ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

DRAFTVERSION

SOCIALANDSPATIALINEQUALITYANDEDUCATION
POLICIESINMADRID:CANWETALKABOUT
EDUCATIONALSEGREGATION?
RosadelaFuenteFernndez
PoliticalScienceDepartment(III)
FacultyofPoliticalandSociologicalSciences
ComplutenseUniversity
rdelafuente@cps.ucm.es

ABSTRACT
ThemetropolitanareaofMadridhasbeentransformedoverthepastdecadesundertheleadershipofthe
capital,butalsoundernewlyappliedregional policies,duetotheprogressiveincreaseofcompetencies
assumedbythepoliticalregionalauthority(ComunidadAutnomadeMadrid),since1983.Suburbanization
andlaterperiurbanizationpopulationdynamicsofsettlement,alongwiththespreadofeconomicalactivities
aroundthecapital,drivenbyaconstantpolicyofnewinfrastructures,havechangedtherelevanceofits
centrality.However,sociospatialsegregationbetweencitiesoftheregionisstillasrelevantasitisinsidethe
city,wherehistoricalandnewpatternsofsocialandspatialinequalityhavebeenincreasingoverthepast
decade. In this context, the aim of this paper is to analyse the relationship between the increase and
persistenceofsocioeconomicalinequalityandthepatternsofspatialsocialproduction,specificallyfocusing
on the disparity in educational opportunities. Three variables will be taken into account: sociospatial
inequality,youngstudentswitheducationalproblemslivingindisadvantagedareas,andregionaleducation
policy, attempting to discover how educational policies are managing social segregation and social
vulnerabilitiesintheregion.Inordertoanalysethisrelationshipourpaperwillbedividedinfoursections.
Thefirstonewillbefocusedontheoreticalreflectionsonthepersistenceofsociospatialinequalitiesin
European cities, and the problems around this issue (lack of social cohesion, gentrification and gated
communities, intergenerational reproduction of vulnerabilities, sociospatial stigmatization and political
disaffection).Thesecondonewillshowhowspatialsegregationhasbeenincreasingintheregionoverthe
pastdecades,especiallyaftertheacceleratedandrecentarrivalofimmigrants.Thirdly,wewillfocuson
education policy in the region, paying attention to educational plans designed for students with social,
educationalandspatialvulnerabilities,withregardstoobtainingacompulsorysecondaryschooldegree.

Introduction

Thispaperisaworkinprogressresultingofnewresearchcentredonconsideringhowsocialurban
spaceisproduced,especiallyinrelationwithinequalityandpoliticalandsocialdisconnection.In
fact,thisisnotaneworisolatedconcern,butonthecontraryitisplacedinaSocialSciences
debate in which space has been included in order to analyse social and political change in
contemporarycities(Bourdieu1999;Harvey1990;Luton1999,Massey1993,Oberti2007,Soja
1989;Wacquant1999,2001).Thisapproachismainlybasedontheconsiderationofspaceasa
socialfactandnolongerjustasaEuclidiansceneoraneutrallandscapewhereactsoccur.
Thereforeinoppositiontodeterministconceptionsofspaceandterritoryconsideredasnatural

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

powerresources,physicalspaceisonewhichisproduced,modifiedanddesignedconstantlyby
socialandpoliticalactionsthroughplanning,actingandappropriatingstrategiesanddiscourses
naturalized over time (Bourdieu 1999:122) and always in relation to an asymmetrical power
geometry(Massey1993).InLefebvresterms,spaceisintrinsicallylinkedtosocialprocesses,but
notonlytoeconomicaldynamicsthatmodifyspatialpractisesonallscales,butalsotopolitical
spatialdiscoursesandcollectiveandindividualeverydayspatialprojectionsandutopias(Lefebvre
1991).Therefore,somescholarsarealsotryingtoanalysehowdailyinteractionswithspaceas
muchaswithspatialwaysofknowingarealsoconstructingourconsciousness,themeaningof
whereweare,howtheothersareseenbyus,andaboutthepossibilityofchangingthosespatialand
socialconceptions(Bourdieu1999:120,Miller1999:251,Lefebvre1991,Sibley1991).
Moreover,itisgenerallyaccepted,howastrongpatternofincreasinginequalityincitieshasbeen
developedlastyears,specially,inthosecasesofhyperconnectedcitiestoglobalarena(Saseen
2001),wherepostfordistproductionhasalreadybeingspread(Wacquant1999,2000,Jessop2004,
Kesteloot2003).Intheseglobalcitiestherearegroupsofcitizens,locatedinthemostsuccessful
places of the city, working in the most demanded financial or hightechservices areas, using
private services (health, transport, education, security), and everyday connecting with similar
groupofpeoplemainlyinjustsomeexclusiveareasofconsumptionandleisure.Howeverthese
spatialpatternsarenotnew,mostofEuropeancitiesarebeinghistoricallysegregated,andalthough
WelfareStateswereabletoreduceinequalityaftertheSecondWorldWar,itisunderlinedthat
nowadaysthesocialmobilityhasbeenreduced,whileStatesarenotbeingabletoavoidsocietal
risks of the population in a globalizing and interconnecting context. In that sense, cities are
consideredsegmentedordualised(Hamnett2003,MollenkopfandCastells1991,Marcuse1989)
becauseatthesametime,therearegroupsofcitizenslivinglinkedtoeconomicalsectorsless
connected,lesssuccessfullylocatedintheglobalandlocalscales,withlowsalariesandprecarious
labourcondition,notonlyjustbecausetheyarelowskilled,asitcouldhappenyearsagoafter
deindustrialization,butalsoduetothedifficultiestoreachthosemoresuccessfuljobsifyourare
notinthecorrectplaceorabletobemobilised
Inthatsense,socialdistancebetweencitizensisenlarging,notonlybecauseofincomedifferences,
butalso,duetootherfactorsrelatedtotheexistingsocialdistance,suchasfamiliarandsocial
networks,differentialplaceswherepeopleareabletostudyandlivein,andtheexistenceofless
possibilitiesforsocialmobility.Also,thereareotherfactorsleadingtosocialexclusion,suchas
increasingnumbersoffemaleheadedhouseholds,immigration,theformationofethnicenclaves,
exclusionofpartsofthepopulationfromthelabourforceduetoskillsmismatchordisability,and
economicdualizationbetweenoligopolisticandcompetitivesectorsoftheeconomy(Fanstein
2001:85).Thesefactorsarecreatinganewregimenofmarginality(Wacquant2001).Inrelation

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

withthespatialexpressionofthosenewprocesses,oneofthemostcharacteristicelementsin
contemporaryglobalcities,istheexistenceofdifferenttypesofneighbourhoodslivingmostly
spacedout,withoutterritorialorsymboliccontinuity:Thesemayincludeneighbourhoodswhich
have traditionally offered homes for people of the highest levels of income and wealth;
neighbourhoodscharacterisedbyadiversityofrecenteconomicmigrantgroups;neighbourhoods
whosedefiningcharacterarisesfromthecombinationofdeindustrialisationandincreasedproperty
prices; neighbourhoods of radical countercultures; and neighbourhoods of the expanding
metropolitanclassescharacterisedoftenbyhighlevelsofeducation(Webber2007:184).
So,thepointathandwouldbehowthosedifferentialspacesareinterconnected,andifthereare
differencesbetweenthesociallifeinsidethem,inordertolinksocialspacesandinequality.Inthat
sense, recently it seems that place matters, since some authors are showing how in the most
connectedcitiessuchasNewYork,LondonorParis,theincreaseofinequalityismoreseverethan
in other, less globalised cities. This is also due to different patterns of dealing with social
segregationover thepast decades. So, although we couldtalkabout the appearance of anew
generalizedregimeofmarginality,Wacquanthasshownthattherearequitesubstantialdifferences
between American ghettos, French banlieus, and for example depressed areas in Madrid or
Barcelona,inSpain.Inthatsense,forsomescholarstheneighbourhoodeffectislesssignificantin
EuropethanincitiesofNorthAmerica(Musterdetal.(2002),Luton(2003),Wacquant(2001) 1.
However,asFainsteinpointedout:Althoughscholarshaveshownthatgrowthandequitydonot
necessarily reinforce each other, and in contemporary cities growth seems to be driving the
tendencytowardgreaterinequality.Nevertheless,itdoesnotdemonstratethatappropriatepolicy
cannotproducebotheconomicdevelopmentandgreatersocialwelfare(2001:85),andalsowe
could add how the absence of some public policies could enlarge the social distance already
producedbetweensocialgroups.

Segn Mustard (2006:124): European authors such as Friedrichs (1998), R. Andersson

(2001), Atkinson and Kintrea (2001), Ostendorf et al. (2001), Whitehead (2002), E.
Andersson (2004) and Musterd (2002) can be called upon to illustrate the European
position. Most of them do not deny the existence of neighbourhood effects, but many
clarify that these effects are relatively minor or not fully understood, and therefore, he
underlined that: There appears to be a great need for two further types of study, of which
there have been few examples up to now. First, in-depth qualitative studies, which try to
shed some light inside the black box of neighbourhood effect processes. Crucial questions
in this type of research are: how actually does the socialization process evolve at the
neighbourhood level? What is the impact of local peer groups on adolescents behaviour,
values and norms? Are social networks of poor (unemployed) people still predominantly
local and what is their role in escaping from poverty? A good example of this kind of study
is the work by Blokland-Potters (2003) on social relations in a poverty-stricken
neighbourhood in the city of Rotterdam, the Netherlands. The second type of research, the
type we aim to contribute to, is large-scale longitudinal research

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

Therefore,thispaperisplacedinadebatearoundhowhistoricalpatternsofurbansegregationhave
changedrecently,increasingthematerialandsymbolicdistancebetweenpeoplelivingindifferent
areasoftheMetropolitanArea.However,althoughwewilluseempiricaldatainordertoshowthe
differencesbetweensocialspaces2,theaimofthisresearchitistounderstandtherelationship
betweensociospatialinequalities,equalopportunitiesandthepositionofthesubjectintheurban
community.Inotherwords,howsociospatialdifferencesbecomeasourceofinequalitywouldbe
themostdifficultrelationtobeunderstoodandexplainedincontemporaryurbancontexts.Inthat
sense,wewillusetheeducationalsegregationasanexcusetoanalysetheseprocess.
Therefore,thefollowingsectionswillbecentredonhowtheMadridMetropolitanareahasbeen
globalizing,inthecontextofbeingaEuropeancity,latershowingwhichkindofspatialdifferences
insocialproductionhavebeenproducedandhow. Then, wewillrevisetherole of educative
performance in relation to inequality, in order to finally analyse how spatial inequality and
educativeitinerariesarebeinginternalizedbypeoplecharacterisedbylivinginsomedeprived
areas,andhavingsomesocialvulnerabilitywhichcouldleadthemintosocialexclusion.
MadridinitscontextofglobalizingasanEuropeanCity

