Decolonizing geographies of race and ethnicity in Latin

America.Debates and evidence of racial and ethnic residential

segregation in Argentina, Chile, Colombia and Mexico.
Javier Ruiz-Tagle

Carolina Aguilera

Department, University, City, Country

Provide full correspondence details here including e-mail for the corresponding author:
Javier Ruiz-Tagle

Provide short biographical notes on all contributors here if the journal requires them.

1
Decolonizing geographies of race and ethnicity in Latin
America.Debates and evidence of racial and ethnic residential
segregation in Argentina, Chile, Colombia and Mexico.

(150-200) Racism has not generally been taken into account in Latin American
social sciences until recently due to the predominance of class-system
perspectives, although differentiations among the population based on ethnic
origins began with colonialism. In this context, though with important exceptions
for Brazil and Colombia, residential segregation has been studied in terms of
class differentiations and has not involved race and ethnic aspects. However,
ethnicity and race have recently become main issues in the region because of the
increasing adoption of multiculturalist paradigms, the impact of postcolonial and
postmodern perspectives, the challenges posed by black and indigenous social
movements, changes in state policies, and issues on integration raised by new
trends of migration by indigenous and black people. This paper aims to address
the intellectual gap in residential segregation studies in Latin America, reviewing
intellectual and political debates, and empirical evidence from Argentina, Chile,
Colombia, and Mexico. We conclude tharurban studies must include the
significance of the ethnoracial dimensions in the construction of local
stratification systems and spatial sorting patterns. The ideology of mestizaje, a
concept coined at the invention of national populations with a common past
characteristics, has still permeated urban studies in the region. A new research
agenda must leave those colonial traces behind and adopt new perspectives
taking into account local realites of the construccion of otherness and social
exclusion. We show that contrary to the ideology of mestizaje, still popular in the
region, the seeming all-class segregation in Latin America is strongly influenced
by cultural and phenotypic dimensions. Although race and class are intertwined
in the production of material and symbolic differentiations in urban contexts, they
should receive separate analytical attention, especially regarding historical and
socio-political developments.

Keywords: race; residential segregation; Latin America; post-colonialism

Colour matters

In the last decades, Latin American states have begun to recognize their multicultural
identity through changes in their national constitutions and in how they count their
population with national censuses (Loveman, 2014). The early twentieth-century
national imagination of a mainly mestizocontinent (i.e. composed by an ethnic and
racially homogeneous population), has been effectively challenged through
visualization policies of Afro-descendant and indigenous communities in most
countries. As Loveman (2014) shows, if in 1980 only three countries included in their
census a question related to race, colour or ethnic origin (Cuba, Brazil, and Guatemala),
in the 2010 round, 18 countries did so.This move was the result of various political and
social processes in the region, taking place in domestic and international arenas.
Loweman (2014) identifies the following: the influence of recommendations made by
development agencies, like the World Bank, to include such questions as part of
measures designed to tackling ethnic and racial social inequalities in the region;
grassroots campaigns among indigenous and Afrodescendant to raise consciousness
about the importance of being measured as such, as part of broader indigenous and

2
black people social movements; and UN campaigns and actions to promote a
meaningful participation of indigenous and Afrodescedants in the census-making
processes in the 2000s.1so.2 Even in countries like Argentina, Chile and Mexico, which
have considered themselves as not having Afro-descendants (and the first two with
relatively marginal indigenous populations) had to accept the presence of significant
numbers of ethnic groups as part of their nations.3 A recent photographic exhibition of
northern Black communities in Chile, placed in the basement of Chilean La Moneda
Government Palace4,Palace, makes the point: “race is back”.

1
Although there were no formal agreements between countries to adopt these kind of questions
in the 2000 or 2010 census rounds, the Economic Commission for Latin America and the
Caribbean (ECLAC) recommended Latin American countries to include questions to
measure ethnic and racial populations in the 2010 census round, in order to have reliable data
to conduct public policies for those populations (CEPAL, 2009). Formatted: English (United States)
2As we explain in more detail in the sections dedicated to the national cases, between the 1980
and 2010 most Latin American countries shifted their approach to construct ethno-racial
classifications in their censuses, adopting perspectives aimed to officially recognize those
distinctions within their populations. This move was the result of various political and social
processes in the region, taking place in domestic and international arenas. Loweman (2014)
identifies the following: the influence of recommendations made by development agencies, like
the World Bank, to include such questions as part of measures designed to tackling ethnic and
racial social inequalities in the region; grassroots campaigns among indigenous and
Afrodescendant to raise consciousness about the importance of being measured as such, as part
of broader indigenous and black people social movements; and UN campaigns and actions to
promote a meaningful participation of indigenous and Afrodescedants in the census-making
processes in the 2000s. Although there were no formal agreements between countries to adopt
these kind of questions in the 2000 or 2010 census rounds, the Economic Commission for Latin
America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) recommended Latin American countries to include
questions to measure ethnic and racial populations in the 2010 census round, in order to have
reliable data to conduct public policies for those populations (CEPAL, 2009).
3
In Chile, the question about ethnic origin was already included in the 1980s round. Still, the
national census does not explicitly asks for Afro origin, although black people communities
have struggled for their inclusion since 2010 (Loveman, 2014). In Argentina, both questions
were included in the 2010 round, and the visibility of indigenous people was achieved in the
census of the previous round (Loveman, 2014). Mexico had a long tradition of identifying their
native population through language (since the 1890s round), but only included a question to
include Afro-descendants in the 2010 Census (Loveman, 2014).
4
See: http://www.ccplm.cl/sitio/afrodescendiente-mas-alla-de-africa/ Formatted: English (United States)

3
 Social scientists in the region are beginning to incorporate multiculturalist
perspectives in their research, and nowadays there is an important amount of literature
on race and ethnicity in Latin America among mainstream texts. ThoseAs recent studies
have noted that, differences in skin colour, facial traits, hair colour, height, talking style,
place of origin, first names and last names, still give way to patterns of social
differentiation (Aguirre & Castro, 2009; Waldman, 2004; Merino, Quilaqueo &
SainzMerino, et al., 2008; Aguirre and Castro, 2009; Telles and& Paschel, 2014;
Waldman, 2004;).In terms of segregation, and in comparison to the US, 2014).Although
Latin American societies appear as more mixed, than in the US, with a more benevolent
Catholic ethos, and lacking clear racial borders. However, racialborders, their
segregation exists,and it started with a harsh racial differentiation between the
supposedly 'pure white' elites and the rest. As a result of this first racial segregation,
race became a genuine descendant marker forThen, the big differences in income, status
and power between the elite and the rest of the population. Moreover, those differences
havepopulation, became a genuine descendant of this first racial segregation and it has been
maintained relatively stable due to the lack of significant social transformations, as it
happened in Europe after World War II, and in the US after the Great Depression.
According to genetic studies in Chile for instance, due to the segregation that exists from
colonialism, upper classes have 20 per cent indigenous genes and lower classes have up to 56
per cent, approximately (Rocco, et al. 2002).

However, some areas of research have stayed well behind in taking race and
ethnicity as a crucial dimension of, like the analysis, among themare the studiesstudy of
cities and in particular, studies on residential segregation. This is a key research subject
if one takes into account that the majority of the population in the region now lives in
cities. In fact, unlikeUnlike the US, the dominant literature in Latin American urban
studies has been blind to colour discrimination and exclusion among the population in
the region. Strikingly, although Although slaves brought from Africa arrived massively
along the whole continent, and indigenous populations pose a strong presence in several
countries of the region, urban planners -until very recently- considered that ethnic/racial
residential segregation patterns were exclusive to the United States. As a researcher
stated in 1991:
[“…the residential segregation of disadvantaged groups (…) is not structured, as it
happens in the United States of America, around the racial factor”]
(Rodríguez 2001:35, self-translation)

Many times the argument has revolved, with a seeming nationalistic pride and a
constant distinction with the reality of United States, around the idea the legal basis for
segregation. Edward Telles (1992), a leading researcher who recognizes the presence of
race segregation in Brazil, made these distinctions:

"Unlike the United States, Brazil has had no race-based laws that encourage
residential segregation since Abolition in 1888" (p. 186)
"...the absence of extreme segregation in Brazil has precluded the formation of
parallel institutions, a condition that was fundamental to the rise of black social
movements in South Africa and the United States" (p. 195)

The argument has persisted and has extended among Latin American scholars. As the
Chilean sociologist Francisco Sabatini stated in an international report:

4
 "[i]n Latin America, we focus our attention on socioeconomic segregation, (…)
considering that the distinct social inequalities, of income and rank or social class,
represent the most salient characteristics of social structure in Latin American
countries - more than poverty, in any case." (Sabatini, 2006: 7).

However, somerecent studies have begun to address race and ethnic dimension ofshown
that residential segregation based on perceived race or colour does exist in Latin America.
Discrimination is observed not Not only against those considered Afro-descendants, but
discrimination is observed against all kinds of people with perceived phenotypical traces
of non-European ascendancy, and interactsascendancy. As somehave shown, race plays
animportant role in residential segregation, interacting with other social stratification
patterns, like class and educational levels(Barbary, 2001; Fontana & Wellington, 2016;
Gissi, 2004; Pedemonte et al. 2015; Telles, 1992; Urrea Giraldo and& Quintín Quílez,
2000; Barbary, 2001; Vivas Pacheco, 2013; Villamizar (2015); Fontana and wellington,
2016; Gissi, 2004; Pedemonte et al. 2015; Telles, 1992).

As we will argue in the paper, the invisibility of race in urban studies of segregation obeys
to a broader trend in Latin American social sciences refereeing back to the consolidation
of the capitalist world system based on colonial partnerships between Europe and the rest
of the world around the sixteenth century (Wallerstein, 1991; Quijano, 2000; van Dijk,
2009). This paradigm has survived to this day and has been sustained by ideologies of
scientific racism, Eurocentric worldviews of modernity, and a national imagery based on
the idea of mestizaje (Segato, 2007; Wallerstein, 1991; Quijano, 2000). The paper aims
to push forward a decolonizing research agenda on the geographies of race and ethnicity
of cities in the region, highlighting the need to take racial and ethnic issues seriously
within the field of Latin American urban studies.

In what follows, we first present an overall review of the concept of

residential segregation focused on the Latin American region. Secondly, we discuss the
persistence of what is called “the myth of mestizaje” in the region. And thirdly, we
present a section based on primary and secondary evidence on the existence of racial
and ethnic dimensions in residential segregation in the region shown in four cases;
Argentina, Chile, Colombia and Mexico.

Residential segregation

Etymologically, the concept of segregation comes from the Latin word ‘segregatus’,
which means ‘to set apart from the flock’, as opposed to 'gregarious', which means
‘belonging to a flock’ (Online Etymology Dictionary, n.d.). It The word was originally
meant to designate ‘the religious notion of separating the flock of the godly from
sinners’ (Online Etymology Dictionary, n.d.). That origin evidencesDictionary),
evidencing the discriminatory connotation of the concept since its beginning.

5
Nowadays, racial/ethnic residential segregation refers to the relegation of racially or
ethnically discriminated groups to separate areas within cities.5

The deeply held beliefs, ideas and customs about race and ethnicity are
manifested in individual, collective, institutional and societal practices of spatial
relegation and residential segregation. Thus, segregationSegregation based on perceived
physical or cultural traces exists since cities were established, and can refer to various
social stratification systems. In sociological terms, the physical separation in diverse
spheres of life, including residential places, is considered problematic when it implies
the lack of interaction between social groups. Despite the usage of different names and
categories, it is possible to identify four clear forms of racial and ethnic residential
segregation in the international literature: classic ghettoes, hyper ghettoes, ethnic
enclaves and self-segregated communities. The classic ghetto corresponds to a spatially
delimited place where a single stigmatized ethnic-racial group is enclosed against their
will, and where parallel institutions and internal economic relations are created, mainly
due to their multiclass character (Sennett, 1996; Marcuse, 1997; Gans, 2008; Wacquant,
2012). The two most cited historical examples are the Jewish ghettoes of the
Renaissance in Europe and the black ghettos of the industrial United States. A second
category, derived from the first, is represented by what has been called hyper ghettoes,
outcast ghettoes, mono class ghettoes or territories of post-industrial relegation
(Marcuse, 1997; Wacquant, 2016). These spatial forms represent a radicalization of the
‘old communal ghetto’ due to processes of out-migration of middle-class residents,
deindustrialization, depopulation, welfare state retrenchment, institutional
abandonment, territorial stigmatization, further impoverishment and more repression
(Wilson, 1987; Wacquant, 2008). The main internal characteristics of these hyper
ghettoes are the mono class composition of their population, the individual
demoralization of their residents, and the disintegration of their communal ties.
Examples of these spaces of relegation are abundant, from the current South and West
sides of Chicago, to the red banlieues in the periphery of Paris, or favelas in Brazilian
metropolises.

