W13 - Housing and Minority Ethnic Groups FOREIGN IMMIGRATION IN SPAIN: TOWARD MULTI-ETHNIC METROPOLISES

Foreign immigration is a very recent phenomenon in Spain. Over the last few years, and especially since 2001, there has been strong growth in the number of non-EU immigrants changing the historical characterisation of Spain as a country of emigration, above all in the 1960s and 1970s. As in other countries with a high degree of foreign population, one of the principal consequences has been the transformation of the social structure, with a special focus on the larger cities. In this way, the main metropolises (Madrid, Barcelona, Valencia, Sevilla, Malaga, Bilbao and Zaragoza) have been the principal areas for the settlement of those migration waves. Between 1999 and 2005, these metropolises have absorbed some 45% of the 3,000,000 immigrants who have arrived in Spain. This phenomenon has led to these metropolises becoming more diverse over a short time, generating different kinds of problems relating to housing and the residential segregation of such immigrants. This paper seeks to analyse the immigrants’ settlement in the main metropolitan areas of Spain and identify the main territorial effects. In order to do this, the paper will focus on the immigrants’ settlement in the metropolitan system and the function of central city and the metropolitan cities upon the spatial residential distribution of the immigrants. In order to isolate the recent evolution, the analysis will be restricted to the period 2001-2005. Foreign immigration in Spain: Toward multi-ethnic metropolises Workshop: Housing and Minority Ethnic Groups Author: Arkaitz Fullaondo 2 0. Introduction When a country starts being the destination for international migration streams and the flows start becoming intense, the immigration phenomenon begins to become a social transformation factor of the host societies. The Spanish case is characterised for having been an emigration country (above all in the 1960s and 1970s) and nowadays is an immigration country. Moreover, in just a few years Spain has moved upwards to join other European countries with higher immigration rates (Arango, 2007). This change started when Spain entered the European Union in the mid-1980s, which supposed an in-depth economic and social restructuring. However this migration change was not unique to Spain and it was due to a general change in the European migration system, which was characterised by the change witnessed in all Southern Europe countries, from being emigration countries to becoming immigration countries (King, 2002; Carella & Pace, 2001; King, Fielding & Black, 1997). The reasons which explain these changes are related to the economic restructuring that took place in those countries in the 1980s and 1990s, which involved a fast modernisation of their economies and labour markets. King, Fielding and Black (1997) therefore explain that change and its influence on the migration stream ““(...) to explain the existence of a demand for immigrant labour by analysing the specific socio-economic formation of Southern Europe. Key features of this formation are the strongly represented processes of modernisation, urbanization and tertiarisation, the dynamism to the informal sector, the importance of small-scale enterprises, an enhanced level of education for most young people leading to a rejection of manual work, and a sharply defined conception of social and family prestige reflected in attitudes towards “acceptable” and “unacceptable” types of work” (King, Fielding & Black, 1997; pp. 9). The aim of this paper is to describe from an urban perspective, the territorial state of immigration in Spain. In that sense, the objective is to define the current state of immigration in the Spanish urban context. In order to do this, we will make a dynamic comparative analysis about foreigners’ settlement in Spain’s principal metropolises: Madrid, Barcelona, Valencia, Sevilla, Bilbao, Malaga and Saragossa. In order to reflect the dynamics which have been produced by the absorption of some 2,300,000 immigrants through this wave, the paper is based on the period 2001-2005. To carry out this analysis, we will first tackle the debate over the existence of an original ethnic segregation model for EU-Southern cities, followed by a short description of the characteristics of the Spanish metropolises. After that, we will carry out an empirical analysis of the migration process and territorial settlement, to close with the conclusions. 1. An original ethnic segregation model for Southern-EU cities? One of the main consequences of migrants’ arrival to Southern-EU cities has been the transformation, diversification and change of their social geography. This way, the debate about the socio-residential segregation of the ethnic groups is taking relevance in Southern Europe and their cities are being analysed. Moreover, in the same way that some authors have defended the idea about the American segregation models are not valid to understand the states of western European cities (Musterd, 2005; Kempen & Ozuekren, 1998) some authors are defending an original ethnic segregation model for Southern-EU cities as opposed to Wester-EU models (Malheiros, 2002; Arbaci, 2004). Following Mahleiros (2002) the spatial organization of ethnic groups in Southern-EU cities is different in regard to the western one, due to both a different migration process and different socio-urban contexts. These differences are based on the hand, on a high degree of informality in the access to housing by the immigrants in the south, which generates poorer living conditions