MadridisnotashighintheglobalcityhierarchyasotherEuropeancitiesare,mainlyduetoits
lowerinternationalizationandtechnologicallevel,accordingtoEuroStatandNationalStatistical
Officesdata(2002).However,theEuropeanSpatialPlanningObservationNetwork(ESPON)has
projectedhowtheMadridmetropolitanareawillhaveattractionandpolarisationpotentialin2030,
inatrendscenario(ESPON2007:9)categorizedasaEuropeanEnginecity.TheseEuropean
projections are being built because there is concern about sociospatial inequalities between
EuropeancitiesandtheirimpactontheterritorialcohesionoftheEuropeanUnion.Inthatsense,
theEuropeanSpatialStrategydevelopedin1999,pointedoutthenegativeeffectofthepersistence
ofahighconnectedareacalledpentagonwhenatthesametimetherewasalsoaclearlyspatial
disconnectionbetweenotherlessdevelopedareasorthoseplacedintheperiphery.Inthatsense,
this main area was conceptualised as a flux space, since London, Paris, Milan, Munich and
Hamburgareseenasahyperdensenetofmobilityandinterconnections,whileotherurbanareas
arejustseenaspotentialdynamicareasbutstilldisconnectedfromGlobalandEuropeanscales.In
ordertoreversethissituation,Europeangovernmentsdecidedtodevelopastrategytocreatenew
polycentricareasinEuropeanterritoryinordertobecomeintoamorecompetitiveregion,mostly
inoppositiontoUnitedStates,generatingamoresocialandsustainablecohesionspaceinside

Duringthefollowingsections,wewillconsidersocialspaceastheresultofhistoricallyreificationof
socialgroupsinphysicalspace,howeverthealreadyexistenceadministrativeandpoliticaldivisions:

districts,regionalareas,andneighbourhoodsasboundedareaswillalsobeourspatialreferences.

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

European frontiers. Therefore, European regional policies are impelling regions, localities and
citiestoimprovetheirinfrastructures,capabilitiesandsocialcapital,fundingthroughINTERREG,
URBAN,LEADER,andothersmallinitiatives,especiallythoseprojectsinvolvingreinforcement
a) transnational networks of cities, b) bottomup perspectives, c) metropolitan and regional
interconnectedprojects,aswellasthosec)concernedwithurbanregenerationandsocialcohesion.
However,Europeancitiesarealsocompetingintheglobalarena,tryingtoreachabetterplacein
therakingofglobalcities,becauseitisgenerallyacceptedthattheexternalinsertionofeachcityby
itsown,couldmakeadifferentintermsofeconomicalgrowth,attractivenessforinvestmentsand
touristyindustry.Inthisdualcompetitiveandcooperativecontext,Madridhasbeentransformed
duringthelastdecades,recoveringfirstfromdeindustrializationstageofeighties,andlaterfrom
the economical crisis of nineties. In fact, road and train infrastructures, metro lines, and
neighbourhood building renovation have been developed with the effort of local and regional
authorities,whileatthesametimethepriorityofbeautifyingthecityhasconverteditintoan
internationalculturalreference,butalsoawellknowncommercialandinternationalconferences
meetingplace.Inthatsense,allthegovernmentpartiesandlocalandregionalauthoritiesarestill
fosteringthecitycandidaturetoreachthecelebrationoftheOlympicGames,tryingtodeletethe
imageofsecuritylackthatoldandnewterrorismattackshavealreadyleft.Also,therelevanceof
urbancohesionisbeingtakingintoaccount,followingtheEuropeanadvices,whichconnecturban
cohesionwithbetterlevelsofcompetitiveness.
However,itseemsthatoldandnewpatternsofinequality,insidethemetropolitanarea,arestill
existing and reinforcing differential social space and increasing social distance among social
groups3, which is nowadays related with social disparities but also with increasing generally
closingattitudestowardsmigrantsandsymbolicdifferences.Inthatsense,thepurposeofthisessay
istoshowhowalthoughwecouldconsiderthatvulnerabilityislessspatiallyconcentratedin

Thisisalsohappeninginglobalcities,insideandoutsidethepentagon.As,Kesteloothasalreadystudied:

MostEuropeancitieswill,accordingtotheirpositionintheEuropeanspace()displayadominanceofcentre
periphery contrasts. North and south of the blue banana, including its south end with relatively late
industrialisation,onefindsstillasignificantpresenceoftheupperandmiddleclassintheinnercities.()In
somecases,onecouldfindrichandpoorconfigurationsbothincentreandperiphery.AgoodexampleisNaples,
with still a preindustrial environment in the inner city where rich and poor are fairly mixed, suburban
developments forthe upperclass onthe westernhills alongthe coastand veryproblematic highrisesocial
housingestatesinthenorth(Morlicchio2001).InScandinaviancities,strongegalitarianprinciplesandthefully
developed welfare state have kept socioeconomic differentiation to a minimum and this translates into
configurationsmorecharacterisedbytheirepochthanbythesocialgroupstheyhouse.(2003:13)

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

MadridthanotherAmericanorEuropeanglobalcities,therearealsohistoricalandnewpatternsof
sociospatialproductionwhichareshowingthepersistenceofinequalityintheMetropolitanareaof
Madrid,andanincreasingpatternofsocialandpoliticaldisconnectionduetoamongotherfactors
theabsenceofpubliceffortstoreleasetheperceptionofsocialdistanceandpoliticaldisaffection
amongcitizens.Letseebrieflyhowthroughdifferenttimesandspacestheproductionofsocial
spaceinMadridwasconsolidating.
HistoricalPatternsofSegregation:inequalityandspatialsocialproduction
Wehavealreadypointedathowsocialproductionofspaceisclearlyrelatedtoinequalityofpower
relation,notonlybecauseofthecapitalistsystem,butalsobecausehistoricallythecityhasbeen
producedsegmentallybypoliciesortheabsenceofpolicies.Followingthosetheoreticalpremises,
weshouldthinkthattherelationship,betweeninequalityandthecity,hasnotalwaysbeenthe
same,neitherateachtime,norateveryplace,andthereforefollowingKestelootwealsoconsidered
thatthemosaic,orthesociospatialstructureofthecityresultsfromhistoricalprocesses.The
periodinwhichtheseenvironmentsarecreatedandtheorganisationoftheeconomyandthestate
ofclassstruggleatthetimearereflectedinthetypeofhousing,thematerialandinstitutional
organisationforcollectiveconsumptionandthespatialarrangementofthearea(2003:4)
Inthatsense,Madridwashistoricallydesigned(XVIIItoXIX)tryingtokeepthecentreseparate
fromtheoutskirts(arrabales),lateralthoughthedevelopmentofthecitywasplannedrationally,in
fact, the real growth was spread among the outskirt where waves of rural migrants were
established.SincethebeginningoftheXXcenturypeoplestartedlivinginthemarginofwayout
roadsofthecity,intheNorth(Tetuan),EastNorth(Prosperidad)andSoutheast(thebeginningof
VallecasBridge)(Batalleretal.2004:39).Sincethen,theconcentricmodelofthegrowingcity
waschangedandtherefore,thecitywasoverflowedduetoatentacleandanuntidyspread,creating
themetropolitanphenomenon(Serrano2002:460).Inthatsense,thehistoricalspatialsegregation
between centre and periphery was being increased between an organized and compact city,
concentringmost of the people(500.000inhabitants) anda spontaneous andfragmented extra
radial,withoutterritorialconnection.Partofthisextraradialwasincorporatedintothecitybetween
1947 and 19544, while other settlements started to be considered as, and still are today, the
metropolitan crown area (from 23 to 26 towns), although by then there were only 50.000
inhabitants.Soon,newmunicipaldistrictsaddedtoMadridstartedtobecomethecentreof

NewMadriddistrictswereAravaca,ElPardo,Fuencarral,Chamartn,Hortaleza,Canillas,Canillejas,Barajas,
Viclvaro,Vallecas,Villaverde,CarabanchelAltoyBajo.

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

industrial activities, mainly Chamartn, Ventas, Villaverd, etc (Tern 1999:63), absorbing the
migrantwavescomingfromruralareasnowadays,developinganurbanizationthatisperipheralyet
dependentonthecentre.
AsLeal(2004:2)hasnoticedtheGeneralUrbanPlanin1946,PlanBidagor,plannedthecitywith
naturalfunctioningorder.Inthatsense,takingintoaccountthenaturalresourcesandthetypeof
inhabitants, the city was divided into three differential areas, the head of the city was the
bourgeoisieandthemiddleclassesarea,whilethefeetofthecitywerethoseareasinwhichthe
workingclassusedtolive,consideringalinkbetweeneachgroupineachplace.Therewasnot
onlyadifferencebetweenwhichpeoplewerelivingandwouldbelivingineach,butalsothere
weredifferencesinthebuildings,inNorthWestofthecitythestonedbuildingandthegreen
landscapes,wereadifferentenvironmentfromtheSoutherndistricts,wherebrickbuildingsand
driedterrainswerecommon.
Asclassicalstudiesareclassified,theurbanevolutionofEuropeanCitiesbetweenthe70sand90s
followedthreemainsteps:first,theurbanizationandconcentrationofactivitiesinurbanspace,
startingatthebeginningofthefifties;secondly,thesuburbanization(declineofcitycentreand
decentralization);and,lastly,desurbanizationanddeconcentration(dispersionofactivitiesinthe
satellitetownsreachingevenruralareas:perurbanization)(TurokyMykhenko2007:166).In
Madrid, after the first stage of urbanization, two main phenomena were going to be central
elementsinthesocialproductionofspace:theexponentialincreaseofpopulationandthenew
developmentandindustrialpolicies.
Thealreadyexistingruralurbanmigrant wave was hugelyincreased, fosteredbythe National
DevelopmentPlans(19641967and19681971),whosemainobjectivewastheeconomicalgrowth
withoutpayingattentiontotheimpactitcouldhaveonmorphologyandurbanstructure.Inthat
sense,asTernpointedout,therewasnocoordinationbetweendevelopmentpoliciesandurban
policies,whichrepresentsastrongchargeforthecity.Thenewdevelopmentprojectstartedto
changethecity,increasinglabourersfrom351.000inthesixties,to539.000in1967,whilethe
populationgrewexponentiallyduringthisdecade.Theproblemofhousingbecamethemainurban
issueasmuchasequipmentandcommunicationinfrastructureandpublicservicesstartedtobea
popularclaiming,firstintheperipheralneighbourhoods,butalsolater,inthemunicipalitiesofthe
metropolitanarea.Inthatsense,spatialpatternsofinequalitywereconcentratinginsomeareas,in
whichmigrantswereconcentratinginworseconditionsofhabitabilityandwherelandusewas
mainlyplannedforindustrialuses.