Ethnic enclaves and self-segregated communities differ from the two cases
mentioned above because of their voluntary character of aggregation, and for the
positive outcomes they might cause to their residents. The ethnic enclave is an area
where a specific ethnic group, i.e. a community who shares a common language, a
religious tradition and/or a national origin (Laguerre, 2010), develops its own cultural
identity and economic activity providing themselves with different modes of
incorporation (Wilson and Portes, 1980). In other words, those are districts where
dwelling, labour, recreation and internal social networks intersect (Harding and
Blokland, 2014). These places are usually located at the lower end of a city’s social
hierarchy. Similar to the classic ghetto, their spatial concentration provides protection
from the host society’s hostility and allows the development of social capital. But unlike
the former, an enclave's economy and cultural activity can encourage self-segregation of
residents that are neither socially nor financially forced to live there (Portes and
Manning, 1986). The most commented examples in the international literature are
Jewish quarters, Spanish barrios and Chinatowns in cities of the Global North.

5
Later in the paper, we elaborate more on the concept of race and ethnicity.

6
Interestingly, current migrations on several directions have converted the ethnic enclave
into an artefact of contemporary globalization in most corners of the world.

Self-segregated communities refer, on the contrary, to areas where a privileged

ethnic or racial group separates itself from the rest of the population, and usually has
direct or indirect support from the state. The This practice is fuelled by growing fears of
crime and thus creates environments of increasing exclusiveness and concentrating
privatization. The enclosure reaffirms the social, economic and political power of their
residents (Low, 2006). The most well-known examples of these places are white
suburbs and gated communities (Farley et al., 1978; Massey and Denton, 1988a; Low,
2003). White suburbs have a low density and peripheral housing inhabited by upper-
status racial groups. Even if they are working class white suburbs, self-segregation in
these cases imply privileges and their inhabitants do not suffer the discrimination and
abandonment that ghettoes dwellers experience. Thus, gated communities achieve high
levels of exclusiveness and privatization by their physical enclosure and restricted
access to them, and by their private management and government (Webster, Glasze, and
Frantz, 2002).

The processes of creation of (mostly) involuntary spatial forms of concentrated

subordination (Wirth, 1927, Marcuse, 1997, Wacquant, 1997) are anchored on the
particularities of each society’s social stratification and the cultural ethos evolving from
it (Ruiz-Tagle, 2013). In other words, it depends on how externally imposed physical
categorizations (race) and/or collectively ratified and expressed identities (ethnicity)
have been socially constructed in each historical, socioeconomic and political context.
In other words, there are differences between the racial segregation derived from
regulations, like the “one drop rule” in the United States, and segregation processes
associated with the strengthening of identity, like the self-imposed “Palestinian” label of
Arab citizens in Israel. The “one drop rule” is a social and legal principle of racial
classification affirming that any individual with at least one African ancestor is
categorized as black, which influenced the purposeful erasure of the ‘mulatto’ category
(black and white ancestors) from the US Census in the 1930s, and the consequent
dichotomous character of US segregation studies thereafter (Hickman, 1997). The
“Palestinian” identity is a voluntary choice to embrace and identify the cultural,
linguistic, religious and national heritage of Arabs living in Israel, against the
government’s administrative designation, which serves as the basis for their
concentration in Arab small localities, enclaves and the so-called “mixed-cities”
(Pierpaoli, 2008). These deeply held beliefs, ideas and customs about race and ethnicity
are manifested in individual, collective, institutional and societal practices of spatial
relegation and residential segregation. And the degree of voluntariness here is crucial
for separating racial and ethnic segregation. In this regard, the decision of self-
segregation points to the need for local ties of subsistence and the need for a refuge
from every-day harassment (except for the privileged self-segregated communities, in
which the refuge is for isolation from the rest). Thus, it is not a free choice but a highly
constrained one (Small, 2008), where the stigmatized may participate in their own
exclusion (Gans, 2008). In contrast, ethnic segregation is on the other extreme of the
spectrum of voluntariness. Either externally created by discriminatory separations or
formed by the conscious action of its residents, foreign merchant districts, religious
quarters and ethnic enclaves are socially organized around a shared cultural identity,
and frequently develop their own solidary economy (Laguerre, 2010). On top of the
mentioned root causes, there are secondary causes for contemporary residential

7
segregation. Large migrations, institutional practices, private behaviours and explicit
public policies and interventions are the most frequent ones (Massey and Denton, 1993;
Hirsch, 1998; Massey & Denton, 1993).

The specific dynamics of residential segregation depend on context. As

Maloutas and Fujita (2016) affirm, segregation is related to four major social
dimensions: (1) the economic exchange affecting labour and residential markets, (2)
state redistribution policies on housing and public service allocation and regulations, (3)
social reciprocity allocated within social networks between individuals, households and
institutions, and (4) local socio-spatial realities of property patterns, urban histories,
ideologies among others. These dynamics may be contextually given, but are usually
driven by the intentional practices of powerful actors, motivated by discrimination
and/or profit seeking, producing the movement of social groups through metropolitan
areas. The actors involved in the processes of configuring residential segregation can be
public, private or from the civil society. Public actors have applied policies of de-jure
racial segregation during colonialism, exclusionary zoning, racial segregation of public
housing, support for out-migration and homeownership of white middle-class, urban
renewal, slum clearance, and the construction of walls, just to name a few (Boal, 2002;
Mörner and Gibson, 1962; Hirsch, 1998; Massey and& Denton, 1993; Mörner &
Gibson, 1962 Boal, 2002). Private actors have used a variety of practices such as
redlining by banks, racial steering and blockbusting by Real Estate brokers, and
gentrification by developers (Massey and& Denton, 1993; Smith, 1996). And actors
from the civil society have practiced segregation by white flight movements, racial
violence, neighbourhood improvement associations, restrictive covenants, and so on
(Massey and& Denton, 1993).

Despite the usage of different names and categories, it is possible to identify

four clear forms of racial and ethnic residential segregation in the international
literature: classic ghettoes, hyper ghettoes, ethnic enclaves and self-segregated
communities. The classic ghetto corresponds to a spatially delimited place where a
single stigmatized ethnic-racial group is enclosed against their will, and where parallel
institutions and internal economic relations are created, mainly due to their multiclass
character (Gans, 2008; Marcuse, 1997; Sennett, 1996; Wacquant, 2012).6 A second
category, derived from the first, is represented by what has been called hyper ghettoes,
outcast ghettoes, mono class ghettoes or territories of post-industrial relegation
(Marcuse, 1997; Wacquant, 2016). These spatial forms represent a radicalization of the
‘old communal ghetto’ due to processes of out-migration of middle-class residents,
deindustrialization, depopulation, welfare state retrenchment, institutional
abandonment, territorial stigmatization, further impoverishment and more repression
(Wacquant, 2008; Wilson, 1987). The main internal characteristics of these hyper
ghettoes are the mono class composition of their population, the individual
demoralization of their residents, and the disintegration of their communal ties.7

Ethnic enclaves and self-segregated communities differ from the two cases
mentioned above because of their voluntary character of aggregation, and for the

6
The two most cited historical examples are the Jewish ghettoes of the Renaissance in Europe
and the black ghettos of the industrial United States. Formatted: English (United States)
7
Examples of these spaces of relegation are abundant, from the current South and West sides of
Chicago, to the red banlieues in the periphery of Paris, or favelas in Brazilian metropolises. Formatted: English (United States)

8
positive outcomes they might cause to their residents. The ethnic enclave is an area
where a specific ethnic group, i.e. a community who shares a common language, a
religious tradition and/or a national origin (Laguerre, 2010), develops its own cultural
identity and economic activity providing themselves with different modes of
incorporation (Wilson & Portes, 1980). In other words, those are districts where
dwelling, labour, recreation and internal social networks intersect (Harding & Blokland,
2014). These places are usually located at the lower end of a city’s social hierarchy.
Similar to the classic ghetto, their spatial concentration provides protection from the
host society’s hostility and allows the development of social capital. But unlike the
former, an enclave's economy and cultural activity can encourage self-segregation of
residents that are neither socially nor financially forced to live there (Portes & Manning,
1986).8

Self-segregated communities refer, on the contrary, to areas where a privileged

ethnic or racial group separates itself from the rest of the population, and usually has
direct or indirect support from the state. This practice is fuelled by growing fears of
crime and thus creates environments of increasing exclusiveness and concentrating
privatization. The enclosure reaffirms the social, economic and political power of their
residents (Low, 2006). The most well-known examples of these places are white
suburbs and gated communities (Farley, Schuman, Bianchi, Colasanto & Hatchett,
1978; Low, 2003; Massey & Denton, 1988). White suburbs have a low density and
peripheral housing inhabited by upper-status racial groups. Even if they are working
class white suburbs, self-segregation in these cases imply privileges and their
inhabitants do not suffer the discrimination and abandonment that ghettoes dwellers
experience. Thus, gated communities achieve high levels of exclusiveness and
privatization by their physical enclosure and restricted access to them, and by their
private management and government (Webster, Glasze, & Frantz, 2002).

The processes of creation of (mostly) involuntary spatial forms of concentrated

subordination (Marcuse, 1997; Wirth, 1927; Wacquant, 1997) are anchored on the
particularities of each society’s social stratification and the cultural ethos evolving from
it,dependying on how externally imposed physical categorizations (race) and/or
collectively ratified and expressed identities (ethnicity) have been socially constructed
in each historical, socioeconomic and political context (Ruiz-Tagle, 2013). Thus, there
are differences between the racial segregation derived from regulations, like the “one
drop rule” in the United States, and segregation processes associated with the
strengthening of identity, like the self-imposed “Palestinian” label of Arab citizens in
Israel.

The problem and study of residential segregation in Latin American

8
The most commented examples in the international literature are Jewish quarters,
Spanish barrios and Chinatowns in cities of the Global North. Interestingly, current migrations
on several directions have converted the ethnic enclave into an artefact of contemporary
globalization in most corners of the world.
Formatted: English (United States)

9
In Latin America, hierarchical divisions of cities were part of the colonial practice
established in all European colonies around the world, to provide special privileges to
the incoming settlers. In particular, Spanish colonizers created a complex caste system
based on racial mixture classifications, putting Spanish and their descendants at the top
of the hierarchy and dividing urban space accordingly (Loweman, 2014). This created
patterns of residential segregation at various scales, which have extended for centuries.

However, the issue of the spatial sorting of social groups only came into the
research agenda in the last decades. During most part of the twentieth century, the main
issues studied by social scientists in the region were driven by a concern around the
processes and consequences of the policies of state-led industrialization and fast
urbanization.urbanization, with more or less strength. Urban studies worried about the
high urbanization rates brought by the industrialization processes generating a
widespread phenomenon of marginality,marginality. Thus, marginality was understood
as a lack of connection between the advancement of modern capitalist social relations
and the creation of informal economies of subsistence (Quijano, 1968; Germani, 1969;
Quijano, 1968;). Cities grew at high rates, and their population settled in differentiated
spaces, creating the basis for some authors to begin speaking of a phenomenon of
segregation (Santos, 1975; Germani, 1988a; 1988b; Santos, 1975). While these authors
had had influences from foreign literature about similar problems in the North, their
main focus was not about socio-spatial sorting across metropolitan spaces. Instead, their
focus was on explaining the production of large marginal masses in Latin American
cities.

The direct and empirical study of segregation in Latin America did not come to
mainstream debates until the 1990s since scholars were concentrated in other related
matters. According to Carrión (1991), there were two main research paradigms for
social studies on spatial dynamics in Latin America on those times were during the
twentieth century. On the one hand, there was an empiricist paradigms represented by
ecological, demographic, anthropological and cultural works, somewhat influenced by
the Chicago School. The main approach here was the collaborative efforts of many
authors working under the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean
(CEPAL, in Spanish). The works of CEPAL took modernisation theory and adapted it
to a Latin American developmental paradigm. These works were the main influence for
the impulse of Import Substitution Industrialisation Policies9 promoted by several states
between the 1930s and the 1970s in the region (Prebisch, 1986; Williams, 2006). This
empiricist paradigm evolved as a more positivist approach, highly influenced by US
theoretical frameworks and predominates today in segregation studies. Thus, direct and
empirical study of segregation in Latin America did not come to mainstream debates
until the 1990s. Thus, while these authors had had influences from foreign literature
about similar problems in the North, their main focus was not about socio-spatial
sorting across metropolitan spaces. Instead, their focus was on explaining the
production of large marginal masses in Latin American cities. Williams, 2006). On the

9
Economic policy for the replacement of foreign imports by domestic products. The idea from
CEPAL is that Latin American countries should reduce their foreign dependency by producing
in local industries.

10
other hand, there has been a generalizing paradigm that did not present much territorial
differentiation. Two approaches are highlighted here. Firstly, there are Latin American
functionalism and marginality theories, which were highly connected with the work of
the Chicago School; particularly Louis Wirth’s and with Oscar Lewis’ culture of
poverty (Germani, 1969; 1988a; 1988b;Jaramillo, 1990). Secondly, there were authors
working on the Dependency Theory, influenced by Marxism and the World Systems
Theory, which were highly influential even outside of Latin America (Quijano, 1968;
Nun, 1988; Slater, 1988;Singer, et al. 1988).

Imagineries of race and ethnicity in Latin America

Thus, the empiricist paradigm evolved as a more positivist approach, and

predominates today in segregation studies, highly influenced by US theoretical
frameworks (for Chile, see Rodríguez 2001, Rodríguez and Arriagada 2004, Sabatini,
Cáceres, and Cerda 2001). That is, the theory and methods of the dominant US literature
of the 1990s, were embraced in Chile by liberal scholars under a neoliberal center-left
government, which were very influential in several Latin American countries.

