7. INTERVIEW RESULTS ........................................................................ 24 7.1 WHY DOES ONE CHOOSE TO LIVE IN ROSENGÅRD? ........... 25 i) The Social network ................................................................................................................. 25 ii) Economy/space: ....................................................................................................................... 25 iii) The housing market .............................................................................................................. 26 7.2 HOW DOES IT FEEL TO LIVE IN ROSENGÅRD? ...................... 27 i) Welfare/Environment: ............................................................................................................. 27 ii) Mass media ................................................................................................................................ 28 iii) Future prospects .................................................................................................................... 29 8. INTERVIEW ANALYSES ..................................................................... 29 8.1 Individualist and collectivist society/culture ......................................................... 32 9. CONCLUSION AND SUMMARY ........................................................ 34 REFERENCE: .............................................................................................. 37 Internet Source: ............................................................................................................................. 38 4 1 Introduction The purpose of this study is to look into the factual state of ghetto building. We have read a number of other studies about this subject, and we arrived at the conclusion that they were all more or less slanted. It seemed to us that the factual world could not be explained by over simplified statements such as: “people, who live in the ghetto, do it because they like it there,” or because they have their friends there, because they refuse to be integrated and prefer to sit about the slum and dream about old times in the old country. We wanted to find out which was the correct explanation, if any, and so we set out to do something about it. It involved nothing less than doing all over again. Considering the enormity of the task and the little time at our disposal, the result became a compromise. We decided to conduct a series of interviews in an afflicted area, in casu Rosengård in Malmö, and we managed to find five inhabitants willing to contribute to our investigation, plus two estate managers in the same area. Based on these five interviews we tried to put together a picture of the situation although we are aware that any conclusions based on a mere sample of five interviews out of about twenty-two thousand possible ones is very dubious indeed. The analysis of the interviews gathered and the conclusions from the same follow below. 5 2. Formulating the problem In society today, mass media have become part of our everyday lives. We read assorted gossip: how to look, what to eat, how to dress and so on. In general, we read about anything and we are influenced by what we read. To catch our attention we are often presented with huge and dramatic headlines. An example is when Metro wrote, “the whole of Rosengård in flames;” or, about two years ago, Insider, on TV3 had a feature on Rosengård, where it was presented as, “Sweden’s worst ghetto.” After all this media prejudice, people still keep wanting to live in Rosengård, so our question is why? There are many myths about immigrants wanting to live with their compatriots and that it is of their own volition that they make ghettos, but what is actually the truth? In addition, even if it is their own choice and that they do prefer to live amongst their own, why should that be considered a problem? Sweden is supposed to be a multicultural society, meaning that you have the same rights and opportunities, irrespective of cultural and ethnic background (Castles & Miller 2003). The multicultural model assumes that anyone is allowed to maintain his or her religion and culture – in order to strengthen their identity. No matter where you choose to settle, it should not have any adverse effects on your possibilities according to the multicultural ideology. This means everybody irrespective of ethnic background has the right to a place to live, where they want to live; whether it be a modest flat in Rosengård or a stately home in Bunkeflostrand. Every individual has autonomy when it comes to choosing a home, but still areas like Rosengård are perpetually stigmatised. For this reason we were roused to go out amongst the dwellers and hear their versions on the cultural influence causing them to stay in Rosengård. After all, they are the ones that live there and best to explain why. 2.1 Purpose and Questions The purpose of this study is to find out why a number of people with immigrant background most often live in immigrant-dense areas. Due to this reason we have formulated research questions that will lead us to find out why immigrants live in those areas. The questions are: 6 a) Do immigrants prefer to live with compatriots? b) Is it due to