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

Forexample,thesocialspaceofneighbourhoodssuchasVillaverdewasproducedinrelationwith
demographicpressureofmigrantscomingfromAndaluca,Extremadura,andcloserprovinces,
insufficientinfrastructureandhabitabilityhousing,andmainlywiththeconcentrationofindustrial
activities,especiallyautomotiveone(Fernndez2005).Therefore,whentheindustrialdismantling
wasplacedduringtheseventies,theVillaverdedistrictwas,atthebeginningoftheeighties,once
againdistressedbythelostofhighpercentagesofemployment,reachinga20%unemploymentrate
at the beginning of the eighties, 4 points over the Madrid rate (16.2). There, young people
desanimados were at the point of not even looking for employment, becoming dramatically
implicatedwithheroineconsumption,pettyshadydeals,andburglaries(DencheyAlguacil1986).
Inthiscontext,industrialandworkingclassneighbourhoodsstartedtobenodesofpolitization,
convertingthemselvesintolocalactors,lookingforradicalchangeintheirneighbourhoods,mainly
cryingoutfortheimprovementofinfrastructures,publicservicesandequipment,butalsoasking
forthesolutionofhighdensitypopulationduetotheconcentrationofmigrantpopulations(Tern
1999: 107). The appearance of democratic local governments was the special context paying
attentiontocitizenclaims,firstthroughsocialsupportbutlaterthroughthefirstdemocraticspatial
planning.Inthatmoment,socialurbanmovementwasclearlyreinforcedbecomingapoliticalactor
withalmost400hundredurbanassociations(Tern1999:110).Asaresponse,duringthe90sa
Neighbourhood Regeneration Plan was developed in Madrid, having a strong impact on the
Villaverde and Usera districts, designed by the public administration and neighbourhood
associations.Although,anewsocialmovementemergedin1997,theMovementfortheSouthern
Dignity, involved in the designed of a new Action Plan, with the Autonomous Regional
GovernmentandtheMunicipalGovernment.
However since the beginning of the seventies, the economical crisis and the exhaustion of
peripheral neighbourhoods, the migrant and working class population of the municipality was
concentrated, led other areas to started becoming the new emergent population centres in the
metropolitanarea,increasingsince1965byaroundoneandhalfmillioninhabitants.Newproblems
startedinthoseareas,wherelittlevillagesbecameurbancentressomeofthemreaching100.000
inhabitants,alreadyby1975.Nowadays,atleastsixofthosesoutherncitieshavemorethanthis:
Alcorcn,Fuenlabrada,Getafe,LegansyMstoles,concentratingnotonlypopulationbutalso
industrialemployment(Costa2007:10)althoughtheywerestillclearlydependentontheCityof
Madrid.Inthatsense,fromtheseventiestotheeightiesthemainurbanpolicieswerecentredon
improvingcommunicationinfrastructures,tryingtosolvethedisorganizedgrowthofthecapital
andthemetropolitanarea,andtryingtoprogressradialroadsandrailnetworks,andalsoimproving
oldinterurbanroads(Serrano2002:460)

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

Later,duringtheeighties,theeconomicalreorganizationbasedondeconcentrationofindustrial
activitywasproduced,whileatthesametimenewpattersofspatializationstartedtobesubstituted.
Therefore, old concentration of population in the first and second metropolitan crowns was
progressivelychangedbyanewpatternofurbanization:aperipherallyanddispersemodel,known
asperiurbanism5ordeurbanization(TurokyMykhenko2007:166).Infact,nowadaysthisprocess
ofurbansprawlisaccompaniedbyageneralizednewpatternofconsumptionandproduction.Even
now,itispossibletofindnewbusiness/scienceparksandnewhousingprojectsincloserprovinces,
such as Toledo, Avila and Guadalajara, all over the Henares Corridor where most industrial
activityisbeingconcentratedduetonewfastcommunications(Costa2007:mad10.htm).
Mainly,thisurbansprawlwaspossiblebecauseofgreatinvestmentsininfrastructuresdeveloped
duringtheninetiesthatarestillincreasing.Theincreaseoforbitalroadsofdistributionandthe
creationofdoubleroutesinalmostallradialaxesfavouredthechangeoflandusesandeconomic
activities,consolidatingurbansettlementoverradialroads, orbitalroadsandintersections,and
planning new urbanization areas for residential use (PRET 1997), as has happened in
Montecarmelo,Sanchinarro,Carabanchel,Valdebernardo,BoadilladelMonte,LasRozasbusiness
park(intersectionbetweenM50andLaCoruahighway),SouthernLinealParkaroundM50
(Arroyo Culebro) (Serrano 2002: 461). Some of them can be considered almost Edge Cities,
especiallyBoadilladelMonteandLasRozas,inthewestofthemetropolitanarea,butalsoTres
CantosandAlcobendas,inthenorth,wherenationalandinternationalenterprisesarebeinglocated.
Inthatsense,itisimportanttopointout,accordingtoOcaa,thattheperipheryisnothomogenous
anymore,asitusedtobeduringthefordiststage.Therearesomefactorsgivingdifferenteconomic
andsymbolicvaluetoeachareaoftheperiphery,inthatsensemiddleandhighclassesarenow
located in a new periphery far (symbolic and materialistic) from those suburban areas and
peripheralmunicipalities,whichfromthebeginning(the60sand70s)weretheplaceswherethe
workingclass and migrant populations started to live, and where international migration is
concentratedinthehighestpercentages,sincethebeginningoftheXXIcentury,aswewilllater
see.
Inconclusion,thephysicalspaceofthecityandthemetropolitanareahasbeenrebuiltaccordingto
different stages of the economical phases, through infrastructure policies and planning (or it
absence),butalsoduetosocialstructurechanges,whichthroughouttimehavebeennaturalized.
AsBourdieu(1999)suggested,socialspaceisdevelopedinphysicalspace,beingreifiedthrough

ThisstrongdynamismoftheperurbanisminMadridisrelatedtotwomainfactors:thecharacteristicsofthe
housingmarketandthequality,cheaperandmoreeasilypaidhousing,intheareasclosetomainroads(northN1
andsouthN5).Inthoseareashousingmarketisdesignedforlowincomefamiliesunabletopayforahouseinthe
metropolitanregion(Estbanez,J.1990,quoutedinPozo1998:308309)

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

anunequaldistributionofgoodsandservices,aswellasthedissimilarlocationofindividualand
collectiveagentsinamannerthatmoreorlessallowforappropriationofthosegoodsandservices,
oftenthroughsymbolicviolence.AccordingtotheFrenchauthor,differentsocialrelationsystems,
socialfieldsinhisterms,aresedimentsinphysicalspace,overlappingthemselves,creatingnot
onlythehabitus6ineachspace,butalso,thenetworksofsocialrelations,inwhichtheyaregoing
to live and feel, who they are, what they could pursue and how they could live with others
(Bourdieu1999:122).Although,socialfieldsaredifficulttoanalysethroughquantitativedata,we
will consider, as a first step, the need to show how the economic and social field is being
overlappedinsocialspaces,whenahomogeneouspopulationwithasimilarincomeaverage,level
ofculturalbackgroundandemploymentsareboundedassocialspaces.
SocialfieldsanditsspatialconcentrationinMadrid

Sociospatialsegregationin1986.Source:Costa2005

Aswecanobserveonthemap,mainlyduetothehistoricalpatternsinthelateeighties,differences
between thecentre and thenorthof Madrid Cityandthe SouthandWest districts were very
significant. There wereno significant differences between percentages of population, although
slightlymorepopulationwaslocatedinthelightbluearea(Southerndistricts(55%).However,the
differences started with the type of employment. Clearly, manual workers were concentrated
mostly in the South and East districts (65%) while occupation in service sectors was highly
representativeintheCentreandNorthdistricts(82%),aswellaspersonswithsuperioreducation,

We use this term as Mills suggests it to be most appropriate, so as not to understand it as a

determinant as other authors have interpreted it for the agency, so according to her: The term
characterisestherecurringpatternsofsocialclassoutlookthebeliefs,values,conduct,speech,dress
andmannersthatareinculcatedbyeverydayexperienceswithinthefamily,thepeergroupandthe
school. Implying habit, or unthinkingness in actions, the habitus operates below the level of
calculation and consciousness, underlying and conditioning and orienting practices by providing
individuals with a sense of how to act and respond in the course of their daily lives without
consciously obeying rules explicitly posed as such (Bourdieu 1990a, 76). That is, the habitus
disposes actors to do certain things, orienting their actions and inclinations, without strictly
determiningthem(Mills2008:80)

10

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

andotherindicatorsofwellbeingsuchassportsinstallationsandsecondaryschools.Ifwewould
pay attention to the metropolitan area, we could find a similar pattern; there was a higher
concentration of industrial activity in the southern and western municipalities of the first
metropolitancrown,wherelowsalariesandGDPpercapitawerealsoconcentrated.
Since then, not only economical but also social and cultural differences between areas were
significantafteraperiodofeconomicalcrisis,buttwodecadeslaterwecouldaskourselvesifthis
patternofsegregation,understoodasthedifferentconcentrationofsocioeconomichomogenous
populationindifferent areas of thecity, is still as significant as it used to be. Unfortunately,
recently,officialurbandiagnosesinMadridCityandthoserelatedwithterritorialimbalanceare
showing how a differential concentration of population with worse economical and social
conditionsitisstillimportant.InfactLeal(2004)oneofthemostwellknownurbansociologists
haspointedoutthatthesegregationindex 7inMadridisoneofthehighestoftheEuropeancities,
mainlybasedonhousingmarketbehaviour.
But,whatitisevenmorerelevantis
how the historical pattern of socio
spatial segregation has been
reproducedoverthepastdecade,after
a period of higher convergence
during the eighties and the early
nineties (Leal 2007:24), measured
with the increased average income
deviationbetweencensussectionsin
theMadridCommunity.Inthatsense,usingthe SigmaIndex8,inMadridCity,itispossibleto
observe a tendency of territorial imbalance growth, taking into account the GDP per capita
(BarmetroEconmico2004:7),althoughlatestdataincludedarerelatedto2000.
IfwetrytofindapatternoflocalizationofdistrictIncomesdatain2000,wecouldclassifythem
intodifferentcategories,followinganofficialreportpublishedbytheMadridCouncil,titled
TerritorialImbalanceinMadridmunicipality.