Race, ethnicity and residential segregation in Latin America

So far we have been using the concepts of race and ethnicity without presenting a
definition of those evasive and normatively loaded concepts. Briefly, we agree with
most sociological and anthropological literature which proposes that race and ethnicity
are social constructs, i.e. "embedded in academic, popular and political discourses that
are themselves a constitutive part of academic, popular and political relationships and
practices" (Wade, 2010, p. xxx). It is commonly assumed that both concepts refer to two
different aspects of a social group; that is, race refers to physical body traces and
ethnicity to cultural traces. But as Mara Loveman (2014) has argued, the distinctions are
not that easy to detect and both tend to overlap. In fact, ethnicity is also constructed
considering ascendancy and physical traits, and there are "racial" communities
organized in cultural forms, like black communities do today in many parts of Latin
America. Further, following Bonilla-Silva specifications who states that "races are not
'things' but relations", we agree that the content of both race and ethnicity "can only be
recognized in the realm of racial relations and positions" (Bonilla-Silva, 2011, p. 472).
In this sense, "races are the effect of racial practices of opposition at the economic,
political, social, and ideological levels" (Bonilla-Silva, 2011, p. 472). This constructivist
perspective of the concept does not mean, however, that the concepts are malleable in
its signification, but once constructed they work as real 'things'.The social and historical
determination of both concepts are backed by the fact that the words ‘black’, ‘white’
and ‘race’ were relatively unused before the 17th century.

In Latin America, as in most parts of the world, the concept of race was
developed through the European practices of converting particular biological aspects
into vital signifiers of difference during the colonial period (Wade, 2010), although
there were some previous forms of discrimination among indigenous people before.
From the 16th century on, the Spanish crown mandated by many decrees of law a kind
of cast structure that introduced a separation between Spaniards, native people, people
with African origin, and their various mixtures. Although there is a discussion around
the effective rigidity of the system, given the high rates of cross-marriages and some
social mobility, the structure introduced an imaginary boundary of difference based on

11
physical traits, favouring European features and culture over the rest of the population
(Mörner and& Gibson, 1962; Smith, 1996; Pike, 1963; Smith, 1996). This reproduce a
social and economic stratification structure were white elites concentrated most of the
resources in their hands.

The adoption of those terminology came along with ideologies that sustained the
colonization of America by Europe (Wallerstein, 1991), later sustained with the so-
called ‘Scientific Racism' which emerged in the 17th and 18th century. As Wallerstein
(1991) argued, racism is not at the core of the attitude of disdain and fear of people
perceived as different for their skin colour or cultural patterns, but a way that capitalist
societies adopted in their time of big expansion during the colonization of the so-called
New World. It was a discourse that allowedWorld, to include the wealth of the labour
force of the dominated people (native people and slaves), but minimizing the cost of
that labour force and the cost of a possible political opposition. In this sense, racism is
structurally tied to the capitalist world system which emerged and consolidated with
colonialism.10

Quijano (2000) argues in the same line, “Over time, colonizers encoded as
colour the phenotypic traits of the colonized and assumed them as the emblematic
feature of the racial category. … As a consequence, the dominant ones called
themselves White". (p.203, self-translation).

Moreover, he argues:

"… Western Europe's success in becoming the centre of the modern world-
system, according to Wallerstein's apt formulation, developed in Europeans a trait that
“was common to all colonial and imperial rulers of history, ethnocentrism. But in the
European case, this trait had a peculiar basis and justification: the racial classification of
the world's population in America. … Europeans generated a new temporal perspective
of history and re-located the colonized peoples, and their respective histories and
cultures, in the past of a historical trajectory whose culmination was Europe”.Europe.
(Quijano, 2000, p. 210-211, self-translation).

10
There are other authors who disagree with this strong association between racism and colonial Formatted: Font: 11 pt
capitalism?. For an interesting discussion about racism in Latin America see (Hering Torres, Formatted: Font: 11 pt
2011) Scientific racism, on its part, was a paradigm that intended to scientifically demonstrate
the existence of racial hierarchies among the world population based on their geographical
origin (European, Asian, African, Native American, and so forth). It was a hegemonic
perspective until the turn of the twentieth century in Europe that used biological arguments to
legitimize the practices in the imperialist conquests of foreign territories (Arendt, 1973). Thus,
scientific racism was able to elevate race to a crucial position among global politics' concepts
and was mainly used to justify white European imperialism and to extend racial segregation
around most regions of the world (Arendt 1973). Some authors of the scientific racism
perspective put Latin American countries as an example of the negative effects of the mixture
between supposedly high-level races (whites) and lower rank ones (indigenous) (Loweman,
2014).

12
 Scientific racism, on its part, was a paradigm that intended to scientifically demonstrate
the existence of racial hierarchies among the world population based on their
geographical origin (European, Asian, African, Native American, and so forth). It was a
hegemonic perspective until the turn of the twentieth century in Europe, that used
biological arguments to legitimize the practices in the imperialist conquests of foreign
territories (Arendt, 1973). Thus, scientific racism was able to elevate race to a crucial
position among global politics' concepts and was mainly used to justify white European
imperialism and to extend racial segregation around most regions of the world (Arendt
1973). Some authors of the scientific racism perspective put Latin American countries
as an example of the negative effects of the mixture between supposedly high-level
races (whites) and lower rank ones (indigenous) (Loweman, 2014).

During the processes of Independence in the 19th century, political elites’

discourses announced the end of differences based on the colonial cast system among
the population. But the new states bureaucracies continued to operate ideologically
under race-system hierarchies, where whitening was a main national project of nation
building (Loweman, 2014). Moreover, discrimination based on appearance against
those with more Indian or Black traces, in political, social and cultural terms, continued
along the period (Loveman, 2014). Political elites, at that time, faced the urgent
question about what would constitute the characteristic aspect of their populations.
Here, the relationship between nation and population differed from Europe, with
important consequences for our cultural understandying of race. As Brading (1994)
suggestively argues, contrary to Europe, nationalism was not the predominant political
independence ideology in our countries, but local versions of Republicanism. This,
mainly because there was nothing similar as a common ethnic origin (common language
and ancestry) as in European states. In this context however, several influential Latin
American scholars argued in favour of a "new race", a proper Latin American race, the
mestizo, which emerged from the crossbreed between the European colonizers and the
American native people (Brading, 1994; Appelbaum, Macpherson &
RosemblattAppelbaum et al., 2003). This perspective entered deep among the
intellectuals of the time, and during the first decades of the twentieth century,
intellectuals and political elites embraced it, as a proper Latin American nationalism,
i.e. an appeal to a shared ethnic origin, the outcome of the colonizers and the native
population, mestizos. Although in some countries like Mexico this stressed the cultural
value of indigenous populations, at the same time erased the African descendant's
population from the Nation’s image.

AfterDuring the second half of the 20th Century, after the experiences of World
War II and the Holocaust, the concept of race was no longer in use among scientists in
explicit forms, and the concept of ethnicity was coined (Appelbaum, et al.al, 2003;
Loweman, 2014). At that point, scientists and States began preferring culture over
biology to classify groups of people with different origins. However, the concept of
ethnicity still groups people along their place of origin, phenotypical traits and their
culture, reaffirming those characteristics (Appelbaum, et al. 2003).

Ideologies of race unLatin American

13
We may find four main imageries regarding the ethnoracial Latin American
foundation, the so called myth of mestiaje, indigenismo, white excepcionalism
and racial democracy.

Themyth of mestizaje

Mestizo is a Spanish word meaning racial mixture. Originally, the term was
associated with illegitimacy and was almost synonymous with 'bastard', due to
practices of rape and concubinage11 between male Spaniards and female natives
during the Conquista. However, since mestizos became the majority of the
population by the time of independence in the 19th century, and the influence of
intellectuals that proposed the mestizo as the constitutive race of Latin America,
their identities in the nation-building period took on a very different character
(Smith, 1996). This more positive view of racial mixture is widely known as ‘the
myth of mestizaje’: an intentional and symbolic idea of racial homogeneity,
created by the cultural apparatus and public intellectuals of each country, for the
construction of a nationalistic identity (Alvarado & Fernández, 2011; Smith,
1996; Waldman, 2004; Alvarado and Fernández, 2011). For instance, the
archetype of the Chilean mestizo was a synthesis of two patriarchal and warrior
races (Swedish immigrants from Spain and Araucano indigenous people), which
was whiter than that of other Latin American countries (Palacios, 1904). This new
race became part of a modernization project, a symbol of nationalist ideology, and
a source of popular culture (Alvarado & Fernández, 2011; Subercaseaux, 2007;
Garabano, 2009; Gutiérrez, 2010; Alvarado and Fernández, 2011Subercaseaux,
2007).However, the myth of mestizaje obscured the main purposes of the new
national elites: whitening, improvement of inferior races, diluting minorities,
creating policies of extermination, and promoting selective immigration policies
(i.e. bringing more Europeans and fewer blacks). It became then, a nationalistic
project of biological upgrading (Smith, 1996; Dulitzky, 2005; Gutiérrez, 2010;
Richards, 2010; Smith, 1996Gutiérrez, 2010). In general terms, the endurance of
the myth has led to a broad denial of racial discrimination in Latin America,
raising the virtues of mestizaje with nationalistic pride, especially when compared
to the strict segregation and lack of interbreeding in the US (Dulitzky, 2005). In
countries of the southern cone (Argentina, Uruguay and Chile), nations were
imagined with a very little, marginal, participation of indigenous and
Afrodescendants in their population (Loweman, 2014).

As Loweman (2014) concludes in her study of censuses in 19 countries in the

region:

"… in a broad sense, the authors of Latin American census reports converged in
identifying race mixture as an unstoppable demographic dynamic that worked to
transform populations in a desirable direction [whitening]. … National census

11
The concept refers to ongoing relationship but unable to marry, due to differences in social
rank status, an existing marriage, religious prohibitions, etc.

14
 reports projected the gradual improvement of populations. And the demography of
metizaje featured centrally in these "optimistic" projections." (p.154)

Mestizaje also gave more room to an idea of a particular social bond between different
social classes and groups with power differences in Latin America, the so-called lazo
social (SojaSorj and& Martuccelli, 2008, p. XX). That bond was not based on modern
political institutions but on informal ones like patronages and tutelages, and was
sustained by the existence of spheres of non-conflictual encounters and interactions
between people of different social classes. It was a sui generis conception of integration,
halfway between the community and societal relations, where vertical hierarchic
interactions could be maintained at the same time as sustaining more horizontal and
egalitarian ones. In this context, Sorja and Martucelli (2008) argue that "the praise of
mestizaje was not only a biased way of denying racism but was also the will to affirm
the permanence of the lazo social in other bases." (Sorja y & Martuccelli, 2008: XXI,
self-translation).

During the 20th century in Latin America, the ideology of mestizaje prevailed among
liberal elites, promoting the idea of the existence of high levels of mixture, sustaining a
national imagery based on a racial continuum (Álvarez, 1951; Beals, 1953). It is
important to note that mestizajewas thought as a one-way process into whitening
(Loweman, 2014).

Although the myth of mestizaje was strong among political and intellectual
elites, there was another racial perspective that emerged at the same time, indigenismo
(Appelbaum, et al., 2003). This paradigm stressed that “pure” native population were
racially or culturally superior to the mestizo. This perspective was strong in Peru, and
coexisted along with mestizo ideologies in Mexico (Appelbaum, et al., 2003).
Interestingly, the promoters of those ideologies were concerned with the integration of
native people, by education and modernization, and finally "whitening" them
(Appelbaum, et al., 2003; Loweman, 2014).

In last years, indigenous social movements have questioned this ideology of

mestizaje (Appelbaum, et al., 2003). Also scholars began criticising this paradigm. As
Appelbaum et al. (2003) stresses, in the 1950s, the Sāo Paulo school of Brazilian social
scientists "documented widespread patterns of racial inequality" and scholars of
ethnicity in Mesoamerica and the Andes argued against what they saw as politics of
dismembering indigenous communities (p. 10). Therefore, the myth of mestizaje has
lost its old legitimation power and has come under intense scrutiny by social
movements, scholars, and even States. The study of residential segregation then should
take part of these turns and address the existing racial and ethnic characters of the social
fragmentation of Latin American cities. To do this, in the following section we review
intellectual and political debates, and empirical evidence from Argentina, Chile,
Colombia, and Mexico.

Current issues and debates on race/ethnic residential segregation in four Latin

American countries

15
Every country in Latin Americahas developed their own understandings of how race
and ethnicity have giving form to their populations, influencing the dynamics of
residential segregation. Although there as few studies on the latter, weTo assess the
socio-spatial significance of racial and ethnic relations in Latin American providingwe
provide evidence of four countries whichthat have experienced diverse trajectories in
regards to the formation of their population:population, Mexico, Colombia, Argentina
and Chile, Colombia and Mexico.Chile. We organize the analysis around four
dimensions: (a)

 Social construction of populations, considering migrations, demographic figures,

policies and interracial conflicts; (b)
 Socioeconomic construction of ethno-racial differences: censuses, discussions
on visibility, socioeconomic status / occupational status; (c)
 Current symbolic status of groups considered ethno racially discriminated,
considering social perceptions, stigmatization, symbolic role, relationship with poverty
and public welfare policies (positive discrimination); Racial residential segregation
evidence.

