The Poverty of Theory in Finnish Segregation Research

The uneven distribution and differentiation of demographic groups in neighbourhoods – sometimes called segregation – are popular topics of research among Finnish urban scholars. However, Finnish segregation research builds on certain unwarranted and as of yet unquestioned assumptions about the process of segregation. This article identifies three such assumptions. First, the consumer choice model for segregation rests on the assumption that segregation is a “natural” phenomenon, brought on by consumer choices in housing. Second, the theory underpinning so-called neighbourhood effects assumes that less well-off groups are to blame for their situation. Third, some ethnic segregation researchers assume that the U.S. based white flight thesis can be uncritically transferred to the Finnish context. After identifying these assumptions this article discusses why they are unwarranted. Primarily, this has to do with the neglect of structural, political economic reasons for segregation such as uneven development of the built environment. This neglect has resulted in circular reasoning about the causes and effects of segregation. Because of the assumptions made by Finnish urban scholars, segregation research has the risk of unintentionally stigmatizing neighbourhoods and blaming low income people and ethnic minorities for segregation. To close, alternative approaches to analysing and understanding segregation in Finland are outlined.