Anindexwhichshowsthespatialseparationofasubpopulationfromtherestofthetotalinhabitantsofa
municipality(Musterd2000,quotedfromTorner2002:21).

Sigmaindexmeasuredthedispersionofvaluesofeachdistrictinrelationtothemunicipalaverage.

1
1

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

Low Income Districts (75% lower of the average): Puente de Vallecas, Usera, Villaverde and
Vicalvaro.
MediumLowIncomeDistricts(between75%and95%oftheaverage):Carabanchel,Villade
Vallecas,SanBlas,LatinaandMoratalaz.
MediumDistricts(between95%and105%oftheaverage)Centro,Arganzuela,TetunandCiudad
Lineal.
MediumHigh Districts (between 105% and 125% of the average) Hortaleza, Barajas and
FuencarralElPardo.
HighDistricts(over125%oftheaverage)Retiro,Chamber,MoncloaAravaca,Salamancaand
Chamartn.
ThecentralalmondofMadridCityandtheWestDistrictsarethosewherethehighestlevelsof
richnessisstillconcentrated,inoppositionofwhatishappeningintherestofthearea,thestrong
contrastbetweenthenorthandthesouthbeingnoticeable(OBS2004:6:1.2).Thispatternof
differencecanbeobservedevenmoreclearlyifwepayattentiontotheneighbourhoodsaswecan
seeinthenextfigure.

Also,differencesinsideneighbourhoodsaregenerallylessimportant,evenimperceptibleinthe
peripheraldistricts,thaninthosebetterequipped(OBECO2006:3/7).Moreover,ifwefollowthe
incomepercapitaaverageincrease,thenwecouldobservehowthosehistoricallylocatedina
better position are growing in a higher proportion that those with less income average. So,
followingthisreport,theconcentrationofwealthhadbeenconstantoverthepastdecades,withjust
smallchangesthemostwelloffsocialgroupsarelivingintheCastellanaband,inthecentral
neighbourhoodsofRetiro,Salamanca,ChamartnandChamber.Butsomenewresidential

1
2

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

enclavesmust beaddedtothis oldprosperousarea inthe business centreofthecityandthe

traditional neighbourhoods of XX century enlargement. These are more peripheral areas in
Moncloa Aravaca(Valdemarn, El Plantio), Fuencarral El Pardo(Fuentelarreina, Mirasierra),
Hortaleza(Piovera,Palomas)andCiudadLineal(Atalaya)(OBS2006:6:1.2).Inthatsense,
comingbacktothehousingmarketsystem,itisalsoimportanttounderlinehowinacitywhere
mostofthehomesareownedproperties,theincreaseofhousingpriceshadbeenmorerelevantin
wealthy neighbourhoods, also converting the housing market into a mechanism for producing
inequalities9(Leal2004:16).
Inaddition,districtswithalowincomeaveragehavebeenthosereceivingmostlythearrivalof
newmigrantneighbourssince2001,andalthoughwehavenotgotenoughquantitativedatatosee
theincreaseofpolarizationbetweenneighbourhoodsoverthepastyearsitisimportanttoreflect
brieflyontheappearanceofaconstantandvertiginousincreaseofmigration.Thisrecentprocess
inSpainisnotsorelevantinabsoluteterms,butthefactthatithasbecomearelevantissuedueto
itsconcentrationinbigcities,intouristareasandinsomeMediterraneantowns,iswhatconverts
thisphenomenonintoasignificantsocial,politicalandspatialchange(Ocaa2005:22).Inthat
sense,theMadridRegionisamajorcase,becausetogetherwiththehighestincreaseofGDP
(around8%),themostsignificantinallSpanishRegionssince2001,itisalsotheonereceiving
thehighestpercentageofforeignpeople(Bruquetasetal.2005:65).
AccordingtodatafromthelistofinhabitantsofMadridCity(2007),theamountofimmigrantshas
increasedfrom286.440inJanuary2002,to550.804inJanuary2007,equallinginabsoluteterms
13.980 newinhabitants duringlast year. Arelevant amount of the populationhad come from
countriesrecentlyjoiningtheEuropeanUnion,likePoland(11.52%)andRumania(20.36%).Also
inrelationtothemostrecentdata,(1January2007),thehigherpercentageofpopulationaccording
tonationalityistheEcuadoriancollective,followedbypeoplecomingfromRumania(8.5%)and
Colombia(7.7%),thepercentageofMoroccans(5%)andChinese(4.4%)beinglower.According
to Bruquetas et. al. (2005), the distribution pattern is not open to chance, since a clear
concentrationofmigrantsinsomeareasofsomedistrictsinMadridCityexists:inoldcentred
districtssuchasLavapis,BarriodeSol,(FuencarralHortaleza),Tetun(CuatroCaminosTetun),
Arganzuela (Paseo de las DeliciasLegazpi), Usera (Marcelo UseraAlmendrales, Zofio) and
PuentedeVallecas(PuentedeVallecas),butalsointheoldindustrialperipheraldistrictssuchasin
Carabanchel, Ciudad Lineal, Latina or Villaverde, where the concentration is less relevant or
disperse(2005:69).Inthatsense,whatisrelevant,isnotthepercentageofpeoplelocatedinthose
9

Theauthorconsideredthattheincreaseofunequalvalueofpatrimonialcapitalisbasedinthedifferential
changeofhousingvalues,whatitcouldneutralisedotherpubliceffortstoreduceinequalitiesamongcitizens
(Leal2004:16)

13

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

specificareas,butthedifferencewithotherareas,sostillfollowingBruquetasatal.,itisimportant
tonoticethatonly291districtsectionswithahighdensityofmigrants,representsjust12.4%of
thetotalmunicipalsections,onethirdofthetotalofimmigrantsregisteredinMadrid.
In relation with the density of the immigrant population, desegregated in districts and
neighbourhoodsin2003,thehighestdensityinrelationwithtotalpopulationwasintheCentre
District(26.22%)beingSol(32,4%)andEmbajadores(32.4%)wherethemostdensityislocated.
Afterthat,inTetuan,andVillaverde(14%),withoneneighbourhoodwithastrongconcentration
(SanCristobal,26.58%),andonthecontraryFuencarralElPardo(7.9%)andElPardorepresent
just 1%. This territorial distribution is mainly caused by the housing market, rental home
availability,andalsobecauseofterritorialandsocialnetworksofcountryfamilies,thatcreate
significant concentrations by nationalities (Ecuadorians in Pueblo NuevoQuintana, or in
DeliciasLegazpi), Colombians and Chinese in (Usera, Almendrales, Zofio), Dominicans in
(Cuatro CaminosTetun), Moroccans in San Cristbal, etc. (Bruquetas et al. 2005: 69). The
following maps show us how immigrant citizens are living in almost all municipalities and
districts,althoughtherearehigherdensitylevelsaswehavealreadynoticed.

1
4

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

Withoutadoubtthispatternofimmigrantterritorialdistributionoverthepastdecade,joinedwith
historicalconcentrationoflessadvantagesocialconditionsinSouthernandEasterndistrictsin
Madrid,andSouthernandEasternmunicipalitiesofthefirstandsecondmetropolitancrown,has
increased the social distance between them and the others. While at the same time, some
neighbourhoods in the central district, especially old town neighbourhoods, are suffering
economical and social degradation as much as in other European and LatinAmerican cities.
Neighobourhoods such as Lavapis, Gran Va and Embajadores are suffering a process of
tugurizationanddegradation,althoughRegenerationPoliciesimpulsedbytheCitycouncilwere
andstillaretryingtochangethispattern.Inthatsense,higherpercentagesofmigrantandelderly
population are living in those areas, mostly in rental houses due to the low prices and
stigmatization.
In that sense, the Council has divided the City areas in which low income population is
concentrated(2005)intotwobiggroups:
a)LevelsoflowincomeaverageinsidetheCityAlmond(calleddepressionsordeprivedareas)and
highdensityofmigrantpopulation.a.1TetunDistrict:(specificallyValdeacederasandBerruguete
neighbourhood),thatcanbeconsideredasaneconomicalperiphery,segregatedinsidethecity.a.2.
CentralDistrict,inwhichafterrecoveringsomeneighbourhoodssuchasJusticiaandUniversity,
attentionispaidmainlytothemostvulnerableareas,EmbajadoresandLavapis.

1
5

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

b)Levelsoflowincomeaverageintheperipheryofthemunicipality,wherethereisalsoahigh
concentration of migrant population. This is mainly an arch along the Southern districts, in
neighbourhoodssuchasUsera(OrcasuryOrcasitas),PuentedeVallecas(Entrevas),Viclvaro
(SanCristbal)andVillaverde.
IntheMetropolitanArea,regardingGDPpercapita,thereisagroupofmunicipalitiesclearlyover
the average, being located in different spatial concentrations. First, there is a group of
municipalitieswiththe67%oftotalGDPoftheRegion,andthe72%ofservices,inwhichthereis
MadridCity,andthebiggestWesternmunicipalitiesoftheregion(Boadilla,PozueloandLas
Rozas), specialized in services against the interest of industrial production. Secondly, there is
another subgroup, in which Alcobendas, San Sebastin de los Reyes and Tres Cantos
municipalitiesarelocated,withGDPconcentratedinservicesector,butalsoinindustrialactivities.
Farfromthisgroup,98municipalitiesproducethe23%ofregionalGDP.Mostofthemaresmall,
althougheightofthemaresignificantsuchasAlcaldeHenares,CosladaandTorrejndeArdoz
intheEast,andAlcorcn,Fuenlabrada,Getafe,Legans,andMstolesintheSouth.Inthose
municipalitiestheeconomicalactivityisstillmostlyindustrial,althoughtheyarealsoconsidered
dormitorytows.Thisisalsocorrelatedwithincomedata.So,accordingtoincomeaverage,the
lowerincome(percapita)isconcentratedintheEasternMetropolitanArea(9.984)andinthe
SouthernMetropolitanarea(9.134)whileintheWestern(16903)andNorthernarea(14.198)the
highestlevelsofincomeareconcentrated.

