IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/acsxxx/v21y2018i06n07ns0219525918500261.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Different Homophily Preferences Mitigate And Spur Ethnic And Value Segregation: Schelling’S Model Extended

Author

Listed:
  • ROCCO PAOLILLO

    (Bremen International Graduate School of Social Sciences, University of Bremen & Jacobs University Bremen, Mary-Somerville-Str. 9, 28359 Bremen, Germany)

  • JAN LORENZ

    (#x2020;Bremen International Graduate School of Social Sciences, Jacobs University Bremen, Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany‡Computational Social Sciences, GESIS Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, Unter Sachsenhausen 6-8, 50667 Köln, Germany)

Abstract

In Schelling’s segregation model, agents of two ethnic groups reside in a regular grid and aim to live in a neighborhood that matches the minimum desired fraction of members of the same ethnicity. The model shows that observed segregation can emerge from people interacting under spatial constraints following homophily preferences. Even mild preferences can generate high degrees of segregation at the macro level. In modern, ethnically diverse societies, people might not define similarity based on ethnicity. Instead, shared tolerance towards ethnic diversity might play a more significant role, impacting segregation and integration in societies. With this consideration, we extend Schelling’s model by dividing the population of agents into value-oriented and ethnicity-oriented agents. Using parameter sweeping, we explore the consequences that the mutual adaptation of these two types of agents has on ethnic segregation, value segregation, and population density in the neighborhood. We examine for equally sized ethnic groups and for majority–minority conditions. The introduction of value-oriented agents reduces total ethnic segregation compared to Schelling’s original model, but the new value segregation appears to be more pronounced than ethnic segregation. Due to spillover effects, stronger ethnic homophily preferences lead not only to greater ethnic segregation, but also to more value segregation. Stronger value-orientation of the tolerant agents similarly leads to increased ethnic segregation of the ethnicity-oriented agents. Also, value-oriented agents tend to live in neighborhoods with more agents than ethnicity-oriented agents. In majority–minority settings, such effects appear to be more drastic for the minority than the majority ethnicity.

Suggested Citation

  • Rocco Paolillo & Jan Lorenz, 2018. "How Different Homophily Preferences Mitigate And Spur Ethnic And Value Segregation: Schelling’S Model Extended," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(06n07), pages 1-17, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2018:i:06n07:n:s0219525918500261
    DOI: 10.1142/S0219525918500261
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0219525918500261
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S0219525918500261?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Card & Alexandre Mas & Jesse Rothstein, 2008. "Tipping and the Dynamics of Segregation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(1), pages 177-218.
    2. Kadi Mägi & Kadri Leetmaa & Tiit Tammaru & Maarten van Ham, 2016. "Types of spatial mobility and change in people's ethnic residential contexts," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 34(41), pages 1161-1192.
    3. Floriana Gargiulo & Yerali Gandica & Timoteo Carletti, 2017. "Emergent Dense Suburbs In A Schelling Metapopulation Model: A Simulation Approach," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(01), pages 1-17, February.
    4. Erez Hatna & Itzhak Benenson, 2015. "Combining Segregation and Integration: Schelling Model Dynamics for Heterogeneous Population," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 18(4), pages 1-15.
    5. Junfu Zhang, 2011. "Tipping And Residential Segregation: A Unified Schelling Model," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 167-193, February.
    6. Schelling, Thomas C, 1969. "Models of Segregation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(2), pages 488-493, May.
    7. Klaus G. Troitzsch, 2017. "Axiomatic Theory and Simulation: A Philosophy of Science Perspective on Schelling's Segregation Model," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 20(1), pages 1-10.
    8. Joshua M. Epstein & Robert L. Axtell, 1996. "Growing Artificial Societies: Social Science from the Bottom Up," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262550253, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Trevor Kollmann & Simone Marsiglio & Sandy Suardi & Marco Tolotti, 2021. "Social interactions, residential segregation and the dynamics of tipping," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 1355-1388, September.
    2. Jan Lorenz & Martin Neumann, 2018. "Opinion Dynamics And Collective Decisions," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(06n07), pages 1-9, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Trevor Kollmann & Simone Marsiglio & Sandy Suardi & Marco Tolotti, 2021. "Social interactions, residential segregation and the dynamics of tipping," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 1355-1388, September.
    2. Grauwin, Sébastian & Goffette-Nagot, Florence & Jensen, Pablo, 2012. "Dynamic models of residential segregation: An analytical solution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 124-141.
    3. Isabel Melguizo, 2023. "Group representation concerns and network formation," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(1), pages 151-179, January.
    4. Florence Goffette-Nagot & Pablo Jensen & Sebastian Grauwin, 2009. "Dynamic models of residential segregation: Brief review, analytical resolution and study of the introduction of coordination," Post-Print halshs-00404400, HAL.
    5. Demetry, Marcos, 2017. "Segregation in Urban Areas: A Literature Review," Ratio Working Papers 304, The Ratio Institute.
    6. Sheng Li & Kuo-Liang Chang & Lanlan Wang, 2020. "Racial residential segregation in multiple neighborhood markets: a dynamic sorting study," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 15(2), pages 363-383, April.
    7. Ioannides, Yannis M., 2015. "Neighborhoods to nations via social interactions," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 5-15.
    8. Malone, Thom, 2020. "There goes the neighborhood does tipping exist amongst income groups?," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    9. Caetano, Gregorio & Maheshri, Vikram, 2017. "School segregation and the identification of tipping behavior," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 115-135.
    10. Zhiwei Cui & Yan-An Hwang, 2017. "House exchange and residential segregation in networks," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 46(1), pages 125-147, March.
    11. Joshua M. Epstein, 2007. "Agent-Based Computational Models and Generative Social Science," Introductory Chapters, in: Generative Social Science Studies in Agent-Based Computational Modeling, Princeton University Press.
    12. Giorgio Fagiolo & Mattia Guerini & Francesco Lamperti & Alessio Moneta & Andrea Roventini, 2017. "Validation of Agent-Based Models in Economics and Finance," LEM Papers Series 2017/23, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    13. Novak, Lindsey, 2020. "Persistent norms and tipping points: The case of female genital cutting," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 433-474.
    14. Victoria Gregory & Julian Kozlowski & Hannah Rubinton, 2022. "The Impact of Racial Segregation on College Attainment in Spatial Equilibrium," Working Papers 2022-036, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, revised 06 May 2024.
    15. Zhaohua Zhang & Derrick Robinson & Diane Hite, 2018. "Racial Residential Segregation: Measuring Location Choice Attributes of Environmental Quality and Self-Segregation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-20, April.
    16. Nina Drange & Kjetil Telle, 2018. "Universal child care and inequality of opportunity. Descriptive findings from Norway," Discussion Papers 880, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    17. Sylvain Chareyron & Samuel Gorohouna & Yannick L'Horty & Pascale Petit & Catherine Ris, 2019. "Seeking for tipping point in the housing market : evidence from a field experiment," Working Papers hal-02334132, HAL.
    18. Furtado, Bernardo Alves & Eberhardt, Isaque Daniel Rocha, 2015. "Modelo espacial simples da economia: uma proposta teórico-metodológica [A simple spatial economic model: a proposal]," MPRA Paper 67005, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Boitier, Vincent & Auvray, Emmanuel, 2021. "Schelling paradox in a system of cities," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 68-88.
    20. Roy Cerqueti & Luca De Benedictis & Valerio Leone Sciabolazza, 2022. "Segregation with social linkages: Evaluating Schelling’s model with networked individuals," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(2), pages 384-440, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2018:i:06n07:n:s0219525918500261. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/acs/acs.shtml .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.