“Not as bad as they seem” A discourse analysis of representations of particularly vulnerable areas in Sweden, within student theses Petra Hellsing Widén Department of Human Geography Master thesis 30 HE Credits Human Geography Globalization, Environment and Social Change Spring term 2019 Supervisor: Bo Malmberg “Not as bad as they seem” A discourse analysis of representations of particularly vulnerable areas in Sweden, within student theses Petra Hellsing Widén Abstract The main purpose of this thesis is to analyse the discourses of particularly vulnerable areas in Sweden, a categorization made by the police authority, as these areas appear within student theses, written between 2010 and 2018. The aim of using this material along with theoretical discourse analysis is to gain a deeper understanding of academic as well as non-academic perspectives of these areas, in relation to the ongoing discussion of territorial stigmatization. Three main discourses where identified, structuring the analysis: the suburban discourse, the Swedish society discourse, and the critical meta discourse. In addition, I found that these are also present within studies conducted by higher scholars, and thus conclude that student theses can successfully serve as a source through which wider academic discourses can be understood. While parts of the discourses found has been identified by previous researchers as well, I argue that the critical meta discourse, having been dismissed as marginal, is prominent as a discourse within student theses. However, although the critical meta discourse serves to nuance the predominantly gloomy discourse of the suburb, I argue that this narrative also functions to preserve this image, and therefore should be used with some caution. Due to the magnitude of studies set out to “challenge the bad reputation” of these areas, the solidity and importance of these reputation are seen as given and thus possibly enhanced. Key words: knowledge production, territorial stigmatization, spatial representation 1 Table of contents 1. Introduction: The discussion of spatial representation and academic knowledge production ................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background and problem statement: a well-researched topic and an unusual material 1 1.2 Research aims and questions ....................................................................................... 2 1.3 Thesis structure ............................................................................................................ 2 2. Literature review: previous research regarding representations of space and knowledge production ................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Literature related to representations of stigmatised areas, in Sweden and beyond ..... 4 2.2 Literature related to the production of knowledge in general, and student theses in particular ................................................................................................................................. 5 2.3 Concluding comments on the literary field ................................................................. 6 3. Theoretical framework: discourse analysis and discourse theory ...................................... 7 3.1 Discourse analysis as a theoretical framework: knowledge as discursively produced 7 3.2 Discourse theory: analysing stability and instability within discourses ...................... 7 4. Methodology: implementing the method of theoretical discourse analysis using student theses as data .............................................................................................................................. 9 4.1 Theoretical discourse analysis as a method: nodal points and floating signifiers ....... 9 4.2 Choice of material: recently written student theses ................................................... 10 4.3 Operationalization: applying the chosen method on the material ............................. 12 4.4 Discussing method and material: positionality in relation to the discourse .............. 13 4.5 Ethical considerations: dealing with sensitive material and topics ........................... 14 5. Discourse analysis part one: three separate, yet inter-connected, discourses .................. 15 5.1 The suburban discourse: constructing the suburb as an essential spatial unit ........... 15 5.1.1 What is a suburb? ............................................................................................... 15 5.1.2 The suburb: a unified, homogenous entity ......................................................... 16 5.1.3 Representing the suburb: islands of crime, segregation and social unrest ......... 17 5.1.4 Segregation: a suburban phenomenon ................................................................ 17 5.1.5 Concluding the suburban discourse: suburbs as representatives of the suburb .. 18 5.2 The Swedish society discourse: constructing a society and an utanförskap .............. 19 5.2.1 Utanförsskapsområden - areas of alienation ...................................................... 19 5.2.2 The (one and only) society ................................................................................. 19 5.2.3 Sweden and Swedishness: exclusive communities ............................................. 20 5.2.4 Immigrants and foreign background: markers of non-Swedishness .................. 21 5.2.5 Ethnicity and migrant background - significant subject positions ..................... 23 5.2.6 Sweden yesterday and today: constructing a dichotomy .................................... 24 2 5.2.7 Concluding the Swedish society discourse: non-Swedish societies within Sweden 24 5.3 Critical meta discourse: counteracting negative representations of the areas ........... 25 5.3.1 Stigmatization: a nodal point structuring the discourse ..................................... 25 5.3.2 The media: a powerful actor from outside.......................................................... 26 5.3.3 Self-representation as a way forward ................................................................. 27 5.3.4 Subject positioning of the author: the legitimacy of being from the neighbourhood ................................................................................................................. 28 5.3.5 The positive antitype: areas of gemenskap ......................................................... 29 5.3.6 Concluding the critical meta discourse: a responsive perspective ..................... 31 6. Discourse analysis part two: discourses in relation to the discursive field ...................... 32 6.1 The suburban discourse: the suburb as a global entity with an inner hierarchy ........ 32 6.2 The Swedish society discourse: spaces of abnormality and un-Swedishness ........... 33 6.3 The critical meta discourse: maintaining the abnormality ......................................... 35 7. Concluding discussion: .................................................................................................... 38 7.1 Discussing the results: strengthening the results of previous findings while stressing the need for further research of academic discourses ........................................................... 38 7.2 Methodological discussion: considering the choice of method and material ............ 39 7.3 Concluding remarks: my result and its implication for further research ................... 41 8. References: ....................................................................................................................... 43 9. Appendix - list of theses in numerical order: ................................................................... 46 3 1. Introduction: The discussion of spatial representation and academic knowledge production 1.1 Background and problem statement: a well-researched topic and an unusual material A growing discussion within the human geography field, as well as a range of other disciplines, is that of territorial stigmatization. This concept was originated by French sociologist Lois Wacquant (2007) and can be understood as the process of certain areas being associated with negative representations, which reproduces a spatial hierarchy where places, and ultimately their inhabitants, are assigned with different status, high or low, in relation to one another. In Sweden, this topic has received particular attention in relation to a number of police reports classifiying several of areas in Sweden as particularly vulnerable, in which the situation is said to be alarming (Polisen, 2017), first published in 2015 (Polisen, 2015). According to the police, the alleged areas share a number of characteristics, such as a great distrust among the residents for the police and the legal system, which complicates police efforts, contributes to the establishment of parallel societal structure and feeds a growing sympathy for extremist movements (Polisen, 2017; 2015). Although the intention of going public with this list was to identify “hotspots” in need of more resources, many have argued that drawing national attention to these areas worsened the situation for people living there, by enhancing, creating or maintaining their spatial stigma. On this note, while I was writing this thesis, the debate gained new life again when several local politicians and private investors working in the areas requested the police authority not to publish the list for