SLIDE 1 My work analyzes the spatial dimension of urban marginality and is based on the French case.

SLIDE 2 In my presentation, first, I will refer to the literature that links the production and re-production of exclusion areas to the affirmation of globalization and metropolization processes of contemporary cities. Secondly, I criticize the role ascribed to the spatial dimension in some of these theories. Finally, I stress some paradoxical effects of French policies that take the spatial concentration of vulnerable populations as the main explanatory factor of social exclusion processes. SLIDE 3 Returning to the first point, the transition to a post-Fordist society and the emergence of phenomena that I have put into the slide, on which I don't dwell, because they were widely discusses during the class, ...I said that this transition has led some authors to underline the emergency of a new paradigm that oppose included and excluded. In this view, a society increasingly polarized manifests itself in a dual city. At the most, in France, some scholars talk about a city with three speeds, stressing the increasing spatial segregation that divides: the gentrification of city centres, from the peri-urbanization of middle class, and the confinement of peripheries, in which poor-people are concentrated. First of all, we can say that these theories assume an overlap between social exclusion and space: that is, the exclusion is both social and spatial. Furthermore, these approaches recognize a passive role to territory, as it's determined by macrosocial forces. SLIDE 4 Actually, in these approaches, the spatial variable plays a negative role: the concentration in a specific area would have the effect of exacerbating the social exclusion of these populations This is the result of the addition of spatial features (lack of opportunities, low accessibility, slum housing) and individual characteristics (populations with shortcomings in the various capitals, in a bourdieusan sense). In other words, the ideal-typical neighborhood of these approaches is what I put in the box: The spatial confinement and concentration of vulnerable populations, that is due to macrosocial processes, produces negative area effects, that exacerbate social exclusion, and, consequently, generates processes of stigmatization of territory and residents SLIDE 5 Then, I wanted to check if this representation of deprived neighborhood was true. In other words, I checked if this spatial concentration is determined only by macro dynamics and, especially, if this concentration produces only negative effects on social life of individuals. To achieve this goal, I have looked for research on the neighborhood effects.

The neighborhood effects may be defined as: the independent, separable effects on life chances that arise from living in a particular neighbourhood. First, we can say that this debate has focused more on the study of slums, although the definition covers any type of area. Secondly, many studies agree in identifying negative effects in the spatial concentration of poverty. These negative effects can be divided into 2 main groups: on the one hand, the effects arising from the location of these territories and their characteristics (low accessibility, lack of opportunities; spatial mismatch with respect to labor markets), which has the effect of confining poor-people in their neighborhood. The second group includes the effects arising from the social relations that individuals develop inside the neighborhood. In particular, an homogenous population develop, on the one hand, a community social capital based on strong ties, that doesn't fit to the contemporary city, on the other, a negative socialization due to the lack of alternative role-models, that can also lead to a ghetto culture. SLIDE 6 But, this view is contradicted by some french research. First, research on poor mobility stress that the local context is a source of resources for these populations, an hub of social networks, based on strong ties, which can form an autochthony capital This capital is based on local rootedness of these groups and it plays a very important role for poor people. It enables to plug a gap in other capitals and also to reach other opportunities: for example, in the case of mobility, own local social network can promoting phenomena of informal car sharing, which desegregated these populations. Instead, research on residential mobility in these poor areas stress that these territories are affected by large mobility processes, mostly ascending, so contradicting the hypothesis of a confinement of these populations and negative effects on life chances. Finally, these studies show that, in France, there are processes of ethnic-discrimination involving part of Maghrebi and sub-Saharan Africa. This is due to both avoidance strategies implemented by social actors and macro social forces, for example the real estate market. SLIDE 7 Compared to the initial question, it seems to me that these quotations can help to understand the role of the spatial variable in these territories. The first says: the area (in which individuals reside) [...] is a milieu, [...] a productive entity, with properties that have specific effects on the course of human actions [... ] But, [...], if the milieu-neighborhood has specific effects, that is to say [...] effects that can't be derived by the social structure these effects are not autonomous , that is to say, [they] can be understood only from the social structure. [...] The effects of social characteristics of milieu-neighborhoods don't operate independently from social properties of individuals and their history.

The second, however, states that: the conclusions tend to support a middle-range position within the area effects debate that is, that both structure and agency are important in influencing neighbourhood problems area effects [] could be positive and negative in both [] Many residents in the deprived areas are content with the familiarity and support found in their locality and it would be unwise to suggest that their social relations are impaired or deficient SLIDE 8 Despite these findings, in France, there's a strong social policy, the politique de la ville, which takes for granted the spatial concentration of poverty as explanatory factor of social problems. In other words, starting from the observation of spatial concentration of social problems, this policy aims to fight social exclusion by acting against tterritorial concentration, thus exchanging the effects with causes. This policy was institutionalized after the 1990 riots in Vaulx-en-Velin, a Lyons banlieue. We can see some picture of the riot in the slide. Historically, Lyons has hosted the most important french riots, except those in 2005, and the lyonnays agglomeration sees the presence of many urban areas have entered in the collective imagination as urban infernos. Returning to the politique de la ville, we can say that it's a policy led by the State in partnership with local communities (governance) in favour of urban areas, where social deprivation is high. In this policy, a wide range of actions is grouped together: from Urban Planning and Economic development, to education, safety and so on. To not expand the discourse, I will consider only the issue of urban renewal, that, to struggle social exclusion, aims to achieve the goal of social mixit in these neighborhoods through the demolition of social housing and the construction of middle class housing. These policies represent the more recent evolution of politique de la ville. The policy of demolition was inaugurated in the Duchre discrict at Lyons, which you can see an image on the right. SLIDE 9 To understand the effects of these policies, I get help from some pictures about a Parisian suburb, but the processes are similar in Lyons, and in France in general. First of all,for some residents, the demolition implies being rehoused. So, it happens that some households are forced to move several times, in other buildings will be demolished in their turn. You can understand the biographical disruptions generated by this type of residential trajectory. Indeed, these operations very often generate a residential mobility of proximity, not far from the point of departure, and, in many cases, in an area spatially and socially similar to that of departure. In other words, not upward trajectories are stressed, unlike the "natural" upward residential mobility of many of these social groups, as we saw earlier. Moreover, these operations destabilize resources and social networks rooted in the neighborhood, that are very important for deprived social actors, as we have seen.

Brief, these policies appear to be effective in struggle the marginalization and the stigmatization of these territories, for example, through the construction of new centralities and the increasing of infrastructures the politique de la ville, however, seems less effective in fight individual social exclusion, because some households find themselves in an environment similar to that of departure, however, having to rebuild a relationship with the territory. Indeed, these policies don't take into account the spatial practices of these groups and, especially, they don't act on the structural causes of exclusion. SLIDE 10 In conclusion, I hope that this presentation makes clear that urban marginality is not determined only by macro social processes, as argued by some theories, but that must be considered simultaneously the micro, meso and macro level. Finally, I hope to be able to highlight the paradoxical effects that can produce a social policy "highly spatialized" that doesn't take into account the complexity of social life in these territories. Thanks for your attention!