Inconclusion,ifwepayattentiontothedifferentiallocationofpopulationinrelationtoitsincome
wefindaclearcorrelationbetweensocialspace,whichhasbeenslightlydeeperoverthepast
decadedespitetheappearanceofnewareasofhighclassresidentialandnewareasofdevelopment
inthenorthandwestperiphery.HoweverSoutherndistrictsandmunicipalitiesofthefirst

16

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

metropolitancrownaswellassomeEasternonesarebeingconsolidatedasplaceswherealow
income average is concentrated, and also as those which are attracting mainly the higher
percentages of immigrant citizens, due to the low prices of housing and the greater rental
availabilitycomparedwithothermorescarceareas(Leal2007).
In summary we could say that pattern of sociospatial segmentation has been consolidated in
Madrid,understandingsegmentationastheconcentrationofsocialhomogenousgroupsinfunction
ofitsdissimilarpositioninthesocioeconomicalsystem.Butalso,wecouldaffirmthatthereare
higherincomeandGDPpercapitagrowthsinthoseareaswherepeoplewithhighestincomerates
live. In that sense, we could also talk about an increasing polarization, which is defined by
Katzmanastheincreaseinhomogenoussocialcompositionofneighbourhoodsaswellasthe
increase of the heterogeneity between them (Kaztman et al., 2003, p. 16). Analysing those
differentsociallyproducedphysicalspaces,wehavealreadyshownhowitispossibletofind
homogenouspopulationcharacteristicsboundinsomeareas,insidethecityandthemetropolitan
areas.Therelationbetweenincomeandresidenceisclear,duetotheliberalhousingmarketand
differentialincomerelation.Inthatsense,itcouldbeworthwhiletopaycloseattentiontohow
currentsocialfieldssedimentationsareexpressedinurbanspaces,takingintoaccountalsohow
inequalityisbeingarticulatedandreproduced.Since,asBourdieunoticed:itisundoubtedhow
insensible incorporation in the social order structure is produced mainly through long time
experience,inconstantrepetitionsofspatialdistancesinwhichsocialdistancesarereified(1999:
121).However,thereisatheoreticalandempiricalproblem:oncewehavenoticedthaturban
socialspacehasbeenproducedinacomplexprocessofdifferentialdistributionofgoods,services,
andindividualandlocalagents,theproblemariseswhenweneedtoshowifthereisadifference
betweenlivinginoneareaorneighbourhoodoranother,whichwehavealreadypointedout:when
dosocialspacedifferencesbecomesourcesofinequality?
Therefore,weshouldtrytodescribehowothersocialfields,specificallysocialandculturalcapital
are related or not to social homogenous compositions of neighbourhoods and districts in the
MetropolitanArea,sincethoseelementsalsohavearelevantinterventioninsocialproductionof
those places and people, habitus, and not only the difference of income and GDP per capita.
Therefore, in the next section, we will pay attention mainly to educative and cultural levels,
specifically in those areas already considered as disadvantaged areas in Madrid City and its
metropolitanarea,thoseinwhichthereisaconcentrationoflowlevelsofincome,wherespacehas
been historically produced in a chaotic way due to a high density of population, industrial
development,anddependencyofotherareas(centraldistrictsorcapital).

1
7

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

Educativeandculturalsocialfields

Beforebeginningthissection,wewilltrytoanswerwhyitshouldbeimportanttoanalysethe
spatialreificationofthesocialandculturalbackgroundsinthemostdisadvantagedareasofthecity
incomparisonwithotherareasoftheMetropolitanArea.Ourmainpremisesarethefollowing:
first,becauseifwehavefoundastrongsegmentedsocialspacerelatedtodifferentialincomes,
historically different land uses designs, and infrastructure policies fostering new areas of
economicalemersion,weshouldkeepanalysingwhattherelationbetweenthosedifferentialsocial
spaces and education performance is, as well as the relationship between family cultural
backgroundandchildrenseducativebehaviourineachofthem,andlast,butnotleast,howwecan
understand the effects of the neighbourhood on the concentration of educative and cultural
vulnerabilities.
Inthatsense,despiteSpainshighdegreeofequity,comparedwithothercountriessuchasFrance,
GermanyorBelgium,itis,oneofthecountries,whichshowsasignificantrelationbetweenthe
studentssocial,economicandculturalbackgroundandtheireducationalperformance(Ferreret
al.2006:566).Thisrelation,followingtheresultsof2000PISAreport,followingFerreretal
(2006),iscorrelatedwiththetheoccupationalstatusoftheparents,secondly,familycultural
capital has a pronounced effect on students performance, and, also thirdly, the educational
standardoftheparentsisalsorelatedtotheeducativelevelachievedbyyoungstudents.The
correlation coefficient between parents years of study and those of sons and daughters is
significantinSpain,asComihasnoticed(2003,quotedCalero2005)fromastudybasedonthe
ECHP, pointing out that Spain is among the countries of the European Union with the least
educational mobility together with Ireland, Italy and Portugal. However, the coefficients
correlation between years of education of the sons/daughters and years of education of
father/motherisheterogeneousinrelationtoeachAutonomousCommunity,forexamplewhilethe
nationalaverageis0.43,inNavarreitisnotablylowerat0.20,inExtremaduraandAsturias,two
disadvantaged communities, the correlation is 0.51, and in Madrid it rises to 0.64, the most
significantone(Calero2005,basedfromECHP2000).So,MadridCityiswherethereisless
opportunitytoachieveahigherlevelofeducationthanonesprogenitors,whichisalsolinkednot
onlytosocialmobility,butalsotothereproductionofsocialandculturalcapital.
Anotherrelevantpointofdifferentialeducativestrengthisthenumberofearlyschoolleavers.By
onehand,inSpain,theaccesstocompulsorysecondaryeducation(56,9%)islowerthaninother
Europeancounties,whatCalero(2005)analysedasthemaincauseofthebottleneckintheSpanish
educationsystemandasourceofinequity.Byotherhand,Marchesi(2003)hasshownhowina
lowsocioculturalcontext,thenumberofstudentswhodonotfinishtheircompulsorystudiesis

1
8

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

higherthatinanyothercontexts.Also,ifwelookatearlyschoolleavers,itisimportanttonotice
that although the data has been decreasing since 1992 to 2002, it is still one of the highest
percentagescomparedtootherEuropeancountries,justunderPortugal,andfarfromDenmarks
8.4%of,orFinlands9.9%,differingaccordingtostudentgender,35.4%ofmalesareearlyschool
leavers,whileonly22.3%offemalesare.

However, it is important to notice how the Spanish Education System has been transformed
profoundlyoverthepastdecadesandthereforethedatahavebeenchanging.First,Spaindeveloped
arelevantefforttopromoteUniversalEducationmuchlaterthanotherclosercountries,especially
afterthedemocratizationofthecountry,whileotherwelfarepolicieswereimplemented(Calero
2005,FernndezEnguita2006).Inthatsense,theextensionofacompulsorylevelofeducation
(from14yearsto16in1990)andthespreadofpostcompulsoryeducationsupplyweredeveloped
inthenineties.However,thepublicsectorisstillclearlynotleadingeducationinSpaincompared
to other countries, and therefore private school systems are still the first choice for a high
percentage of students, because the right to chose freely between private, private with prices
subsidized with public funding, and public schools is being formally accepted, although it is
correlatedwithincomepossibilities(FernndezEnguita2006).
Ontheotherhand,theprocessofdecentralizationundergonesincetheeightieshasmeantthatapart
frombasicregulatorypowers,theexecutionofthepublicexpenditureoneducation,developing
programs and promoting a more or less public initiative is a competency of the Autonomous
Region(Calero2005:7).Inthatsense,wecanfindstrongdisparitiesinpublicfundingineducation
levels.Forexample,takingintoaccount2002Data,wefoundthattheMadridRegion

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

was dedicating just 1.87 % of the total GDP to nonuniversity education, while other less
economicalvigorousregionssuchasCastileLaMancha(4.33%)andExtremadura(5.53%)were
dedicating significantly more general expenditure. Also, differences in public expenditure per
studentonnonuniversityeducationcanbefound,sincewhileintheBasqueCountryandNavarre
morethanfourthousandeurosperstudentwerededicated,inGaliciaalmostoverthreethousand
andfivehundredeurosandtheMadridAutonomousRegionwasonlydedicatingtwothousandand
fivehundredeuros,thelowestratealongwithAndalusia.
WithregionalandintraregionaldatainMadrid,onthefollowingtableshowingthepercentageof
thepopulationwithstudiesbelowsecondaryschool(compulsory),wecanseehowevenifthe
percentage has been reduced in the past years, the highest percentage is still in the Southern
districts(52%),andSouthernMunicipalities(63.25%),comparedtotheCentre/Westernareas
(32.8%).And,therearealsostrongdifferencesbetweenpeoplewithadvancededucationinrelation
withthedistrictsandmunicipalitiesoftheRegion,andhowithaschangedornotoverthepast
years.Forexample,sinceintheCentreWestdistrictsoftheCity,theincreaseofpopulationwith
highereducationhasbeen3.4points,duringthelastfouracademicyears,intheSoutherndistricts
ithasonlyincreasedby0.8,whileintheSouthernmunicipalities,althoughtheincreasehasbeen
morerelevant,1.7,itisstilltheareainwhichthepercentageofpeoplewithuniversityeducationis
lower18%,dramaticallydissimilartothe53.2%oftheWesternmunicipalitiesoftheRegion.

Unites: persons and % percentages. Those data are not significant different if we
considered population with more than 16 years. Source: INE.

Thousand Total
os
persons M. C.

Centre South
/ West

Male and
Female

Resto de
municipios

Madrid City
North South

North

/ East

/ Eas

West

<2 ciclo secundaria

2000
2001
2002
2003
2004

2.353,3
2.330,0
2.380,7
2.462,1
2.471,9

53,7
51,8
51,5
52,0
51,2

2000
2001
2002

1.133,8 25,9
1.229,3 27,4
1.274,8 27,6

2003

1.268,5 26,8

2004

1.357,9 28,1

34,6 56,4
33,2 54,4
33,1 55,8
33,4 56,5
32,8 52,9

52,5 64,1
51,0 63,6
49,8 63,4
51,4 64,1
52,3 63,2

64,1
62,7
60,8
57,6
56,8

41,7
36,7
38,4
38,4
36,4

Enseanza superior
41,9 23,0
27,1 16,3
44,5 24,8
28,4 16,6
44,1 22,4
30,1 18,2

19,2
19,6
19,3

35,5
37,6
36,1

20,1

37,0

43,5 22,2
23,8

45,3

28,3 17,4
18,0

27,9

24,0 53.2

2
0

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

Anotherclassificationcanalsohelpustounderstandhowdifferentialpatternsofeducationare
distributedinthespaceoftheMetropolitanregion.Aswehavealreadypointedout,inSpainthere
isastronghistoricalpresenceofprivateschool,mainlybutnotonlyledbyCatholicreligious
orientation,andthereisamixedstageofsubsidizededucationsupply.FernndezEnguita(2006)
hasshownushowthemostimportantsegregationinMadridsEducativeSystemisthedivision
betweenStateandPrivateeducation.Throughoutthecountry,thereisanimportantpatternofnot
choosing public schools among urban families with higher income, better employments and
culturalposition,whichisclearlyinthecitiesofMadridandBarcelona.Inhiswords:Highand
medium social classes runningfrom public education, while it has tosupport increasinglythe
integrationofmostproblematicpupils(2006:6).Butalso,itisimportanttonoticethatprivate
schoolsarelocatedintheCentreDistrictsorinthewealthyperiphery(westandnorth)somostof
thepupilsattendingprivateschoolsusedprivatetransportationtocommutetotheirschools,while
just7%ofthepublicschoolattendantsdidso.Inthatsense,thereisastrongcorrelationbetween
theplaceofresidenceandthelocationoftheschoolmoresoinpubliceducation,thaninrelationto
privateeducation.Itisalsoimportanttosaythatoneofthemostimportantreferencesforbeing
placedinapublicorsubsidizedschoolistheproximityoftheresidence.However,thefollowing
tablecouldhelpusagaintoalsounderstandwhicharethelessonpatternsinthemostpopulated
municipalities of themetropolitan area in relationwithincome average and type of education
public/private/orsubsidizedprivate.