The case of Argentina

 Racial residential segregation evidence

THE CASE OF ARGENTINA

The self-image of Argentinians as a white nation of European descendants is the
legacy of politico-intellectual campaigns to whiten the country, extermination of native
peoples, and selective immigration programs (Ko, 2014; Bastia & Hau, 2003; Ko,
2014). Just in current generations, the hierarchies of racism over which Argentina was
built have started to be unearthed (Grimson, 2016). As in most Latin American
countries, the national identity construction after independence sought to achieve a
civilized status through a political intervention over race and culture. The Argentinian
elite embraced the 19th century’s beliefs about the strong relationship between race,
culture and progress (Courtis, Pacecca, Lenton, Belvedere, Caggiano, Casaravilla, &
HalpernCurtis et al., 2009). However, the distinction from other Latin American
countries was the categorical preference for all that came from Europe, and a particular
disdain towards mestizaje (Ko, 2014). Intellectuals like Doming Faustino Sarmiento,
affirmed that racial mixtures were dangerous because they pushed toward inferior types
that could not be whitened, and highlighted the importance of a civilized, European,
white, and Christian race for Argentina (Ko, 2014). That is how concrete and discursive
strategies were established to eliminate non-whites from the imaginary: interrupting
racial categories in the census, neglecting indigenous and Afro-descendant populations
and the practices of slavery from official history, demonizing non-white characters in
literature, and so on (Ko, 2014).

The first Argentinian census after independence only captured indigenous

groups in some territories outside full political control, and assumed that racial traits
were paired with individual nationality. European immigration was the major focus of
analysis, emphasizing the inflow of Europeans and mixture with them as a general
racial improvement (Loveman, 2014). In a second census, the report affirmed that
African-descendants and indigenous were less fertile and more vulnerable to mortal

16
diseases, thus assuming that blacks disappeared from the population and justifying the
lack of racial categories in the census (Loveman, 2014). In the 1930s and 1940s, with
the ascendance of Peronismo and industrialization, there was a strong internal migration
to Buenos Aires, which opened room for new socio-ethnic appellatives like cabecita
negra and descamisados, and the re-signification of older ones, like criollo or even
Argentinian (Grimson, 2016). Immigration from bordering countries was treated as a
problem from the beginning, and the cabecitanegra character in particular, became the
stereotype of ignorant and uncivilized provincianos (CurtisCourtis et al., 2009).

By the end of the 19th century, indigenous peoples were geographically and
politically marginalized (Loveman, 2014), with a territory that was separated between
civilized territories on one side, and territories under the indigenous rule on the other
(CurtisCourtis et al., 2009). The Argentinian elites never had interest in identifying
indigenous peoples and their territories, despite the commercial, cultural and political
interactions they had with them (CurtisCourtis et al., 2009). The military campaigns of
the late 19th century and early 20th century relieved the elites from the indigenous
problem, and opened those territories for white agriculture, where natives were
incorporated as labor power (CurtisCourtis et al., 2009). At the same time, census
reports insisted in the decrease of the indigenous population, and especially their
mixture, dilution and assimilation within the general mass (Loveman, 2014). Thus,
indigenous people and European immigrants were treated as two poles of the transition
from barbarism to civilization (CurtisCourtis et al., 2009).

In the same vein, the national identity construction created the belief that Argentina was
a nation without Afro-descendants (Jensen, 2013). Their presence was erased from
records and consciousness, despite evidence of hundreds of thousands of Africans
arriving to Argentina during colonialism, especially to Buenos Aires (Ghosh, 2013).
They were brought to work in agriculture and domestic service and their number was
very high in Northern provinces (Ghosh, 2013). In fact, black slaves were about one
third of Buenos Aires’ population in the early 19th century (Ghosh, 2013). After
independence, black population indeed waned, but their heritage was also repressed and
distorted by a hegemonic imaginary (Solomianski, 2003). Two factors played a role in
the decrease of black population: the deadly war against Paraguay in the mid-19th
century (where blacks were part of the Argentine military), and the yellow fever in
Buenos Aires in 1871 (Ghosh, 2013). In addition, other blacks fled to Brazil and
Uruguay, places that were somewhat less hostile to them (Ghosh, 2013). In this context,
Argentina never included a query to capture race or color after independence (Loveman,
2014). The 1865 official census report said: "happily in Argentina we don't have this
serious reason for concern [as in the US]; here the race is completely white; we have
blacks only as an exception." (Loveman, 2014, p. 193).

In summary, most Argentinians believed that blacks were inexistent in their

country and that indigenous lived by the other side of the Andes Mountains (Ko, 2014).
Indigenous and Latin American immigrants were always treated as ‘non-Argentinians’,
and with time, distinctions between provincianos and Latin American immigrants (both
mestizos) were blurred (CurtisCourtis et al., 2009).

TheHowever, the intellectual climate of the last part of the 20th century has
changed the previous images, contribuityingcontributed to the expansion of studies on
the afro-Argentinian and indigenous heritage (Solomianski, 2015), and several recent

17
changes have been done in that direction, suggesting the country is in a process of
changing its concept of citizenship towards interculturality (Grabner, 2012). Thus,
indigenous peoples were constitutionally recognized in 1994 and their autonomy was
acknowledged in 2000. Between 2003 and 2005, the Economic Commission for Latin
America and the Caribbean (CEPAL, in Spanish) partnered with the World Bank to
encourage the incorporation of racial questions in the statistics of several countries,
among them Colombia and Argentina (Loveman, 2014). In that sense, the bicentennial
census (2010) included the categories of Afro-descendants and indigenous for the first
time since 1887, including a racial sensitivity campaign that had to demonstrate the
existence of Afro-Argentinians (Ko, 2014; Jensen, 2013; Ko, 2014). The inclusion of
ethno-racial categories was surrounded by negotiations and disputes between different
actors, in a context of internationalization of black movements in the previous decade
and a conference against racism organized by the United Nations (López, 2006). In
addition, new school textbooks have started to include the history of indigenous and
Afro-Argentinian peoples (Ko, 2014).

Nevertheless, as several authors have stressed, while the change in the racial
paradigm is undeniable, there has always been resistance from conservative sectors and
from social inertia (Ko, 2014). As it had happened in several countries with racial and
affirmative action policies, in Argentina, differences passed from invisibility to hyper-
visibility (Kaminker, 2011). Due to different portrayals of Afro-descendent groups by
different actors, Afro-Argentinians have not had much ability to show their own selves,
and have been replaced by the history and traditions of Afro-Uruguayans and Afro-
Brazilians (Frigerio, 2000). In addition, there are racist discourses against indigenous in
schools, in the parliament, and in everyday discourses against Latin American
immigrants (CurtisCourtis et al., 2009). Mapuches, an indigenous group that inhabits in
southern Chile and Argentina, are considered an ethnic, excluded minority, live under
linguistic and cultural domination, and thus some emancipatory movements have been
created for historic reparation and for the application of international agreements
(Vásquez, 2002). Latinamerican foreignersForeigners are treated as a different race
(Kaminker, 2011). For instance, they have coined The terms bolita and boliguayos are
pejorative appellatives, likebolita and boliguayos used to refer to Bolivians,
Paraguayans and any dark-skinned immigrant, without a real definition of national
origin (Kaminker, 2011; Ko, 2014). Furthermore, almost the entire working class is
racialized as ‘black’, with the resulting assumption that villas miseria are populated by
dark-skinned immigrants, and that all dark-skinned residents are foreigners (Ko, 2014).
According to a survey, the most discriminated immigrants are Bolivians, then
Peruvians, then Paraguayans and then others like Chinese, Chileans, Koreans, etc.
(Loveman, 2014).

As can be inferedextracted from the above mentioned, the racial question has
been absent from urban studies. Studies of segregation have focused on the self-
segregation of the rich, the emergent world of the poor, and the generation of dual or
fragmented cities (Kaminker, 2015). Some studies have highlighted the existence of
excluded ethnic neighborhoods (especially Bolivians, see Grimson, 2006), but without
much internal differentiation (Kaminker, 2015). However, there is increasing awareness
of how the socioeconomic segregation of Argentinian cities involves ethno-national and
racial aspects as well (Kaminker, 2011), from the racialization of villas miseria
(Margulis, 1997) to the formation of nationality clusters, where conflicts are developed
around the construction, use and disposition of urban space (Kaminker, 2015). An

18
investigation in the city of Rosario, describes how Afro-Uruguayans are concentrated in
a port zone since the late 19th century, and are discriminated for their association to
backwardness, which is now more visible because of the rapid urban changes happening
in the area (Broguet, 2016). A study in the city of Puerto Madryn delineates the cultural
imageries around the poor and non-white North, the rich and white South, the touristic
East, and the concealed West of that city (Kaminker, 2011). More detailed works
(Lucero, 2003) have showed important levels of immigrant segregation, including
individuals from bordering countries (e.g. Bolivians, Paraguayans, etc.) and non-
bordering countries (e.g. Europeans). Immigrants from non-bordering countries are
primary located in central areas, and immigrants from bordering countries are
concentrated in minor localities and dispersed settlements of rural areas (Lucero, 2003).
Therefore, as Javier Auyero (2007) stresses, the silence around the racial question
should be converted into a serious examination of the relationship between race, space
and the State.

The case of Chile

THE CASE OF CHILE

In Chile, the myth of mestizaje took the form of a white national imaginary, or in
process of whitening, by an assumed extermination (except in southern regions) of
indigenous populations and a low percentage of Afro-descendent population. Like in
Argentina, Costa Rica and Uruguay, the envisioned homogenization was the Latin
shade of white, illustrating a difference regarding the rest of Latin American countries,
as a sort of racial and ethnic exceptionalism (Loveman, 2014). In other words, it was
whitening by exclusion. However, in Chile onThe cultural apparatus created the
contrary to Argentina, the national state buildingprocess included, discursively, the
Mapuche native as a significant partimage of the Chilean population, as an exceptional
and privileged race whose. The archetype of the Chilean mestizo was a synthesis of two
patriarchal and warrior races (Swedish immigrants to Spain and Mapuche (Araucanos).
Whiter , or Mapuches), which was whiter than in other Latin American countries,
thiscountries. This new race became part of a modernization project, a symbol of
nationalist ideology, and a source of popular culture (Alvarado and & Fernández 2011,
Garabano 2009, Gutiérrez 2010, Subercaseaux 2007).

The Mapuches that had resisted the Spanish invasion were first extolled as
warriors and fighters by the newly independent Chileans, but then discriminated as
uncivilized and relegated into small territories (Richards, 2010). Mapuche are not the
only native descendants in Chile, but the most populous indigenous people in the
country. Rights of citizenship for Mapuche,Mapuches, granted after independence,
could not be exercised south from the Bio-Bio River, where they remained independent
from the Chilean state until the end of the 19th century, which in turn reinforced the
binary identity construction between the white and the non-white. The violent
indigenous resistance excluded them from the national project and from the political,
scientific and academic ideals of superiority with which Europe was associated. The
term indio was reserved to people living in southern regions and denoted traits of
violence, poverty, rebellion, lack of history, and so on (Waldman, 2004).

A census in 1813 included a query on origins, separating categories between

'Spanish and foreign European' on one side, and 'caste' on the other. However, that
query was canceled in all subsequent censuses, the need for accounting for differences

19
was denied, and indigenous were counted separately since they were living outside of
the national community. Census officials believed that queries on religion, race or
language were irrelevant (Loveman, 2014). The myth of mestizaje was already present
in census reports in the 19th century (Estefane, 2004).

"...religion and language are only one among Chileans. In addition, the census
of the United States of America determines the black-slave population, the free
and the color-free. Happily in our country there is a unique race, free and equal,
the same with skin colourcolor and their political rights and duties, which
excuses us from the task of distinction that uses several pages in the American
census" (Estefane, 2004, p. 57. Translation from the authors)

The construction of the Chilean state involved establishing sovereignty over

Mapuche territory, including laws and education. Mapuches were seen as dangerous and
savage barbarians that had to be diluted in the Chilean institutional system. Racism
grew attached to the formation of the nation state, including the military irruption on
their lands, which passed to Chilean and foreign colonists (Waldman, 2004). During the
1920s and 1930s, the Chilean political system sought the integration of
Mapuche,Mapuches, helping them in material terms with infrastructure, like roads and
rural schools.

Throughout
Slavery existed in Chile until 1811, just after gaining independence from Spain. But the
strategies of identity construction also involved consequences for African-descendants;
they were disappeared from statistics and most of them were forced to migrate to Peru
(Fundación Oro Negro, 2001). Regarding the few that remained, they were ‘whitened’
and ‘diluted’ by practices of mestizaje, and reduced in numbers and visibility. More
recently, prior to the 2012 Census, there was a mobilization of Afro-descendent
communities for their inclusion and visibility. The only achievement was that census
officials were trained to write 'Afro-descendent' in 'other'. In 2017, the census was
repeated in an abbreviated fashion, but there was no training for officials to write 'Afro-
descendent'. The only ethnic question was about membership in indigenous peoples.

During the first half of the 20th century, Chile continued believing that its population
was not multiracial or multi-ethnic,multiethnic, and thus, did not include any racial
category in the census (Loveman, 2014). Indigenous were counted separately from the
national census. In opposition to Mexico, inIn Chile, there was no mestizo nationalism
as the base for popular movements of the 20th century. Chilean movements privileged
class ideology over ethnic content (Richards, 2014). Thus, Chile's multiculturalism
privileged redistribution over recognition, but policies were only ameliorative and did
not bring redistribution (Richards, 2016).

