Logo
ScienceStack
Table of Contents
Fetching ...
Sign In

Socio-spatial segregation and human mobility: A review of empirical evidence

Yuan Liao, Jorge Gil, Sonia Yeh, Rafael H. M. Pereira, Laura Alessandretti

Abstract

Socio-spatial segregation is the physical separation of different social, economic, or demographic groups within a geographic space, often resulting in unequal access to resources, services, and opportunities. The literature has traditionally focused on residential segregation, examining how individuals' residential locations are distributed differently across neighborhoods based on various social attributes, e.g., race, ethnicity, and income. However, this approach overlooks the complexity of spatial segregation in people's daily activities, which often extend far beyond residential areas. Since the 2010s, emerging mobility data sources have enabled a new understanding of socio-spatial segregation by considering daily activities such as work, school, shopping, and leisure visits. From traditional surveys to GPS trajectories, diverse data sources reveal that daily mobility can result in spatial segregation levels that differ from those observed in residential segregation. This literature review focuses on three critical questions: (a) What are the strengths and limitations of segregation research incorporating extensive mobility data? (b) How do human mobility patterns relate to individuals' residential vs. experienced segregation levels? and (c) What key factors explain the relationship between one's mobility patterns and experienced segregation? Our literature review enhances the understanding of socio-spatial segregation at the individual level and clarifies core concepts and methodological challenges in the field. Our review explores studies of key themes: segregation, activity space, co-presence, and the built environment. By synthesizing their findings, we aim to offer actionable insights for reducing segregation.

Socio-spatial segregation and human mobility: A review of empirical evidence

Abstract

Socio-spatial segregation is the physical separation of different social, economic, or demographic groups within a geographic space, often resulting in unequal access to resources, services, and opportunities. The literature has traditionally focused on residential segregation, examining how individuals' residential locations are distributed differently across neighborhoods based on various social attributes, e.g., race, ethnicity, and income. However, this approach overlooks the complexity of spatial segregation in people's daily activities, which often extend far beyond residential areas. Since the 2010s, emerging mobility data sources have enabled a new understanding of socio-spatial segregation by considering daily activities such as work, school, shopping, and leisure visits. From traditional surveys to GPS trajectories, diverse data sources reveal that daily mobility can result in spatial segregation levels that differ from those observed in residential segregation. This literature review focuses on three critical questions: (a) What are the strengths and limitations of segregation research incorporating extensive mobility data? (b) How do human mobility patterns relate to individuals' residential vs. experienced segregation levels? and (c) What key factors explain the relationship between one's mobility patterns and experienced segregation? Our literature review enhances the understanding of socio-spatial segregation at the individual level and clarifies core concepts and methodological challenges in the field. Our review explores studies of key themes: segregation, activity space, co-presence, and the built environment. By synthesizing their findings, we aim to offer actionable insights for reducing segregation.
Paper Structure (37 sections, 3 figures, 8 tables)

This paper contains 37 sections, 3 figures, 8 tables.

Table of Contents

  1. Introduction
  2. Methods
  3. Measuring socio-spatial segregation
  4. Co-presence: a precursor to social interaction
  5. Approaches and their spatiotemporal scale
  6. Methodological reflections
  7. Use of the term segregation
  8. Discrepancy in computation
  9. Measuring activity space
  10. Measuring co-presence: Individuals included
  11. Measuring co-presence: Temporal resolution
  12. Limits of existing approaches
  13. Individual segregation levels: residential vs. experienced
  14. Studies showing similar or higher experienced segregation than residential
  15. Studies showing lower experienced segregation than residential
  16. ...and 22 more sections

Figures (3)

  • Figure 1: Conceptual framework of measuring socio-spatial segregation. (1) Residential segregation quantifies the extent to which different groups live separately from one another in different neighborhoods. (2) Built environment approach analyzes transport networks and urban spaces to evaluate the potential of reaching different groups from one's residence. (3) Activity space approaches driven by empirical mobility data assess individuals' co-presence with others across their activity space and quantify the social mixing level in these geographic areas. This study includes (2-3) for the evidence synthesis.
  • Figure 2: Conceptual framework explaining socio-spatial segregation. Activity demand and lifestyle (Section \ref{['sec:exp_disp_homo']}), and Other individual aspects (Section \ref{['sec:exp_disp_o']}) deal with individual factors. Housing and urban sprawl (Section \ref{['sec:exp_seg_h']}) examines housing and its relationship with workplace locations. Transport access (Section \ref{['sec:exp_seg_t']}) refers to access from one's residence, linking the home with the rest of the activity space. Urban design (Section \ref{['sec:exp_seg_ud']}) covers the spatial aspect of activity space.
  • Figure A.1: Referenced papers from activity space and built environment perspectives. These statistics only include original studies published in journals or conference proceedings, excluding reviews, opinions, and other articles cited in this study. (a) Number of activity space papers by studied country, year, and data source (Themes 1 & 2.) (b) Number of transport and urban science papers by studied country and year (Themes 1 & 3 and Themes 1 & 4.)