2
1

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

Intheregionalaverage,46,1%ofprimaryschoolpupilsarestudyinginaprivateschool(including
subsidizedones),whilealowerpercentageareinsecondaryschool,43,2%.However,inMadrid
City,withanincomeaverageslightlyovertheregionalone,thepercentageofpupilsstudyingina
privateschoolis66%inprimaryschools,and64%insecondaryschools.Also,wecanalsofind
strong dissimilarities if we look at the more disadvantaged municipalities in the Southern
Metropolis,forexample,inParla,withanincomeaverage40pointsbelowtheregionalaverage,
thepercentageofpupilsattendingprivateschoolsisonly6.8%inprimaryand5.2%insecondary,
almostalltheschoolsofthepublicsectorbeing89.5%inprimaryand91.1%insecondary.While
inthewealthiestmunicipalityoftheregion,PozuelodeAlarcn(RD100:172),where85%of
primarystudentsarestudyinginprivateschools,18%ofthetotalnumberofprimaryschoolsare
private,and67%aresubsidized.ThesamehappenedinBoadilladelMonte(RD100:148)where
76,9%ofpupilsinprimaryattendprivateschools,andevenahigherpercentageofstudentsstudy
insecondaryprivateschools,theunitsofprivateschoolsbeing76%inprimaryschooland78%at
thesecondary level. So, it shouldalso be noticedthat there is also a correlationbetweenthe
numberofpupilsattendingprivateorpublicschoolsandthesupply,inallcasesofincomeaverage.
Forexample,alsoinwealthymunicipalities(wellovertheincomeaverage)locatedintheWestern

2
2

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

region, the municipalities in which a high percentage of pupils are attending private school
(includingsubsidized)isclearlycorrelatedwiththenumberofprivateschoolsandnotonlywith
theincome level. For example in Majadahonda (RD100: 150) the number of pupils attending
primarylevelinprivateschoolsisconsiderablylessthaninpreviouswealthycases,just36.7%,
beingevenlessatthesecondarylevel,30.7%,andthemaindifferenceisthestrongerpublicsupply
thaninotherwealthymunicipalities56%inprimaryand63%insecondary.Also,inSouthernand
Eastern municipalities, with a similar income average, the amount of pupils attending will be
differentdependingontheprivatesupply.
Alcorcn(SouthMunicipality,RD100:82.6)has42%ofpupilsattendingprivateprimaryschools,
and 36% in private secondaryschools being 56% of the school units private or subsidized in
primarylevel,and48.8%insecondary.However,inCoslada(Easternmunicipality,RD100:81.8)
6.2%ofpupilsattendprivateschoolsinprimaryand4.8%insecondary,whiletheprivateand
subsidizedprimarysupplyissignificantlyless10.2%,andevenlessinsecondary,4.8%.Inthat
sense,obviouslythesupplymakesadifferenceinthetypeofeducationchosen,andnotonlythe
incomeaverage,althoughinwealthyareastheprivatesupplyismostlyexceededbytheattendance,
sincetheyreceivestudentsfromotherareasbutalsobecausethereisnotenoughpublicsupplyas
therewasinPozuelo,Boadilla,VillaviciosaandMadridCity,wheresubsidisedandprivateschools
areincrementingtheirpupils.Inthatsense,duringthelastyears,theincreaseofpublicandprivate
supplyintheMadridAutonomousCommunityhasbeenimbalanced.
Accordingtothetotalnumberofpupilsinpublicandprivate(includingsubsidized),althoughinall
regionsthenumberofpublicpupilattendancehasincreasedexceptinMadridCity,therehasbeen
apositivebalancebetweentheincreaseofpupilsinprivateschoolcomparedtopublicschoolinthe
mostwealthyregions:3.274pupilsintheWesternregion,3.956intheNorthernRegion,increasing
twopointsintherelation(48%ofpupilsinWesternareaattendedprivateschoolin2005).In
MadridCity,thepercentageofpupilsattendingprivateschoolis59%,anincreasedof14.059,
whiletherehasbeenadecreaseof191pupilsstudyinginpublicschoolslastyear20052006.
WhileintheSouthernRegiontheincreaseofpupilsattendingpublicschoolsis8.739,althoughthe
percentageofpupilsattendingprivateschoolhasalsoincreased,therelationisstillfavouredfor
pupilsstudyinginpublicschools(76%).

2
3

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

Source:Toro(2007:64)
Therefore,itwouldbeinterestingifwecouldalsonotehowthedistributionofpublicandprivate
supplyisplacedinsidethemunicipalities,inordertoseeifthereisaconcentrationofprivateoffers
in the most advantaged areas or if it is equally distributed. But also, if there is a source of
inequality,beingapupilinapublicorprivateschool,andifthereisadifferencebetweenthe
regioninwhichonelives.Inthatsense,wewillpayattentiontoeducationalfailureinrelationwith
private/stateandareasinMadridCityandtheMetropolitanRegion.
Canwetalkabouteducationalsegregation?
Thekeyquestionwecouldraiseaboutinequality(socialsegregation)andnotonlydifferencesis
thefollowing:Coulditbesaidthattherearebetterpossibilitiesoflearninginrelationtothekindof
schooloneattendsandtheneighbourhoodregioninwhichonelives?
Thefirstdifficultyistomeasuresuccessorfailureintheeducationsystem.Ononehandwecould
firsttakealookatthenumberofpupilswhoreachedtheeducationalgradelevelaccordingtothe

2
4

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

agedesignatedasthecompulsoryeducationlevel 10,butwecouldalsothinkaboutthenumberof
students who keep studying after the compulsory stage in order to complete the education
necessarytoaccessuniversityorothermoreprofessionalorientededucation.
Inordertodothis,wewillfollowthereportelaboratedbytheofficialinspectionofficeinthe
MadridAutonomousCommunity(Toro2007),becausewedonothavetheintramunicipaldata,
whichwouldallowusamorepreciseanalysis.Inthatsense,wefoundthattheEasternRegion
(72,6%)hasthelowestpercentageofstudentsachievingthestipulatedcompulsoryeducational
gradelevel,followedbythesouthernpupilsscore(73.6%).Onthecontrary,betterpercentages
arereachedbyWesternandNorthernareas,andinMadridCity(80.2%)

Accordingtothelatestavailableresults(Toro2007:78),alsorelevant,isthelownumberofpupils
reachingthelevelwithoutfailingoneortwosubjects.Inthatsense,againpupilsoftheWestern
Areaschoolshadabetterperformance,with52.9%,theSouthernandEasternareasbeingtheones
withworseresults:only37%ofpupilsgettheGradewithoutfailinganysubjects.Itcouldbe
interestingtogomoreindepthintotheseresults,combiningthemwithstateandprivatedivision,
butunfortunately,wehavenotfoundtheseOfficialData.

10

Whenpupilsdonotpassfourthlevel,theydonotget ESOGrade,andareoutoftheofficial
academicitineraryeducativesystem,whichmeansareductionofpossibilitiesofbetterinsertioninto
theemploymentmarket.However,anumberofstudentsabandonedschoolbeforebeingtestedinthis
level,whentheyreachedtheageof16,soperhapsthenumberofpupilsnotreachingESOismore
thanthosewhofailedatthelastmoment,inthefourthlevel(Bernalteetal.)

2
5

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

However, if we pay attention to some internal evaluations, we also found slightly significant
variations.Forexample,onemathsevaluationintheMadridAutonomousregion,inthe20022003
academicyear,inthe6thyearofprimary,showedushowinMadridCapitalthereisadifference
between the correct answer percentage obtained in relation with the type of the school
(public/private)andthearea,5.46pointsofdifferenceinSouthernregionalschools,11.49pointsin
Westmetropolitanarea,andjusta4.66pointsinMadridCity.

Source:(DePrada2004)

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

However,weshouldalsopayattentiontonewdifferentmechanisms,recentlycreatedtodealwith
educationaldifficultiesattheendofthecompulsoryeducationage.Inthatsense,first,apupilolder
thanorcloseto16yearsoldisabletogetintoCurriculumDiversification(Toro2007:62)forone
ortwoacademicyears,since1997,ifheorshehashadlearningdifficultiesinpreviousyearsorthe
OrientationDepartmentcanpredictthattherewillbehighprobabilityoffailureifkeptwithinthe
ordinarycurriculum,alwayswiththeEducativeInspectionApproval,andwithparentandpupil
allegations.Thisisaspecialclassinwhichthepupilcanreceivebetterattentioninordertogetthe
minimumlevelnecessarytoobtaintheCompulsoryEducationGrade,calledESO.
However,accordingtothetypeofschool,itissignificanthowthenumberofgroupsinpublic
schoolsis280(twoyearsprogram)and194(oneyear),whilethereisjust96(twoyear)and15
(oneyear)groupsinprivateschools,andtheeffectivenessissimilarinbothtypesofschools,
around75%.

