Search

We examine how different spatial compositions affect the educational achievement in mathematics of 16-year-old students in Chile, a Latin American country with high inequality and one of the most segregated education systems in the world. Conceptually, we complement the literature on 'neighbourhood effects', which typically addresses the influence of concentrated disadvantage, by focusing on concentrated advantage and its influence on educational outcomes. We construct a panel with all school students who took a national standardized mathematics test in 2010, 2014 and 2016 in the Metropolitan Region of Santiago, Chile. We complement it with survey data for the 52 districts of the Metropolitan Region, clustering the districts based on factors such as unemployment, economic inequality, access to services, experiences of violence and stigmatization. Our different identification strategies consistently show that concentrated poverty and affluence are both relevant for explaining educational achievement in mathematics above and beyond individual and school characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contrary to the idea that neighbourhood cohesion is something that inherently benefits the poor or counterbalances the forces of social exclusion, in this article we argue that it can also function as a mechanism of cumulative advantage. In order to explore this proposal, we offer a definition and key dimensions of neighbourhood cohesion based on three components: place attachment, local relations and commitment to the local common good. We test our proposal in a highly segregated Latin American city: Santiago, Chile. A combination of survey data and georeferenced information was obtained from a random sample of 700 residents. The results reveal the existence of four neighbourhood cohesion types: Communitarians, Belongers, Strangers and Outsiders. As expected, we found that people who reside in affluent areas and perceive themselves to live in more reputable neighbourhoods are those who report the strongest patterns of neighbourhood cohesion. We conclude by questioning the scope and effectiveness of policies which have promoted neighbourhood cohesion as a 'tool' of governance without first attempting to reduce socio-spatial rifts. We also ask whether these notable spatial differences in neighbourhood cohesion contribute to improving the overall social cohesion at the city level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]