During Allende's government (1970-1973), indigenous peoples were recognized

as individuals whose culture differed from the majority of the country, although the
political left never separated the indigenous question from the rural question. Later, the
military coup d'état led to a strong repression: Mapuche organizations were banned and
many members were detained and disappeared. In addition, a new legislation allowed
individual property of Mapuche land, in order to convert them into peasants who can
freely compete in the market. From 1990 onwards, a new Indigenous Law was
promulgated, in order to protect Mapuche land and to encourage them to be

20
incorporated into the political system. However, their access to natural resources was
not granted, their voice in the decision of new hydroelectric dams was not taken into
account, and their insertion into the agroforest industry was highly disadvantaged
(Waldman, 2004).

Within the Chilean census, in 1992 indigenous were first Chileans and then
members of some indigenous culture. In 2002, the idea of 'indigenous people' was
incorporated. In anvel way, in 2012, a new question about language was included, and a
question on nationality was opened, to include an indigenous nationality. Although the
political situation is better than in 1992, there is more tension associated with processes
of ethnic vindication. Thus, today more people assume itself as indigenous (around
11.1%), of which 1.5 million are Mapuche (De la Maza, 2014).

Slavery existed in Chile until 1811, just after gaining independence from Spain.
But the strategies of identity construction also involved consequences for African-
descendants; they were disappeared from statistics and most of them were forced to
migrate to Peru (Fundación Oro Negro, 2001). Regarding the few that remained, they
were ‘whitened’ and ‘diluted’ by practices of mestizaje, and reduced in numbers and
visibility. More recently, prior to the 2012 Census, there was a mobilization of Afro-
descendent communities for their inclusion and visibility. The only achievement was
that census officials were trained to write 'Afro-descendent' in 'other'. In 2017, the
census was repeated in an abbreviated fashion, but there was no training for officials to
write 'Afro-descendent'. The only ethnic question was about membership in indigenous
peoples.

In terms of social stratification, theThe occupational status of Mapuches is

highly inferior to non Mapuche,, from service employees, to workers and domestic
servants (Waldman, 2004). Poverty and vulnerability indexes are higher for them as
well.Mapuches than the national average. The main territory they occupy (Araucanía
Region) is one of the poorest regions of the country, with high levels of poverty and
inequality. Today, Mapuche communities are involved into violent clashes with private
and state interests in their territories, due to historical events where much of their land
was illegally expropriated and then sold to private entities. In addition, policies directed
to them have been framed just from the social class perspective (Richards, 2010).

Discrimination and exclusion against Mapuches from the national imaginary,

and against indigenous in general, is part of a conception of economic development in
which indigenous lands have beenare liberalized to become part of development capital
(Fontana and& Wellington, 2016: Waldman, 2004; Richards, 2014). Despite the interest
of some Mapuches in participating on Chilean politics, the social, political and cultural
stereotypes built in the 19th century remained. That is, Mapuches kept being portrayed
in a dichotomous fashion; between the images of invincible warriors and barbarian
culture (Waldman, 2004). There is ample documentation of stereotypes, prejudice and
discrimination against groups with indigenous traits, especially Mapuches (Merino et al,
Quilaqueo y Sainz, 2008). Discrimination is higher in cities than in the countryside, and
would be more covert in higher educational levels. Mapuches in Chile are highly aware
of their discrimination. The most affected ones are those higher in educational levels
and socioeconomic positions (Merino , Quilaqueo y Sainzet al., 2008). Mapuches have
to conceal their identity in urban settings, and a large majority end up denying their
identity, refusing their language and even changing their last names.

21
 In terms of immigrants, their history is marked by four particular moments.
First, after the War of the Pacific and at the beginning of the 20th century, Chile
established control over new territories in the north, which was accompanied by
increasing prejudices and discrimination against Bolivians, Peruvians, Afro-descendants
and persons of Asian origin. Second, until the first half of the 20th century, European
immigrants arrived (encouraged by the State) together with some communities from
Asia and a permanent regional immigration. Third, during the military dictatorship,
immigration decreased due to restrictive laws. And fourth, with the new democratic
governments after 1990, Latin American immigrants started to arrive attracted by a
relatively steady economic growth and political stability (Tijoux and& Palominos,
2015).

The geography of international migrations has changed in South America, and

new internal destinations have appeared, such as Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, and Chile.
The number of registered immigrants in Chile has doubled from 2002 to 2015 (Rojas
and& Silva, 2016). The Peruvian community is the largest, followed by the Argentinian
and the Bolivian. However, Colombians arrived in massive numbers in the last decade,
and in recent years Venezuelans and Haitians have created big communities as well
(Manrique, 2013). In this context, the growth of Latin American immigration has
revealed racism again in Chile. Racism has become a structural factor of domination
and exclusion of immigrant workers, especially if they are Afro-descendent. The
immigration of Peruvians has a strong presence of woman, and are concentrated by
region and occupation (Stabb and& Hill, 2006).???). Working under more
disadvantaged situations, many Peruvian womenwoman are employed as domestic
servants, in a process of disempowerment created by political and legal circumstances
(Stabb and& Hill, 2006).???). Chilean employers describe Peruvians as backward,
uneducated and indigenous, and see themselves as civilized, modern and white (Stabb
and& Hill, 2006).year???). In the last decade, Haitians have become a highly visible
group of immigrants in major cities of the north and in the Metropolitan Region (Nieto,
2014). Immigrants live afraid for their portrayal in the media, bad treatments from
Chileans and the experience of being ‘the other’ in the spaces they occupy (Segura y
Bijit, 2014).

In terms of residential segregation, though they are diffused in many districts, immigrants
are concentrated in central and peri-central areas, and are relegated to an informal, illegal
and racist housing stock (Contreras, Ala-Louko, & Labbé,Contreras et al, 2015). Their
living spaces are tugurized (processes of intense turnover and degradation) and landlords
do not invest, favoring illegal markets (Contreras et al 2015; Segura y Bijit, 2014).
Immigrants in central areas occupy bourgeois buildings of the early 20th century, which
are now under serious deterioration, with their internal spaces intensely subdivided
(Segura &y Bijit, 2014). Despite those buildings have scarce living spaces, poor lighting
and ventilation, and deteriorated infrastructure, immigrants have to reside highly
overcrowded, sharing kitchens and bathrooms (Segura y & Bijit, 2014, Torres & Hidalgo,
2009). In addition, there are abusive requisites for renting, and landlords modify the rent
at any moment, especially for the undocumented (Contreras et al., 2015; Segura y & Bijit,
2014; Contreras et al 2015). Chileans living in those neighborhoods complain that they
have become insecure, and that overcrowding is a threat to their way of life (Segura y &
Bijit, 2014). But in Santiago, the intensity of immigration has extended their localities
from the center and peri-center to more peripheral, relegated and stigmatized spaces, in

22
the social housing areas occupied by the poorest mass of Chileans. Haitians have
concentrated in these spaces, and as the urban poor, they have poor access to public
services and a high exposure to insecurity (Pedemonte et al., 2015). In northern cities like
Antofagasta, high land prices and speculation associated to cupper extraction had led to
the proliferation of immigrant informal settlements in segregated peripheries (Taylor,
2014; Strang& & Stefoni, 2016; Taylor, 2014).

Regarding Mapuches, some argue that they would be developing a double

process: on one side assimilating themselves with the urban poor, and on the other self-
segregating in the form of ethnic enclaves in some metropolitan areas. Mapuches that
arrived to the Metropolitan Region during the 20th century were forced to assimilate
within the urban poor in the segregated periphery of Santiago (Fontana and&
Wellington, 2016). They were displaced from their original land in the Chilean south
and were forced to live in urban and individual conditions of life, which had deep
consequences for their customs and social organization. But their self-segregation has
opened room for a cultural emergence. Despite the general negative effects of poor
segregation, Mapuche's identity and culture is preserved and renewed, and they have
gained political strength (Gissi, 2004). In a context of growing recognition of ethnic and
cultural differences, and of retraction to the local sphere under globalizing forces,
Mapuche spaces in the city allow them to regenerate their homes, families, land and
ethnic communities (Gissi, 2004; Fontana and& Wellington, 2016; Gissi, 2004).

The case of Colombia

THE CASE OF COLOMBIA

Despite the widespread legacy of African slavery, the myth of mestizaje in Colombia
only included indigenous and Spaniards in the makeup of a culturally homogenous and
racially mixed country (Paschel, 2013). Thus, the assimilation, disappearance and
exclusion of Afro-descendants from that constitutive narrative were intended to achieve
progress (Loveman, 2014). African slaves were brought to Colombia in large numbers
from the 16th century, in order to replace the declining indigenous population. They
worked in mining, agriculture, textile manufacturing and domestic service in all regions
of the country. Some blacks lived in free towns called palenques, where they lived as
cimarrones (runaway slaves). African slaves fought for independence with the promise
of absolute freedom, becoming around 60 percent of Simon Bolivar's army (PNUD-
Colombia, 2012).Some authors have denounced this situation referring to the existence
of a myth of racial democracy in Colombia (Rodríguez-Garavito, Alfonso & Cavelier,
2008; Zapata-Cortés, 2010).

Abolition of slavery came in 1851, but Colombian laws only recognized the
status of indigenous (Cunin, 2004). Former slaves were considered new citizens, but
without equal rights or opportunities, without land and housing, without access to
education and political participation (PNUD-Colombia, 2012). Thus, their rights were
continuously violated. African-descendants were still considered lazy, primitive and
barbarian, and had to relocate in subordinated positions, without legal rights, stability
and adequate labor conditions (PNUD-Colombia, 2012). In that context, those who
wanted to take distance from proletarianization, to escape the stringent controls of the
dominant society, and that wanted more autonomy, moved and occupied relatively
isolated regions after abolition: the Pacific Coast, the North of Cauca, the Patia, and
other regions (PNUD-Colombia, 2012). For a long time then, Afro-Colombians were

23
able to establish themselves as a free peasantry, where they reaffirmed their racial
identity (PNUD-Colombia, 2012). Thus, the historical regional segregation of Colombia
took shape, with indigenous and mestizos occupying the Andean highlands and blacks
settling in the lowlands and the coast (Williams, 2013). The indigenous that remained in
the Pacific Coast coexisted with Afro-descendants, and both developed culturally
sensitive and non-violent forms of conflict resolution (Restrepo & & Martínez, 2004;
Escobar, 2004). This was the positive side of living in the poorest, most forgotten and
relatively isolated region of the country.

Former slaves that stayed in cities, settled under poor conditions of habitability,
socioeconomic limitations, legal vulnerability, and strong discrimination (PNUD-
Colombia, 2012). They were economically useful for a racist society, but marginal in
terms of political decision, opportunities and rights (PNUD-Colombia, 2012). From the
1960s, Afro-Colombians started a transit from peasantry to waged work. Thus, while
indigenous issues began to be taken into account (Cunin, 2004), new economic
activities gained importance in coastal regions, and blacks started to lose their autonomy
(Escobar, 2004; PNUD-Colombia, 2012).

The penetration of economic activities, and the relative isolation and weak
institutional presence opened room for the cultivation of illegal species, which brought
the armed conflict to the formerly peaceful Pacific Coast from the 1990s (PNUD-
Colombia, 2012; Escobar, 2004; PNUD-Colombia, 2012; Williams, 2013). The region
and its entire infrastructure began to be disputed, which led to a forceful and massive
displacement of black communities (Restrepo& & Martínez, 2004). Two other
processes contributed to that displacement: (1) the establishment of large projects of
development and the consequent decline of local agro-forestry activities, and (2) the
existence of rich natural resources and ideal sites for tourism (Escobar, 2004). Thus, just
when property rights were being recognized, the resistance and the advance of the
ethnic movement were weakened (Restrepo& & Martínez, 2004). The amount of
displaced Afro-Colombians increased three times during the 1990s, totaling 2.2 million
from 1985 to 2000 (Escobar, 2004). Displaced populations arrived to cities abandoned
and hopeless, which affected their struggles for territorial and cultural rights (Restrepo&
& Martínez, 2004). De-territorialized by the imposition of terror, blacks experienced a
forceful inclusion into capitalist modernity (Restrepo& & Martínez, 2004), and their
presence in cities opened room for new encounters and negotiations of space and race
(Williams, 2013). Due to their proximity to the Pacific Coast, Cali and Medellin have
historically concentrated more blacks, but from the 1990s, the armed conflict and the
economic opportunities pointed to Bogota as a new destination (Villamizar, 2015).

The pressures of the rural black movement, mostly from Colombia's Pacific
region, with a discourse based on ethnic difference, culture, territory and the need to
preserve biodiversity, led to unprecedented changes in the 1990s (Paschel, 2013). Racial
categories were included in the 1990 census (Loveman, 2014). Later, the new
constitution of 1991 and the Law of Black Communities that it mandated, gave Afro-
descendants rights for collective lands, ethnic development and political participation,
mandated the study of Afro-Colombian heritage in schools, and designated special seats
of representation (Cunin, 2004; Escobar, 2004; Cunin, 2004; , Loveman, 2014; Paschel,
2013, Loveman, 2014). The constitution officially recognized the country as 'pluri-
ethnic' and 'multicultural', and the Law of Blacks Communities has been highlighted as
the most comprehensive legislation for Afro-descendents in Latin America (Paschel,

24
2010). Both pieces of legislation provided a critical political opening, with a focus on
ethnic difference, culture and identity, instead of racial equality, as it is in Brazil and the
US (Paschel, 2010). Thus, the increased racial awareness has led to ethno-racial pride
and self-identification, which has resulted in a slow increase in self-identified Afro-
descendents in the last 20 years (Loveman, 2014).