and higher vulnerability. On the other hand, residential segregation indices in the Foreign immigration in Spain: Toward multi-ethnic metropolises Workshop: Housing and Minority Ethnic Groups Author: Arkaitz Fullaondo 3 south are smaller in relation to the Western-EU cities. However (as opposed to the idea of less segregation, more integration) the reason is that in the Southern-EU cities the settlement complexity is greater due to patterns of diversity among nationalities. Thus, this complexity produces less segregation indices. In the same way, Mahleiros (2004) points out that the social segregation in southern cities is leading to in socio-ethnic segregation, as long as immigrants tend to reproduce their socioeconomic position in the urban social stratification. Thus the author advises that the problem is not the segregation itself, but the coexistence of negative elements such as the exclusion and marginality in the areas where the immigrants are concentrated. Finally, another different feature is that in Southern-EU cities the immigrants are more suburbanized. On the other hand, Arbaci (2004) takes the structural differences of southern and western societies, as explanatory factors of different residential insertion models in Southern-EU cities. Following her approach, the southern context has some structural factors which facilitate immigrants’ insertion. First, one of the factors is the immigrants’ diversity feature which generates diverse skills and educational levels, thus, improving the insertion of certain groups in the city. On the other hand, the important presence of translational communities also works as an important inclusion factor. Secondly it is the labour factor related with the facilities to access the labour market. This facility is a consequence for the southern labour markets’ characteristics which are a feature for an important cheap labour market and with low productivity as well as an important need for family assistants due to the weak family-care system. Thirdly, the presence of niches of informal labour and housing markets also works as an attraction factor for migration streams, conditioning their settlement patterns. Arbaci (2004) also points out that the combination of these factors could produce a scattered spatial distribution due to the dispersion of niches of informal labour markets. However it could also produce the contrary process due to the concentration of the informal housing market in some areas, for example, in the inner cities. On the other hand, some ethnics groups (above all those that have particular religious bonds) tend to an aggregative spatial pattern. Nevertheless, the author says that there are also some structural factors in the southern European societies which inhibit the residential insertion of immigrants. Among these factors is the characteristic of the ideology of the host society for being non-inclusive and having repressive attitudes which produce the irregular immigration and discrimination in the housing market. On the other hand, the labour factor is characterized for being a dual labour market, where the immigrants have access to the worst occupations and often in an irregular way. Moreover some socio-urban processes also have the same exclusion influence, such as the gentrification in inner cities as well as the spatially endogenous upward social mobility in certain working class areas, which makes housing access difficult in those areas. Finally, the housing regime, which reproduces a dualist housing system and is characterized by an imbalance in housing tenure towards owner occupation and residual social housing, also works as an exclusion factor in Southern-EU cities. With regards to the Spanish case, as the migration phenomenon has been gathering relevance, studies applied to the Spanish cities have started to appear. In this sense, for Barcelona city Bayona (2007), following Malheiros’s (2002) and Arbaci’s (2004) approaches, concludes that the insertion of immigrants has been similar to that in other Southern-EU cities. For the same city, Fullaondo (2003) and Fullaondo & Roca (2007) identify different settlement patterns for the different nationalities, both, for the degree of segregation and the characteristics of the areas which are settled. In that sense these differences, related to the origin, generate an important pattern of diversity and complexity. On the other hand, with regard to the consequences generated by the immigration, Checa & Arjona (2006) points out that the migration processes have produced the growth of residential segregation. In that sense, for Leal (2007) another consequence is the changing social morphology of Spanish cities, which has an influence over the social cohesion as well as the dynamics and structure of urban spaces. Foreign immigration in Spain: Toward multi-ethnic metropolises Workshop: Housing and Minority Ethnic Groups Author: Arkaitz Fullaondo 4 2. Short description of Spanish metropolises Metropolitan comparisons are always complex and difficult to make, due to their structure and diverse reality. One of the main problems is the metropolitan delimitation itself. In this sense, different metropolitan delimitation typologies for Spanish metropolises have been carried out, such as the functional delimitation through an INTERREG-IIC project (CPSV, 2001). However, for this paper we have taken the delimitation carried out by the Spanish Ministry of Housing (2004) which is based upon the administrative delimitation of Madrid, Barcelona, Valencia, Sevilla, Bilbao, Malaga and Zaragoza. Although both delimitations are different, the characterization