However, the differential point is not only centred on the number of groups, but also in its
distributionsamongareas.Inthatsense,theregionalaverageofpupilsattendingDiversification
Curriculum(DC)classesrepresents7.23%,althoughmostofthemareattendingpublicschools
10.44%ofthetotalofpublicattendance,whilejust3.5%ofthetotalinprivateschool.Whenwe
readthestatisticsacrosstheregioninwhichtheschoolislocated,thenthepercentagesagain
changeseverely.IntheWesternarea,thepercentageofpupilsinthiskindofclassesrepresents
5.06%, but almost all of them are located in public schools, representing 8% of the total of
scholars,whileonly0.68%ofstudentsareinthoseclassesinprivateschools.However,inthe
Southernschools,thenumberofpupilsattendingDCineventhepublicsectorisoverrepresented
11.5%,whiletheprivatebeinghalfthatat5.5%,itistheareawithmorestudentsinprivateschool
inDCclasses.SoitseemsthatstudentswithlearningproblemsaremoreconcentratedinDC

27

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

groupsinoneregionthananother,andalsoinpublicschools,becausethereisnotabalanced
supplyofthosekindofreinforceprograms.
Ontheotherhand,thosestudentswhichhavenotreachtheESOGradeandhavedecidedtoleave
school, can chose to get into a Social Guarantee Program (GS), in order to get a basic
professionallyorientededucationthatallowspupilstoentertheworkingworldorkeepstudyingin
asecondaryitinerary.ThoseprogramsaremostlyorientedtoyoungpeoplewithoutabasicGrade,
thatneedurgentemploymentinsertion,duetolowereconomicalresources,marginationorsocial
exclusionvulnerabilityorforpeoplewithdisabilities(Toro2007:120)Atthatpoint,wealsofound
dissimilaritiesbetweenpublicandprivateattentiontothesestudents,andtheregionalsubdivision.
Thereare3.995pupilsinthisGSprogram,inthe20042005academicyear,and68.4%ofthemare
studyinginpublicschools,mostlylocatedinMadridCity(953),andtheSouthernArea(921),
beinglessconcentratedintheWesternArea(230)andNorthernarea(162).Inprivateschools31%
ofthetotalisdistributed,especiallyconcentratedinMadridCityandtheSouthernArea.Oneofthe
mainconsequenceswecanextractisthehighereffortthatpublicschoolsaremakingtodevelop
theseprogrammes,andalso,thatyoungEasternstudentswitheducationalchallengestoreaching
theESOGrade(18.4%)mustgotootherareastotrytokeepstudyingsincetheofferinthisareais
insufficient.

Also,ifwelookatthenumberofpupilsinsecondarynotcompulsoryeducationlevels,wecould
alsoobserveimportantdifferences.Studentsareabletochoosebetweencontinuingtheirstudiesin
aSecondarySchoolacademicitineraryorstartaprofessionallyorientededucation,Professional
Education,similartoTradeSchoolinothercountries.IntheAcademicitinerary,57.6%ofpupils
registered in public schools in the entire region, while the percentage in Madrid City was
significantlylower,wherejust37.7%ofstudentsareinthepublicsector,whileinthesouthern
regiononly21%ofstudentsareregisteredinaprivateschool.
Alsoaccordingtothisstate/privatedivisionandtheperformanceatthisleveltherearesignificant
results,thehighestsuccessratepercentageisconcentratedin20052006intheSocialSciencesand
Humanities itinerary in those pupils attending private schools (87.5%), while there was a
considerably lower percentage of pupils in public school passing without failing any subjects
(67.4%).Almostthesameproportioncanbefoundinotheritineraries,thedifferencebeinggreater
intheNaturalSciencesandHealthitinerarywherethesuccessrateis91%inprivateschool,while
only74%inpublicschools.Ifwecrossthoseresultswiththelocationwecouldalsosaythatinthe

28

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

secondcourseofSecondarySchooltheworstpercentageofpupilsnotachievingtheGrade,are
thoselocatedintheSouthern(33.4%)andEastern(35.6%)municipalities,whileintheWestern
Schoolsthepercentageis22.9%(Toro2007:164)
In conclusion, we could say public / private school system, and educative regional areas are
elementsthatareclearlyrelatedwiththelevelofperformanceofpupilsintheMadridEducation
System.EasternandSouthernmunicipalities,inparticular,aretheoneswiththeworstresults,
mostlyinpupilsattendingpublicschools,andespeciallyifweconsiderthenumberofstudentsin
SocialGuaranteeProgramsandpupilsintheDiversificationCurriculum.
Allthosedataandconclusionsleadusahugeroadtokeepsearchingthroughqualitativeresearch
methodstodiscoverhowtheseresultsarecreatingmoreorlesssocialdisconnection.Infact,there
isanotherrelevantelementaboutwhichweshouldalsopayattentionsincehigherpercentagesof
migrantsleavinginthosemoredisadvantagesareasareattendingmainlypublicschools,being
insertedinanalreadydichotomisededucationsystem.Inthatsense,insecondaryschoolinthe
region, the proportion among foreign students is unbalanced, since pupils from nonEuropean
countriesareconcentratedinpublicschools,andespeciallyinthosedisadvantagesneighbourhood:
i.e.inSanBlas,Barajas,Moratalaz,VillaverdeandTetunin20052006academicyeartherewere
nostudentsinprivateschools,beingtheaverageof14.5%offoreignpupilsattendingschoolsin
theregion.Inthesubsidizedschoolstheaverageofforeignstudentsisjust9.8%,againbelowthe
average,whileinpublicschoolsthepercentageis24.9%.InthesomedistrictsofMadridCity,as
Tetun,thepercentageis53.4%inpublicschools,and50,6%inthecentraldistrict.(Povedaetal.
2007)
Theunequaleducativetendencieshavebeenalreadyanalysedasproblemstobesolvedbythe
authoritieswithcompetenciesinthematter,ononehandtheMinistryofEducation,andonother,
bytheEducationCouncilofMadridRegionalCommunity.Infact,severalpolicieshavebeen
developed,characterisedmostlytoattendthosemorepublicproblematicschools.Inthatsense,
inallthecountryanewcooperationpolicywaslaunchedbytheMinistryorEducation,called
PROA, since 20052006 academic year, with three main areas of intervention, Academic
accompaniedPrograminprimary,andsecondary,andHelpandReinforcement,inthoseSchools
enrolledintheProgram.InMadrid,duringthecurrentacademicyear,111schoolsareusingthose
funds in Primary level, and 78 in Secondary Accompanied Program and 37, in Help and
Reinforcement.
Also,anewprogramforprioritisingschoolshasbeenspecificallydevelopedinMadridRegional
Communityinordertoimprovethelowperformanceofpupilsinsertedinpubliclocatedin

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

disadvantages areas, trying to follow English and French initiates launched in the eighties.
However,inthiscase,theattentionispaidjusttoschoolswhichareaskedforit,andthereisstilla
softcoordinationamongthemandtheregionalcommunity,andthereisnotcoordinationwithother
socialservicesintheneighbourhoodtheyarelocatedin,asitisusuallyplannedinFranceor
Belgiumcases(Alegre&Subirats2007:43),itshouldberelevanttocheckifthefearofsocial
stigmatizationofthoseareasisoneofthereasonofthissoftpolicy.
Furthermore, lately, recent public efforts have been done to try to solve educative problems
associatedwitharrivingmigrantsinpublicschoolsandotherproblematicsituationinschools,with
highpercentagesofvulnerablepupils.First,regionalpoliciestoimprovetheintegrationofmigrant
pupils,aslinksclasses,reinforceteachersformation,translatorsandinterculturalprograms,but
alsootherprogramshavebeenlaunchedbytheMinistryofEducationandCulture.Byonehand,in
November 2007, two new programmes were singed among the Ministry andthe Autonomous
Communities,oneofthem,withtheaimofimprovingtheacademicperformanceofpupils,funded
with25millionsofeuros,andanotherone,centredonthefightagainsttheearlyschoolleavers,
with11.2millionsofeuros,bothofthemshouldbealsobefundedbyregionalauthoritieswith
another60%.
In fact, it is still soon to evaluate those public policies to balance the educative segregation,
although it could be said that most of them are concentrated to change low percentages of
academic performance as much as to improve the social conditions of schools, and learning
environment,howeverIcouldsaythereisnoattentiontoplanarealcoherentandgeneralpolicyto
interveneinthosequestionsmorerelatedwiththeeducativesegregationassourceofinequality.
OnewaycouldbetocoordinatezonepoliciesasithasbeenalreadyplaninsomeAutonomous
Communities,inordertoreducethedisconnectionamongsocialspaces,thesocialhomogeneityin
schools and neighbourhoods and to avoid the low income average students and familys
concentration.AsWest(2006)suggested,onewaycouldbetoexercisepubliccontrolofthechoice
ofschool,notonlyinpublicschoolsbutalsoinprivateones,since,theexperiencesofcarrying
pupilsfromoneparttotheanotherofthecityhavenotbeensuccessful,inthosecaseswhereithas
beenimplemented.Wehopeourresearchwillbeabletopointoutthroughourfieldworkmore
interestingresultsinrelationtothosepreliminaryadvances.
Bibliography

(CAM),I.d.E."IndicadordelProductoInteriorBrutoMunicipaldelaComunidaddeMadrid2002
2003,2004(provisional)y2005(avance)."From:
http://www.madrid.org/iestadis/gazeta/region/ipibm04nt.htm

30

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

(CAM)(1997)PlanregionaldeEstrategiaterritorial.Madrid:ConsejeradeOrdenacindelterritorio
deMadrid.
Alegre,M.andJ.Subirats(2007).Educacineinmigracin:nuevosretosparaEspaaenuna
perspectivacomparada.Madrid,CIS.
Allen,R.L.(1999)."TheSocioSpatialMakingandMarkingofUs:TowardaCriticalPostmodern
SpatialTheoryofDifferenceandCommunity."SocialIdentities5(3):249277.
Atkinson,R.a.K.,K.(2000)."Owneroccupation,socialmixandneighbourhoodimpacts."Policy
andPolitics28(1):93108.
Atkinson,R.a.K.,K.(2002)."AreaEffects:whatdotheymeanforBritishhousingandregeneration
policy?"EuropeanJournalofHousingPolicy2(2):147166.
Atkinson,R.a.K.K.(2001)."DisentanglingAreaEffects:EvidencefromDeprivedandNon
DeprivedNeighbourhoods."UrbanStudies38(12):22772298.
BatallerEnguix,J.J.,LpezdeLucio,Ramn,(etal.)(2004).GuadeUrbanismodeMadrid.Madrid,
SigloXX
Bonal, X., Rambla, X. Caldern, E. & Pros, N. (2005). "La descentralizacin educativa en
Espaa. Una mirada comparativa a los sistemas escolares de las Comunidades
Autnomas.."
Bourdieu,P.(1977).Outlineofatheoryofpractice.Cambridge,CambridgePublishing.
Bourdieu,P.(1999).Efectosdelugar.Lamiseriadelmundo.P.e.a.Bourdieu.Madrid,Akal:119
125.
Bruquetas,F.,MorenoFuentes,J.Walliser,A.(2004).LaRegeneracindeBarriosDesfavorecidos.
DocumentodeTrabajoMadrid,FundacinAlternativas.
BruquetasGaln,C.e.a.(2005).Elurbanismoanteelencuentrodelasculturas.Lainsercin
socioespacialdelinmigranteenlaComunidaddeMadrid..Madrid,ComunidaddeMadrid.