According to the 2005 census, 10% of the population self-identify as Afro-

Colombian, but the number is highly questioned due to the pejorative use of the term
'black' (PNUD-Colombia, 2012). Current estimations then, propose a number between
15% and 26% (Barbary & Urrea eds., 2004;, ????; Agudelo, 2004; PNUD-Colombia,
2012). In any case, the large majority (around 70%) live today in cities (Agudelo,
2004). While 90% of the Pacific Coast population is Afro-descendent (Escobar, 2004),
there are blacks in all the country, with an important presence in urban centers,
especially in Cali and Buenaventura (Agudelo, 2004; PNUD-Colombia, 2012). Despite
the recent changes, the current situation of Afro-Colombians is far from ideal. Their
main contemporary conquest, the recognition of collective rights, has been disrupted by
extractive activities and the armed conflict in the Pacific Coast (PNUD-Colombia,
2012). Blacks have the lowest incomes, poor access to health, education and social
services, and high levels of infant and maternal mortality (Paschel, 2010; Urrea& &
Quintín, 2000; Paschel, 2010; Villamizar, 2015; Vivas, 2013; Villamizar, 2015).

The black identity of today revolves between the remaining stereotypes in social
memory, the indigenized mould of the 1991 constitution, and the homogenization of
diverse black ethnicities that remain in Colombia under the single badge of 'black
communities' (Restrepo& & Martínez, 2004). In addition, black towns in the Pacific
Coast remain under a veil of invisibility: no one knows where they are, and several
myths surround a potential visit (Olivero, 2004). In the city of Cali, there are accounts
of police abuse and violence, unemployment, verbal aggressions in inter-racial
bordering areas, discrimination in public transportation, and perceptions of insecurity
when passing close to whites-mestizos (Urrea & & Quintín, 2000). In a similar vein,
indigenous living in the countryside have bilingual educational programs and a
collective and self-governed territory that comprises almost one third of Colombia's
territory (Cunin, 2004). But their relationship with peasants is marked by political
isolation (Bocarejo, 2011).

As introduced before, the most salient form of racial segregation in Colombia is

regional (Paschel, 2010). In a context of large rural-urban displacements, blacks
experience racism and discrimination when they arrive to cities and try to find housing
(Villamizar, 2015). Afro-Colombians in cities are a minority in absolute terms, but
important in numbers (PNUD-Colombia, 2012). The levels of racial segregation are
high in cities like Bogota, Medellin, Soacha and Barranquilla, but socioeconomic
segregation is higher than that (Villamizar, 2015). In Bogota, as in many cities, blacks
are more concentrated in lower status neighborhoods, and those living in privileged
areas are a minuscule minority (Williams, 2013; Villamizar, 2015; Williams, 2013).
This city presents experiences of inclusion and exclusion: from the cosmopolitanism of
central spaces to the segregation of the periphery (Villamizar, 2015; Williams, 2013;
Villamizar, 2015).

Cali is the center of research on racial segregation, with the highest percentage
of blacks in cities, high levels of segregation, unequal access for several services in the

25
city, and segregation patterns that have persisted (Villamizar, 2015). In this city, blacks,
indigenous and mestizos are concentrated in the poorest areas (Urrea & & Quintín,
2000). Thus, statistics and imaginaries of exclusionary otherness, poverty and skin color
are combined (Urrea & & Quintín, 2000). In fact, the spaces of black-mulatto
concentration are called 'ghettos', a term that was transferred through the hip-hop
movement and has been incorporated from the late 1980s (Urrea & & Quintín, 2000).
The lack of mobility and social integration of blacks resulted in the development of
several homogenous spatial clusters of Afro-Colombians that have persisted through
time (Vivas, 2013).

The case of Mexico

THE CASE OF MEXICO

The homogeneity sought in the Mexican nationalistic project was thought to be
essentially mestizo, beyond their ethnic past and skin color (Loveman, 2014). Mestizos
are presented as symbols of the national identity, and as proof of the absence of racism
(Villareal, 2014). This mixture was thought to be exclusively between Spaniards and
indigenous, thus negating the contribution of Afro-descendants to Mexican history and
its racial makeup (Cuevas & Jackson, 2004; Jones; 2013; Villareal, 2014). This relative
invisibility of blacks is explained as a result of a colonial condition of slavery, and
assimilation processes (Castellanos, Gómez & Pineda, 2009).

Afro-Mexicans’ have lived in the Pacific Coast of Oaxaca from the 16th century
(Noticia BBC sobre negros, ???), and their history starts with Hernán Cortés, who
brought black slaves with him, especially for military purposes (Simms, 2008). During
the first century of colonial rule, there was a demographic collapse of indigenous
populations, due to epidemics, diseases, enslavement, and hard work, in addition to poor
living conditions, low birth rates, destructive wars, and mass suicides (Simms, 2008). In
that context, the Church put pressure to protect the indigenous from exploitation, and to
stop enslavement and mass genocides, leading the Spanish Crown to abolish indigenous
enslavement by 1542 (Simms, 2008). In addition, figures like Bartolome de Las Casas
advocated the use of African slaves to protect indigenous populations and replace their
labor power. That decrease in labor supply increased the demand for cheap labor, which
forced Mexico to import more black slaves than any other country in Spanish America
(Russell, 2011; Simms, 2008; Russell, 2011). Thus, the number of African-descendants
in Mexico grew rapidly in the 16th and 17th centuries (Simms, 2008). They were
initially employed in urban areas, and then in rural areas, and worked in agriculture,
mining, textile manufacturing, domestic service, and as artisans (Simms, 2008; Russell,
2011; Simms, 2008). African slaves were thought to have a special strength, higher than
indigenous and whites (Simms, 2008), and as a consequence, indigenous were
stereotyped as too weak for hard labor (Simms, 2008).

Some authors highlight three periods of African slavery in Mexico. First, from
1519 to 1580, blacks were brought by conquistadors, and grew in number while
indigenous populations were declining. Second, from 1580 to 1650, there was a rising
demand for African slave labor. By the end of the 16th century, for example,
approximately 50,000 blacks and mulattos lived in Mexico City, either enslaved or free
(Simms, 2008). And third, from 1650 to 1827, there was a decline of slavery trade and
enslaved black population, the indigenous population recovered, and mestizos grew
massively (Simms, 2008). After independence from Spain, European immigration was

26
promoted and was seen as a cure to improve the racial makeup. They settled specially in
the countryside, considered in need of modernity and institutional control (Castellanos
et al.,2009; Sánchez-Guillermo, 2007; Castellanos, Gómez & Pineda, 2009).

Between independence (1810-1812) and the Revolution (1910-1918), an

extremely violent racist discourse grew, as part of a war against rebel indigenous
(Castellanos, Gómez & Pineda et al., 2009). Otherwise, the Porfiriato era in Mexico
(1876-1910) highlighted the importance of statistics as a sign of progress, and censuses
began to recognize the variety of indigenous languages (Loveman, 2014). The Mexican
revolution exalted the indigenous and glorified their past, even putting them in the first
place (Loveman, 2014), while Afro-Mexicans were separated from the imaginary
(Cuevas & Jackson, 2004). The racial ideology of mestizaje emerged after the
revolution. Race became constitutive of nationality and to be Mexican was to be
mestizo (Loveman, 2014), thus erasing distinctions within this category and
differentiating with whites just in cultural terms (Villareal, 2010). Mestizos were
portrayed as symbols of identity, future of the nation, biological and cultural
improvement of the Mexican race, and as proof to negate discrimination towards
indigenous (Castellanos, 2000; Castellanos et al., Gómez & Pineda, 2009). Mestizaje
broke with the racial paradigm and replaced it with a ‘cultural’ approach (Loveman,
2014). Thus language replaced race, making ethno-racial differences invisible. (Noticia
BBC sobre negros, ???).

In this process, the development of anthropology was linked to the State and to
racism (Castellanos, 2000). Scientific and pseudo-scientific discourses, created by
anthropologists and intellectuals, supported cultural backwardness of the indigenous
(Castellanos, Gómez & Pineda et al., 2009). Manuel Gamio, an influential Mexican
anthropologist, installed the idea that indigenous founded Mexican culture and society,
but the nation required a common and homogenous language, character, history and
race (Brading, 1994). Health and social policies were influenced by ideas of racial
improvement (Bashford & Levine, 2010), in a period of hegemony of assimilation
discourses and policies (Castellanos, Gómez & Pineda et al., 2009). The census of 1921,
the first after the revolution, confirmed mestizos as the majority of the population,
followed by indigenous, and then whites (Loveman, 2014). In 1930, racial categories
were erased from the census, justified by the supposed integration of indigenous into
labor and politics, their cultural assimilation, and their participation in mestizaje, which
left a social stratification that does not follows ethnic categories (Loveman, 2014).
However, some questions on culture and language were added, showing an increase in
Spanish speakers (Loveman, 2014). In this context, Manuel Gamio suggested that
language questions should be replaced by questions on cultural habits, in order to
eradicate backward behavior, which turned simple poverty into a marker of indigeneity
(Loveman, 2014).

The Mexican ideology of mestizaje has been widely criticized from different
angles. First, it has concealed several processes, from forced assimilation to ethnocide
(Castellanos, 2000). Second, it ignores the contribution of Afro-descendants to the
racial makeup (Villareal, 2010). Third, it has been the base for racial discrimination
toward indigenous and foreign minorities (Sánchez-Guillermo, 2007). Fourth, it
obscures racism against internal (indigenous, blacks) and external (Chinese, Jews,
Guatemalan) ‘others’ (Castellanos, Gómez & Pineda et al., 2009). Fifth, the domination
of the Spanish language has erased more than 100 local languages (Castellanos, Gómez

27
& Pineda et al., 2009). Sixth, within the mestizo color spectrum, individuals classify
themselves as whiter, depending on education and wealth (Villareal, 2010). Finally, the
glorification of mestizos has lost legitimacy with the emergence of the indigenous as a
new political subject (Castellanos, 2000).

Currently, a strong correlation between race and class persists in Mexican

society (Castellanos, 2000). Indigenous are estimated between 9% and 14% of the
population (Van Dijk, 2009), and their indexes of poverty and marginalization are the
highest, especially in regions with greater proportions of them (Castellanos , Gómez &
Pinedaet al., 2009). In addition, internal migration to cities and outmigration to the US
and Canada has had a strong effect on rural communities, and among them, on the
indigenous (Castellanos , Gómez & Pinedaet al., 2009). In 2010, the census gave
visibility to indigenous, but not to Afro-descendants, despite a campaign for visibility
from black organizations (Villareal, 2010; Loveman, 2014). Black leaders insisted that
if they were recognized as a minority, they would receive funds for cultural promotion
and public health programs (Noticia BBC sobre negros, ???)12.???). The government’s
response to black organizations was that Afro-Mexicans do not have a distinctive
language (Noticia BBC sobre negros, ???). To compensate that absence, an inter-census
survey was made in 2015, identifying around 1.4 million Afro-descendants (Noticia
Diario Jornada, ????). However, many Afro-Mexicans call themselves morenos, so the
question for ‘blacks’ was not completely accurate (Noticia BBC sobre negros, ???).

Several scholars affirm that the Zapatista uprising helped social scientists to renew their
interests in racism, with an impressive multiplication of such publications (Sánchez-
Guillermo, 2007; Castellanos et al., Gómez & Pineda, 2009). Racism persists in the
everyday language of schools, political discourses and the media, reasserting old racial
hierarchies (Castellanos, Gómez & Pineda et al., 2009). Today, there is evidence of
increasing racialized humor about blacks and indigenous (Sue & Golash-Boza, 2013),
prejudice against dark-skinned people (Villareal, 2014), coded employment preferences
for lighter skins (Villareal, 2014), family obstacles for the entry of dark-skinned through
marriage (Villareal, 2014), and African-descendants distancing themselves from a black
identity, among other problems (Villareal, 2014). Despite the national ideology of
mestizaje then, there is a preference for whiter skin and European features, which partly
explains why whiter Mexicans occupy higher status positions (Villareal, 2010).
Regarding indigenous in particular, there is a highly fluid boundary between them and
the mass of mestizos, based on cultural traits (Villareal, 2010). There is evidence of
indigenous in cities working in the least qualified jobs, and suffering labor
discrimination and disdain in workplaces, especially women (Castellanos, Gómez &
Pineda et al., 2009). In addition, a great part of the Mexican society believes that
indigenous have social limitations because of their ethnic background, that the best they
should do is to abandon their habits, and that they should not live close to their
community (Castellanos , Gómez & Pinedaet al., 2009). And there is also evidence of
racism against Afro-descendants as well (Castellanos, Gómez & Pineda et al., 2009).
There have been cases of deportation to other countries, since the police considered that
there are no blacks in Mexico, despite having Mexican IDs (Noticia BBC sobre negros,

12
Falta revisar esa referencia

28
???). In that context, some Afro-Mexicans have put the idea of rising up as Zapatistas
did in the past (Noticia BBC sobre negros, ???).