has been done by the INTERREG-IIC project (CPSV, 2001) is valid for a short description of the main features of the urban areas. Thus, Madrid is the main metropolis, both in population and economic activity as well as its being the political capital of Spain. Located in the centre of the country, its metropolitan structure is featured for being monocentric, therefore the central city has a dominant role over the metropolitan system. Barcelona is the second metropolis, both in population and economic activity. Located in the north of Mediterranean coast, its structure is the more similar to the model of city of cities, due to the central city not having a dominant position and the metropolitan cities playing an important role. Valencia is the third metropolis in population terms, but its economic activity is not one of the more important. Located in centre of the Mediterranean coast, its structure is featured for a dominance of the central city and its surroundings. Sevilla is the fourth metropolis in population terms, although its economic activity is one of the smallest. Located in the south, its structure is characterized by a relative dominance of the central city. Bilbao is the fifth metropolis in inhabitants; however its economic activity lies above the Spanish average. Located in the north, its structure is featured for less importance of the central city and a relevant dominance of the periphery. Malaga is the sixth metropolis in population terms and its economic activity is one of the smallest. Located on the south coast, its structure is characterized by the central city’s predominance. However, for this case it is necessary to highlight the importance of the residential tourism in the metropolitan coastal municipalities, where Europeans tend to establish their residence. Finally, Zaragoza is the metropolis with the lowest population. Located in the north-east, its metropolitan structure is characterized by the central city’s absolute dominance, both in population terms and territorial extension. 1 The maps of each metropolises are in the appendix Foreign immigration in Spain: Toward multi-ethnic metropolises Workshop: Housing and Minority Ethnic Groups Author: Arkaitz Fullaondo 5 3. Migration flows: evolution and trends The different evolution, intensity and settlement patterns in the process of immigration in the Spanish metropolises have generated significant changes between 2001 and 2005. In 2001, these metropolises could be classified in three groups, with regard to the percentage of foreigners: Malaga, Madrid and to a lesser degree Barcelona, had a larger percentage of foreign population than the whole of Spain. On the other hand, in Valencia and Zaragoza the percentage was below that for the whole of Spain, meanwhile Bilbao and Sevilla were at the bottom of this hierarchy. Table 1. Number and % of all population by nationalities. 2001-2005 2001 2005 Metropolis Nationality n % n % ∆ (%) 20012005 Spanish 4,804,578 94.27 4.874.119 86.85 -7.42 Foreigners 292,125 5.73 738.189 13.15 7.42 Madrid Total 5,096,703 100.00 5.612.308 100.00 Spanish 4,218,000 96.13 4,236,390 88.86 -7.27 Foreigners 169,734 3.87 530,867 11.14 7.27 Barcelona Total 4,387,734 100.00 4,767,257 100.00 Spanish 1,332,936 97.70 1,352,643 91.80 -5.90 Foreigners 31,349 2.30 120,813 8.20 5.90 Valencia Total 1,364,285 100.00 1,473,456 100.00 Spanish 1,163,662 99.06 1,193,584 97.53 -1.52 Foreigners 11,088 0.94 30,198 2.47 1.52 Sevilla Total 1,174,750 100.00 1,223,782 100.00 Spanish 894,518 98.80 874,123 96.77 -2.03 Foreigners 10,842 1.20 29,185 3.23 2.03 Bilbo Total 905,360 100.00 903,308 100.00 Spanish 718,519 93.71 754,437 88.09 -5.62 Foreigners 48,223 6.29 101,965 11.91 5.62 Malaga Total 766,742 100.00 856,402 100.00 Spanish 617,182 97.69 620,921 92.07 -5.62 Foreigners 14,583 2.31 53,492 7.93 5.62 Saragossa Total 631,765 100.00 674,413 100.00 Spanish 39,746,185 96.67 40,377,920 91.54 -5.12 Foreigners 1,370,657 3.33 3,730,610 8.46 5.12 Spain Total 41,116,842 100.00 44,108,530 100,00 Source: INE. Elaborate by the author In 2005, after the absorption of the main part of the immigration wave, this overall hierarchy has been maintained, although there have been some changes and interesting trends: Firstly, Malaga, Madrid and Barcelona have maintained their position as the metropolises with the largest percentage of foreign population, however now Madrid has the largest percentage and Barcelona has a greater prominence compared with 2001. Secondly, Valencia and Zaragoza continue as the second group but now the foreigners’ percentage is marginally smaller than the whole Spain. Finally, Sevilla and Bilbao remain at the bottom of this hierarchy, with the smallest percentage of foreigners. The explanation for those trends is the different processes of immigration in each metropolis: Madrid and Barcelona have been the areas where the foreigner percentage has grown most (more than 7%), and that has led to Madrid being the metropolis with the largest percentage of Foreign immigration in Spain: Toward multi-ethnic metropolises Workshop: Housing and Minority Ethnic Groups Author: Arkaitz Fullaondo 6 foreigners and it has increased Barcelona’s prominence. On the other hand, Malaga, Valencia and Zaragoza have risen in the same way as the whole of Spain (5%), meanwhile Sevilla and Bilbao have had the smallest growth. Figure 1. Demographic growth % by nationalities. 2001-2005 13,49 4,85 18,05 61,03 -100,00 40,06 8,77 21,12 86,51 95,15 81,95 38,97 89,90 59,94 91,23 78,88 -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100 Madrid Barcelona Valencia Sevilla Bilbao Malaga Zaragoza Spain