Buck,N.(2001)."IdentifyingNeighbourhoodEffectsonSocialExclusion."UrbanStudies38(12):
22512275.
Buck,N.,Gordon,I,Harding,A.&Turok,I.(2005).Changingcities.Rethinkingurban
competitiveness,cohesionandgovernace.London,PalgraveMacMillan.
Burgess,S.,Gardiner,K.,andPropper,C..(2001)."GrowingUp:School,familyandareainfluences
onadolescentslaterlifechances."
Burgess,S.,Wilson,D.&Lupton,R.(2005).Parallellives?Ethnicsegregationinschoolsand
neighbourhoods.CASEpaper101.C.f.A.o.S.Exclusion.
Compitello,M.A.(2003)."DesigningMadrid,19851997."Cities20(6):403411.
Costa,F.(Coord.EdicinOnline,Junio2007)."Atlashistricodelasciudadeseuropeas."from
http://www.xcosta.arq.br/atlas/Atlas.htm.
DePradaVicente,M.D.c.(2005).Evaluacindelrendimientoescolar:matemticas,6Educacin
Primaria.Plangeneraldeactuacin.InformeFinaldelainspeccindeEducacin.Equipo
Interterritorial,Curso20022003.Madrid,ComunidaddeMadrid.
Denche,C.A.,Julio(1986).Aspectossociolgicosdeunaperiferia.Villaverde.A.y.L.M.Dezde
BaldenGarca,Flora,AyuntamientodeMadrid.ConcejaladeRelacionesInstitucionalesy
Comunicacin:270309.
DazOrueta,F.(2007)."Madrid:urbanregenerationprojectsandsocialmobilization."Cities24(n3):
183193.
Fainstein,S.S.(2001)."Competitiveness,Cohesion,andGovernance:TheirImplicationsfor
SocialJustice."InternationalJournalofUrbanandRegionalResearch25(4).
Fainstein,S.S.(2005)."Citiesanddiversity,ShouldWeWantIt?CanWePlanForIt?"Urban
AffairsReview41(1):319
FernndezGmez,J.A.(2005).Buscandoelpandeltrabajo.Sobrelaindustrializacinfranquistay
suscostessociales.Villaverde(Madrid)19401965Madrid,MioyDvila.
Forrest,R.a.K.,A.(2001)."SocialCohesion,SocialCapitalandtheNeighbourhood."UrbanStudies
38(12)(21252143).
Gracin,G.d.e.d.c.B.(s/f)."EstructurasocialdelfracasoescolarenlaESOdentrodelaComunidad
deMadrid"fromwww.colectivobgracian.com/articulos_CBG/articulos_cbg/abandono.pdf
Hamnett,C.(2003).UnequalCity:LondonintheGlobalArena.London,Routledge.
Harvey,D.(1990).Theconditionofpostmodernity:AnEnquiryintotheOriginsofCultural
Change.London&Massachusset,Blackwell
Jessop,B.(2004).FromLocalitiesviatheSpatialTurntoSpatioTemporalFixes:AStrategic
RelationalOdyssey.SECONSDiscussionForum,ContributionNo.6.Lancaster
University

3
1

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

Katzman,R.R.,A.(2005)."Segregacinsocial,empleoymercadodetrabajoenMontevideo."
RevistadelaCEPAL85131148.
Kesteloot,C.(2003,04/2008)."UrbansociospatialconfigurationsandthefutureofEuropeancities
"PaperpreparedfortheEurexonlineseminar,fromhttp://www.shakti.uniurb.it/eurex/.
Larson,S.(2003)."ShiftingmodernidentitiesinMadridsrecenturbanplanning,architectureand
narrative."Cities20(6):395402.
LealMaldonado,J.(1997)."Sociologadelespacio:elordenespacialdelasrelaciones
sociales."Polticaysociedad25:2136.
LealMaldonado,J.(2002)."Segregacinsocialymercadosdeviviendaenlasgrandesciudades."
RES.RevistaEspaoladeSociologa(2):5975.
LealMaldonado,J.(2007).Desigualdadsocial,segregacinymercadodeviviendaenMadrid.
Viviendaysegregacinenlasgrandesciudadeseuropeas.J.c.LealMaldonado.Madrid,
AyuntamientodeMadrid.
Lefebvre,H.(1991).TheproductionofSpace.Cambridge&MA,Blackwell.
LpezdeLucio,R.(1999).Madrid.LatransformacindelaciudadenveinteaosdeAyuntamientos
democrticos1979/1999.Madrid,AyuntamientodeMadrid.
LpezdeLucio,R.(2000)."Madrid19791999.Perfilesdeunatransformacinurbanadesconocida."
RevistaUrban4.
Lupton,R.(2003)."NeighbourhoodEffects:Canwemeasurethemanddoesitmatter?"CASEPaper
n.73.
Lupton,R.,Noden,P.,POWER,A.(1999)."Poverty,SocialExclusionandNeighbourhood:Studying
theareabasesofsocialexclusion."CASEPaper,n22.
Madrid,A.d.(2006).AnuarioEstadstico,AyuntamientodeMadrid.
Marcuse,P.(1989)."Dualcity'muddymetaphorforaquarteredcity."InternationalJournalofUrban
andRegionalResearch(13):697708.
Marcuse,P.e.v.K.,R.(2000).Globalizingcities,anewspatialorder?London,Blackwell.
MarchesiUllastres,A.(2003).ElfracasoescolarenEspaa.Madrid,Documentodetrabajo11/2003
FundacinAlternativas.
MarchesiUllastres,A.M.A.,R.(2006).EscuelasdexitoenEspaa.Sugerenciaseinterrogantesa
partirdelinformePisa2003.DocumentoBsico.X.S.M.d.l.Educacin.Madrid,
Santillana:88.
Massey,D.(1993).Powergeometryandaprogressivesenseofplace.MappingtheFutures:Local
Cultures,GlobalChange,.J.Bird,Curtis,etal.(eds).London,Routledge:5969.
Massey,D.(1996)."Politicisingspaceandplace."ScottishGeographicalMagazine112(2):117123.
Massey,D.y.J.,Pat(1995).Aplaceintheworld?Places,CulturesandGlobalization..NewYork
Oxford,OpenUniversity.
Mndez,R.e.a.(2006)."Metamorfosisindustrialdelasgrandesciudadesynuevasestrategias
derevitalizacin:elejemplodeMadrid."BoletndelaA.G.E42:729.
Mills,C.(2008)."Reproductionandtransformationofinequalitiesinschooling:thetransformative
potentialofthetheoreticalconstructsofBourdieu."BritishJournalofSociologyofEducation
29(1):7989.
Mollenkopf,J.H.C.,M.(1991).DualCity:RestructuringNewYorkNewYork,RussellSage
Foundation.
Musterd,S.,Kesteloot,C,Murie,A.&Ostendorf,W.(s/f)."Socialexclusionandmodesof
integration.Literaturereview."UrbexSeries,n.1.
Oberti,M.(2007).""Socialandschooldifferentiationinurbanspace:inequalitiesandlocal
configurations"."EnvironmentandPlanningA39(1)208227.
OcaaOcaa,C.(2005)."Microanlisissociodemogrficodeespaciosurbanos."BoletndelaAGE
40(534).
Poveda,D.e.a.(2007).SegregacintnicaenMadrid..Mimeo.
Purcell,M.(2007)."CityRegions,NeoliberalGlobalizationandDemocracy:AResearchAgenda."
InternationalJournalofUrbanandRegionalResearch31(1):197206.
Robert,J.T.e.a.(2007)."ESPONScenariosReport."from
http://www.espon.eu/mmp/online/website/content/publications/98/1378/1005_EN.html.
RodriguezVignoli,J.(2001)."Segregacinresidencialsocioeconmica:ques?,cmosemide?,
questpasando?,importa?"CEPALECLAC.SeriePoblacinyDesarrollo16.
Sassen,S.,(,Princeton,NJ)(2001).TheGlobalCity.London,NewYork,Tokyo,PrincetonUniversity
Press.
Scott,A.J.(2007)."InsidetheCity:OnUrbanisation,PublicPolicyandPlanning."UrbanStudies
45(4):755772.

ECPR Workshop 2008 Joint Sessions: 11 - 16 April

Workshop 4. Metropolitan Governance and Social Inequality

SerranoCambronero,M.M.(2002)."Influenciadelascarreteraseneldesarrollourbanodela
ComunidaddeMadridenelperiodo19871997."AnalesdeGeografadela
UniversidadComplutenseVol.extraordinario(2002)459469.
Shields,R.(1991).Placeofthemargin.AlternativeGeographiesofmodernity.London,Routledge.
Sibley,D.(1995).Geographiesofexclusion.SocietyandDifferenceintheWest.London&New
York,Routledge.
Soja,E.(1989).PostmodernGeographies.London&NewYork,Verso.
SubiratsHumet,J.(2002).Gobiernolocalyeducacin.Barcelona,Ariel.
Tern,F.d.C.(1999).Madrid:ciudadregin.Vol.II.Entrelaciudadyelterritorio,enlasegunda
mitaddelsigloXX.Madrid,ComunidaddeMadrid.
ToroMrida,J.C.(2007).Resultadosdelaevaluacinfinaldealumnoseneducacinprimaria,
educacinsecundariaobligatoria,diversificacincurricular,garantasocial,bachillerato
yciclosformativos.CursoEscolar20052006.Documentodetrabajo,n.21,CAM
INSPECCINDEEDUCACIN.
Turok,I.M.,Vlad(2007)."ThetrajectoriesofEuropeancities,19602005."Cities24(3):165182.
Wacquant,L.(1999)."UrbanMarginalityintheComingMillenium."UrbanStudies36(10):pp.1639
1647.
Wacquant,L.(2000).LogicsOfUrbanPolarization:TheViewFromBelow..RenewingClass
Analysis.F.D.RosemaryCrompton,MikeSavageandJohnScott..Cambridge,Basil
Blackwell:Pp.107119.
Wacquant,L.(2007).Loscondenadosdelaciudad.Gueto,periferiasyEstado.BuenosAires,Siglo
XXIEditores.
Webber,R.(2007)."Themetropolitanhabitus:itsmanifestations,locations,andconsumption
profiles."EnvironmentandPlanningA39(1)(182207).
West,A.(2006)."Schoolchoice,equityandsocialjustice:thecaseformorecontrol."BritishJournal
ofEducationalStudies54(1):1533.

3
3