There was a de-jure racial residential segregation during the colonial rule in Mexico. An
explicit policy of segregation separated "two republics" for the protection of indigenous
from the exploitation and negative role models of conquistadors (Sánchez-Guillermo,
2007). During the 16th century, there were exclusive parishes and local governments for
indigenous and Spanish. And although indigenous and mestizos were not accepted in
the Spanish city, blacks and foreigners were able to enter (Cruz, 1993). The end of de-
jure segregation for indigenous put them in a disadvantageous position, since they no
longer had the legal institutions that guaranteed the possession and administration of
their goods (Cruz, 1993). Today, the patterns of segregation for indigenous follow those
of the poor employed in informal jobs, but the levels are more extreme for them, they
are more crowded and their location is more peripheral (Vilalta, 2008; Monkkonen,
2012).

In the Pachuca metropolitan area, for example, ethnic segregation increased between
2000 and 2010, indigenous are concentrated and isolated in a small scale, and the areas
of highest concentration coincide with historically marginalized areas or in process of
densification and expansion (Linares & Ramírez, 2014). The current segregation of
indigenous in southern cities of Mexico is characterized as "ethnic encapsulation": that
is, while they live concentrated in marginal neighborhoods, they present some networks
of mutual support, in a hostile environment marked by historical stigmas (París, 2003).
In those cities, indigenous are seen as foreigners, illegitimate residents, and even as
invaders or appropriators, especially in the city of San Cristobal de las Casas (París,
2003). Indigenous and mestizos do coexist in public space, but their exchanges are
mediated by prejudice, which reinforce the discrimination against the already
disadvantaged indigenous (París, 2003).

Conclusions

The aim of the paper has been to present the recent debates and evidence on racial and
ethnic residential segregation in Latin America. This, in order to stress the need for a
new research agenda on residential segregation studies, one that strongly recognises
stratification structures based not only on class systems but also along racial and ethnic
dimensions. Although the irruption of new actors in the last decades, at an international
and local level, has allowed for a widespread recognition of social inequalities between
peoples of different ethnoracial characterises, urban studies are well behind in studying
the spatial aspects of the phenomenon. There are some few studies that give evidence
about the existence of various types of residential segregation patterns based on
ethnoracial differences among the population, in countries as different as Argentina,
Mexico, Colombia and Chile. However, besides Colombia and Brasil, we lack a
systematic corpus of research on cities, metropolitan areas and at a regional level, to
understand how race and ethnicity form part of the residential segregation in our
countries.

What do we know:

ResidentialPendiente

29
In Latin America, the historical racial differences became institutionalised within aclass
system, and were consequently ‘naturalised’. This conception of class differences as more
‘natural’ than race differences comes from an increasing meritocratic ideology imposed
by the neoliberal reforms of the 1980s, and carries the problem of a decreasing state
protection, as it has happened recently in the US.

An important conclusion regarding stratification is that residential segregation is not

exclusively produced by race, nor exclusively produced by class. That is, pure class and
pure race segregation have never existed as such.Stratification systems work for the
maintenance of the status quo, either through legitimisation or through naturalisation of
differences. In our regio race was not enforced as difference, therefore class became the
best most visible dividing line. But as forces to create inequality, these two categories
have never worked in a separate fashion. Sometimes more interbreeding or better
institutional treatment has helped to disconnect race from class, but this separation has
never been complete. The paper has shown that the ethnoracial stratification systems, in
all countries studied, are related to how elites and the state have constructed national
identities and otherness along the years. In Mexico and Chile, at a discourse level, this
identity formation during the nineteenth century was sustained on the assumption of a
new mestizo race, in the process of whitening. This provoked a double move that
included the indigenous population as part of a national imaginary with a glorious
ascendancy, but gave them little room for development, and privileged European
foreigners. Argentina has been an extreme case in such a conception.

In countries like Mexico, Argentina and Chileafrodescendancy has been almost

completely invisible for the State, until very recently, in contrast to Colombia which has
a larger afro descendant population. However, various studies have questioned
Colombia’s multiculturalism and have shown patterns of residential segregation of
black people.

Moreover, the invisibility of race and ethnicity in latinamericanurban studies of

segregation can be understood as the afterlife of previous Latin American social
sciences perspectives which were developed within a worldview refereeing back to the
consolidation of the capitalist world system based on colonial partnerships between
Europe and the rest of the world around the sixteenth century (Wallerstein, 1991;
Quijano, 2000; van Dijk, 2009). This paradigm has survived to this day and has been
sustained by ideologies of scientific racism, Eurocentric worldviews of modernity, and a
national imagery based on the idea of mestizaje (Segato, 2007; Wallerstein, 1991;
Quijano, 2000).

This research agenda must acknowledge:

a) It is not possible to “import” conceptualizations of residential segregation patterns

from contexts outside Latin America. This, due to the characteristics of the social
construction of otherness in our countries. For instance, the United States almost
exterminated their native population, thus the formation of ethnic enclaves obeys
in their case to international migration moves. On the contrary ethnic auto
segregation processes in Latin America does not obey to strategies of subsistence
in foreign countries -they haven’t migrated at all-, but must probably are related
to racism against to non-European descendant others.

30
b) Residential segregation patterns of afrodescendants in Latin America shouldn’t
be conceptualized in similar terms as in the US, because officially they were not
excluded from citizenry as in that northern country. Thus, the practices of
exclusion and/or auto segregation must be studied recognising how blackness has
been constructed in our countries. Moreover, the classbackground and class
position of these“middelclass” The ‘ideal type’ of pure race segregation would be
between middle-class whites and middle-class blacks in the US, who supposedly should
not have expectations of deviant behaviour. However, the class background and class
position of these groups, mostly in terms of wealth accumulation and low
inheritability of status, is highly different. Likewise, the ‘ideal type’ of pure class
segregation in most Latin American countries would be between rich and poor
European descendants, or between rich and poor mestizos. But this seems to be
very unlikely given the strong barriers around the elite, and the perpetuation of
homogeneous racial traits within this group. It is important to note then, that
stratification systems work for the maintenance of the status quo, either through
legitimisation or through naturalisation of differences. Thus, if race is not possible to be
enforced as difference, then class becomes the best dividing line. But as forces to create
inequality, these two categories have never worked in a separate fashion. Sometimes
more interbreeding or better institutional treatment has helped to disconnect race from
class, as it is in some sense in Chile, but this separation has never been complete.

31
 References
Agudelo, C. E. (2004). No todos vienen del río: construcción de
identidadesnegrasurbanas y movilizaciónpolíticaen Colombia. EnConflicto e
(in)visibilidad. Retosenlosestudios de la gentenegraen Colombia.Feriva, Cali,
Colombia: Editorial Universidad del Cauca.
Aguirre, M., & Castro, M. (2009).Prejuicio y discriminación racial en Chile. Talca,
Chile: Universidad de Talca. Recuperado a partir de
http://www.ceoc.cl/pdf/Estudios_Opinion/2009/1109_racismo.pdf %[October
13th, 2011
Alvarado, M., & Fernández, H. (2011). Una Narración Fundacional para una
Antropología Filosófica Chilena: Raza Chilena de Nicolás Palacios, 40(1), 47–
63.
Appelbaum, N. P., Macpherson, A. S., & Rosemblatt, K. A. (2003). Race and Nation
in Modern Latin America.Univ of North Carolina Press.
Arendt, H. (1973). The origins of totalitarianism. Orlando, FL: Harcourt.
Auyero, J. (2007). Introducción. Claves para pensar la marginación. En Wacquant, L.,
Parias urbanos: marginalidad en la ciudad a comienzos del milenio. Buenos Aires: Formatted: Font: 12 pt
Manantial.
Auyero (2007

Barbary, O. (2001). Identidad y ciudadanía afrocolombiana en Cali y la

regiónPacífica: pistasestadísticas para unainterpretaciónsociológica. Scripta
Nova. Revista Electrónica de Geografía y CienciasSociales, 94(22), 17.DOI o
URL
Barbary, O., & Urrea, F. (2003). La población negra en la Colombia de hoy:
dinámicas sociodemográficas, culturales y políticas. Estudos Afro-Asiáticos,
25(1), 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-546X2003000100002
Bastia, T., & Hau, M. vom. (2014). Migration, Race and Nationhood in Argentina.
Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 40(3), 475–492. DOI
Bastia & Hau, 2003

Beals, R. (1953). Social Stratification in Latin America. American Journal of

Sociology, 58(4), 327–339. DOI URL
Boal, F. (2002). Belfast: walls within. Political Geography, 21(5), 687–694.
Bolt, G., Burgers, J., & Van Kempen, R. (1998).On the social significance of spatial
location; spatial segregation and social inclusion.Journal of Housing and the
Built Environment, 13(1), 83–95.
Bonilla-Silva, E. (2011). The essential social fact of race. American Sociological
Association, 899–906. DOI URL
Brading, D. A. (1994). Nationalism and State-Building in Latin American History.
Ibero-amerikanischesArchiv, 20(1/2), 83–108. DOI URL
Carrión, F. (1991). La investigaciónurbanaenAmérica Latina. Una aproximación.
Nueva Sociedad, 114(1), 113–123.
Castellanos Guerrero, A. (2000). Antropología y racismoracism en México.
Desacatos, (4), 53–79.
Castellanos Guerrero, A., Gómez Izquierdo, J., & Pineda, F. (2009). Racist Discourse
in Mexico. IEn T. A. van Dijk (Ed.), Racism and Discourse in Latin America
(pp. 217–258). Lanha, Boulder, New York, Tornoto, Plymouth: Lexington
Books. DOI URL

32
 Castro, F. W. (2013). Afro-Colombians and the Cosmopolitan City New Negotiations
of Race and Space in Bogotá, Colombia.Latin American Perspectives, 40(2),
105–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/0094582X12468868
CEPAL, 2009
Contreras, Yasna, Ala-Louko, Veera, & Labbé, Gricel. (2015). Acceso exclusionario
y racista a la vivienda formal e informal en las áreas centrales de Santiago e
Iquique. Polis, 14(42), 53-78. DOI URL
Curtis/Courtis, M., Pacecca, M. I., Lenton, D., Belvedere, C., Caggiano, S.,
Casaravilla, D., & Halpern, G. (s. f.2009). Racism and Discourse: A Portrait of
the Argentine Situation. IEn T. A. van Dijk (Ed.), Racism and Discourse in
Latin America (pp. 13–56). Lanha, Boulder, New York, Toronto, Plymouth:
Lexington Books.
Cruz, 1993

Cuevas, M. P. H., & Jackson, R. L. (2004). African Mexicans and the Discourse on
Modern Nation. Lugar: University Press of America.
Cunin, E. (2004). De la esclavitud al multiculturalismo: el antropólogo entre
identidad rechazada e identidad instrumentalizada. IEn E. Restrepo& A. Rojas
(Eds.), Conflicto e (in)visibilidad. Retos en los estudios de la gentenegraen
Colombia. Feriva, Cali, Colombia: Editorial Universidad del Cauca.
Dulitzky, A. E. (2005). A Region in Denial: Racial Discrimination and Racism in
Latin America. IEn A. Dzidzienyo& S. Oboler (Eds.), Neither Enemies nor
Friends (pp. 39–59). Lugar: Palgrave Macmillan US. Recuperado a partir de
http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781403982636_2
De la Maza, 2014

Elias, N., &Scotson, J. (1994). The Established and the Outsiders. London, UK:
SAGE.
Escobar, A. (2004). Desplazamientos, desarrollo y modernidad en el Pacífico

colombiano. In E. Restrepo & A. A. R. Martínez (2004). Conflicto e invisibilidad.

Editorial Universidad del Cauca.

Escobar, 2004

Farley, R., Schuman, H., Bianchi, S., Colasanto, D., & Hatchett, S. (1978).
“Chocolate city, vanilla suburbs:” Will the trend toward racially separate
communities continue? Social Science Research, 7(4), 319–344. DOI
Fontana and Wellington, 2016;

Frigerio, A. (2000). Blacks in Argentina: Contested Representations of Culture and

Ethnicity (p. 27). Presentado en 2000 Meeting of the Latin American Studies
Association Section Session: Lo “afro” en América Latina: Debates sobre cultura,
política y poder, Hyatt Regency Miami, Estados Unidos.

Fundación Oro Negro (2001) Los Afrodescendientes de Arica. Oro Negro, Fundación de Field Code Changed
Afrodecendientes de Chile, retrieved July 8th, 2011, from:
Formatted: Spanish (Chile)
http://usuarios.multimania.es/oronegro/presentacion.htm
Formatted: Spanish (Chile)

33
 Gans, H. (2008). Involuntary segregation and the ghetto: Disconnecting process and
place. City & Community, 7(4), 353–357. DOI
Garabano, S. (2009). Una herencia monstruosa: mestizaje y modernización en Chile.
RevistaIberoamericana, 75(227), 349–362.
https://doi.org/10.5195/reviberoamer.2009.6577
Germani, G. (1969). Sociología de la modernización. Buenos Aires, Argentina:
Paidós.
Germani, G. (1988a). El Proceso de UrbanizaciónenlosPaísesAvanzados y
enlosPaísesenDesarrollo.En M. Bassolls, R. Donoso, A. Massollo, & A. Méndez
(Eds.), Antología de Sociología Urbana (p. 287‐316). México, DF: Unam.
Germani, G. (1988b). La ciudad comomecanismointegrador. En M. Bassolls, R.
Donoso, A. Massollo, & A. Méndez (Eds.), Antología de Sociología Urbana (p.
267‐286). México, DF: Unam.
Ghosh, 2013

Gissi, 2004

Grabner, 2012

Grimson, 2016

Gutiérrez, H. (2010). Exaltación del mestizo: La invención del Roto Chileno.

