Leaving no one behind the imperative of inclusive development

Who is being left behind? 63
Box III.2
The geography of opportunities: residential segregation and
educational outcomes
The social composition of the schools or neighbourhoods where children are raised has a
significant impact on their development and livelihoods. Growing up in a disadvantaged
neighbourhood has been shown to affect educational outcomes negatively because of social,
cultural and linguistic isolation, scarce institutional resources − including poorly funded
and often underperforming schools − environmental health hazards and stress as a result
of violence and crime.
It has been found in a large body of literature that, while the socioeconomic characteristics
of students and their families have a large impact on educational outcomes, the effect
of neighbourhood and school characteristics cannot be ignored, particularly for children in
poor households. Educational outcomes are often better in more well-off neighbourhoods
and schools, independent of the socioeconomic status of a student’s family. a In Montevideo,
improvements in the socioeconomic status of a neighbourhood resulted in corresponding
improvements in public school students’ composite scores on mathematics and native language
examinations, even when holding constant socioeconomic characteristics of each
student’s household. Nearly a third of variability in test scores could be attributed to the
socioeconomic composition of the school that children attended or the neighbourhood
where they resided (Kaztman and Retamoso, 2007).
In the United States, experimental groups of households with children living in povertystricken
areas were randomly selected from five cities (Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles
and New York) and assigned to a treatment group where families received counselling
as well as public assistance to access housing in areas with less than 10 per cent of poverty.
Evaluations of the programme have provided various insights into the interplay between
individual characteristics and the characteristics of neighbourhoods, and how these interact
to influence outcomes. Chetty, Hendren and Katz (2016) found that children younger than
13 whose families moved away from very low-income areas through participation in the
experiment achieved better educational and economic outcomes in the long run than their
peers who did not move. On average, these children were 16 per cent more likely to attend
college or university, and as adults their incomes were 31 per cent higher than those children
whose families were assigned to the control group (Chetty, Hendren and Katz, 2016).
Children older than 13 actually fared slightly worse than the control group, however. Those
researchers reasoned that the disruptive effects of the move among this group, such as a
loss of social networks, outweighed the benefits of moving. Furthermore, the experiment
not only reduced the effects of neighbourhood poverty on children in the treatment group
but also led to an intergenerational reduction in the exposure to spatial concentrations of
poverty. As adults, these children were more likely to live in areas with lower poverty rates,
higher mean incomes, less racial segregation and a lower share of female-headed households.
While the mechanisms that create residential segregation are not entirely clear, the
study of neighbourhood effects has provided evidence that the characteristics of where
families live represent an important factor in the improvement or deterioration of their material
conditions, in what can be referred to as the “geography of metropolitan opportunity”
(Galster and Killen, 1998).
a
See, for instance, Brännström (2008) for Sweden; Chetty, Hendren and Katz (2016) and Jencks and Mayer
(1990) for the United States; Kaztman and Retamoso (2007) for Uruguay; Kauppinen (2007) for Finland;
and Montgomery and Hewett (2005) for health outcomes in developing countries.