Universum (Talca), 25(1), 122–139. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-
23762010000100009
Harding, A., & Blokland, T. (2014).Urban Theory: A critical introduction to power,
cities and urbanism in the 21st century. London, UK: SAGE.
Hering Torres, M. S. (2011). La limpieza de sangre. Problemas de interpretación:
acercamientos históricos y metodológicos. Historia Crítica, 45. Pp DOI
Hickman, C. (1997). The Devil and the One Drop Rule: Racial Categories, African
Americans, and the U.S. Census. Michigan Law Review, 95(5), 1161–1265.
Hirsch, A. (1998). Making the second ghetto: Race and housing in Chicago, 1940-
1960. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Jaramillo, S. (1990). El Desenvolvimiento de la Discusiónsobre la
UrbanizaciónLatinoamericana: ¿Haciaun Nuevo Paradigma de Interpretación?
En M. Unda (Ed.), La Investigación Urbana enAmérica Latina (Vol. 2) (pp. 35–
74). Quito: Ediciones Ciudad.
Jargowsky, P. (1996). Take the money and run: Economic segregation in US
metropolitan areas. American Sociological Review, 61(6), 984–998.
Jargowsky, P. (1997). Poverty and place: Ghettos, barrios, and the American city.
New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Kerbo, H. (2012). Social stratification and inequality: Class conflict in historical,
comparative and global perspective. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Ko, 2014;

Laguerre, M. (2010). Ethnic Enclave. IEn R. Hutchison (Ed.), Encyclopedia of

Urban Studies (pp. 255–257). London, UK: SAGE.
Linares & Ramírez, 2014

López, 2006

34
 Loveman, M. (2014).National Colors: Racial Classification and the State in Latin
America. Lugar: Oxford University Press.
Low, S. (2003). Behind the Gates: Life, Security and the Pursuit of Happiness in
Fortress America. New York, NY: Routledge.
Low, S. (2006). Towards a theory of urban fragmentation: A cross-cultural analysis
of fear, privatization, and the state. Cybergeo: European Journal of Geography,
(349). Recuperado a partir de http://cybergeo.revues.org/3207
Low, S. M. (2001). The edge and the center: Gated communities and the discourse of
urban fear. American Anthropologist, 103(1), 45–58. DOI
Lucero, 2003

Maloutas, T., & Fujita, K. (2016).Residential Segregation in Comparative

Perspective: Making Sense of Contextual Diversity. London, UK: Routledge.
Marcuse, P. (1997). The Enclave, the Citadel, and the Ghetto. What has Changed in
the Post-Fordist US City. Urban Affairs Review, 33(2), 228–264. DOI
Massey, D., & Denton, N. (1988).The dimensions of residential segregation.Social
Forces, 67(2), 281–315.
Massey, D., & Denton, N. (1993).American apartheid: Segregation and the making
of the underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Massey, D., & Eggers, M. (1990). The ecology of inequality: Minorities and the
concentration of poverty 1970-1980. American Journal of Sociology, 95(5),
1153–1188.
Merino, M. E., Quilaqueo, D., &Saiz, J. L. (2008). Una tipología del discurso de
discriminación percibida en mapuches de Chile. Revista signos, 41(67), 279–
297. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-09342008000200011
Monkkonen, 2012

Mörner, M., & Gibson, C. (1962).Diego Muñoz Camargo and the segregation policy
of the Spanish Crown.Hispanic American Historical Review, 42(4), 558–568.
Neil Smith. (1996). The new urban frontier: Gentrification and the revanchist city.
New York, NY: Routledge.
Nun, J. (1988).Marginalidad y otrascuestiones.En M. Bassolls, R. Donoso, A.
Massollo, & A. Méndez (Eds.), Antología de Sociología Urbana (p. 366‐398).
México, DF: Unam.
Nieto, 2014

Oliver, M., & Shapiro, T. (1995).Black wealth, white wealth: A new perspective on
racial inequality. New York, NY: Routledge.
Olivero, 2004

Online Etymology Dictionary, (n.d.). “Segregate” (v.) [dictionary entry]. Retrieved

from http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=segregate on 3rd July 2017.
Palacios, N. (1904). Raza chilena. G. Schäfer.
París, 2003

Paschel, T. S. (2010). The Right to Difference: Explaining Colombia’s Shift from

Color Blindness to the Law of Black Communities. American Journal of
Sociology, 116(3), 729–69. https://doi.org/10.1086/655752

35
 Pierpaoli, P. (2008). Israel, Arab Population in. En S. Tucker (Ed.), The Encyclopedia
of the Arab-Israeli Conflict: A Political, Social and Military Story (pp. 503–
504). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
Pike, F. B. (1963). Aspects of Class Relations in Chile, 1850-1960. The Hispanic
American Historical Review, 43(1), 14–33. https://doi.org/10.2307/2510434
PNUD-Colombia. (s. f.). Los Afrocolombianos frente a los Objetivos de Desarrollo
del Milenio. Recuperado a partir de http://nacionesunidas.org.co/ferialibro/los-
afrocolombianos-frente-a-los-objetivos-de-desarrollo-del-milenio/
Portes, A., & Manning, R. (2008). The immigrant enclave: Theory and empirical
examples. En D. Grusky (Ed.), Social stratification: Class, race, and gender in
sociological perspective (pp. 646–657). Philadelphia, PA: Westview Press.
Prebisch, R. (1986). El desarrolloeconómico de la América Latina y algunos de sus
principalesproblemas.DesarrolloEconómico, 26(103), 479–502.
Quijano, A. (1968). Dependencia, cambio social y urbanización en Latinoamérica.
Revista Mexicana de Sociología, 30(3), 525–570. DOI
Quijano, A. (2000). Colonialidad del poder, eurocentrismo y América Latina.En E.
Lander (Ed.), La colonialidaddelsaber: eurocentrismo y ciencias sociales.
Perspectivas Latinoamericanas (pp. 201–246). Buenos Aires, Argentina:
CLACSO, ConsejoLatinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales.
Rocco, P., Morales, C., Moraga, M., Miquel, J. F., Nervi, F., Llop, E.,
…Rothhammer, F. (2002). Composicióngenética de la poblaciónchilena:
Distribución de polimorfismos de DNA mitocondrialengruposoriginarios y en la
poblaciónmixta de Santiago. RevistaMédica de Chile, 130(2), 125–131.
Restrepo, E., & Martínez, A. A. R. (2004). Conflicto e invisibilidad. Editorial

Universidad del Cauca.

Restrepo & Martínez, 2004;

Richards, 2010;

Richards, 2014

Richards, 2016

Rodríguez-Garavito, Alfonso & Cavelier, 2008; Zapata-Cortés, 2010

Ruiz-Tagle, J. (2013a). A Theory of Socio‐spatial Integration: Problems, Policies and

Concepts from a US Perspective. International Journal of Urban and Regional
Research, 37(2), 388–408.
Ruiz-Tagle, J. (2013b).SegregaciónResidencial, Guetos y Políticas de Dispersión. En
E. López, C. Arriagada, P. Jirón, & H. Eliash (Eds.), Chile UrbanoHacia el
Siglo XXI: Investigaciones y Reflexiones de Política Urbana desde la
Universidad de Chile (pp. 130–135). Santiago, Chile: Editorial Universitaria. Commented [a1]: Revisr si esta correcto dejar el otro y no este
Russell, P. (2011). The History of Mexico: From Pre-Conquest to Present. London:
Routledge.
Sabatini, F. (2006).The Social Spatial Segregation in the Cities of Latin America.
Inter-American Development Bank, Sustainable Development Department,
Social Program Division.

36
 Sandercock, L. (2003). Cosmopolis II: Mongrel Cities of the 21st Century. New
York, NY: Bloomsbury Academic.
Sánchez-Guillermo, 2007

Santos, M. (1975).Space and Domination -- A Marxist Approach.International Social

Science Journal.
Sassen, S. (1991).The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
Segato, 2007;

Sennett, R. (1970). The Uses of Disorder: Personal Identity and City Life. New
Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Sennett, R. (1996). Flesh and stone: The body and the city in Western civilization.
New York, NY: WW Norton & Company.
Simms, E. Y. (s. f.2008). Miscegenation and Racism: Afro-Mexicans in Colonial
New Spain. Journal of Pan African Studies, 2(3), 228–254.
Singer, P. (1988). Urbanización, dependencia y marginalidadenAmérica Latina.En
M. Bassolls, R. Donoso, A. Massollo, & A. Méndez (Eds.), Antología de
Sociología Urbana (p. 399‐424). México, DF: Unam.
Skeat, W. (1993).The concise dictionary of English etymology. Chatham, UK:
Wordsworth Editions.
Slater, D. (1988). Haciaunaeconomíapolítica de la urbanizaciónen las
sociedadescapitalistasperiféricas.En M. Bassolls, R. Donoso, A. Massollo, & A.
Méndez (Eds.), Antología de Sociología Urbana (p. 425‐457). México, DF:
Unam.
Small, M. L. (2008).Four Reasons to Abandon the Idea of “The Ghetto”.City &
Community, 7(4), 389–398. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6040.2008.00271_8.x
Smith, C. (1996). Myths, Intellectuals, and Race/Class/Gender Distinctions in the
formation of Latin American Nations.Journal of Latin American Anthropology,
2(1), 148–169. DOI
Smith, J. (2010). Integration: Solving the wrong problem. En C. Hartman & G.
Squires (Eds.), The integration debate: Competing futures for American cities
(pp. 229–245). New York, NY: Routledge.
SoSorjrj, B., &Martuccelli, D. (2008a). El DesafíoLatinoamericano: Cohesión Social
y Democracia. SigloVeintiuno.
Solomianski, 2003

Stabb and Hill, 2006

Strang & Stefoni, 2016

Sorj, B., &Martuccelli, D. (2008b). El DesafíoLatinoamericano: Cohesión Social y

Democracia. SigloVeintiuno.
Subercaseaux, B. (2007). Raza y nación: el caso de Chile. A Contracorriente: Revista
de Historia Social yY Literatura eEn América Latina, 5(1), 29–63. DOI
Sue & Golash-Boza, 2013

Suttles, G. (1972). The social construction of communities. Chicago, IL: University

of Chicago Press.

37
 Telles, E. (1992). Residential Segregation by Skin Color in Brazil. American
Sociological Review, 57(2), 186–197.
Telles, E., &Paschel, T. (2014). Who Is Black, White, or Mixed Race? How Skin
Color, Status, and Nation Shape Racial Classification in Latin America.
American Journal of Sociology, 120(3), 864–907. DOI
Torres & Hidalgo, 2009

UrréaGiraldo, F., Flórez, C. E., Medina, C., UrréaGiraldo, F., Flórez, C. E., &
Medina, C. (2001).Understanding the cost of social exclusion due to race or
ethnic background in Latin America and caribbean countries. Cali: CIDSE,
Centro de Investigaciones y DocumentaciónSocioeconómica.
UrreaGiraldo, F., & QuintínQuílez, P. (2000).Segregacióon urbana y violencia en
Cali: trayectorias de vida de jóvenes negros del distrito de Aguablanca (p. 41).
Presentado en La societé prise enotage. Sratégies individuelleset collectives face
à la violence. Réflexionsautour du cascolombien, Marseille, Centre de la Vielle
Charité, Francia. Recuperado a partir de
http://biblioteca.clacso.edu.ar/Colombia/cidse-
univalle/20121113043808/segregacion.pdf
Van Dijk, T. A. (2009). Racism and Discourse in Latin America. Lugar: Rowman &
Littlefield.
Vásquez, 2002

Vilalta, 2008;

Villamizar, S. F. (2015). Desigualdades sociales, ¿inequidades espaciales? Análisis

de la segregaciónsociorracialen Bogotá (2005-2011).Revistacolombiana de
sociología, 38(2), 67–92. DOI
Villareal, 2010

Villareal, 2014

VillamizarSantamaría, S. F. (2015). Desigualdadessociales,

¿inequidadesespaciales?Análisis de la segregaciónsociorracialen Bogotá (2005-
2011).Revistacolombiana de sociología, 38(2), 67–92.
Vivas Pacheco, H. (2013). Persistence of the Residential Segregation and
Composition of the Human Capital for Neighborhoods in the City of Cali.
Ensayos sobre Política Económica, 31(SPE70), 121–155. DOI
Wacquant, L. (1997). Three pernicious premises in the study of the American ghetto.
International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 21(2), 341–353. DOI
Wacquant, L. (2008). Urban outcasts: A comparative sociology of advanced
marginality. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Wacquant, L. (2012). A Janus-Faced Institution of Ethnoracial Closure: A
Sociological Specification of the Ghetto. En R. Hutchison & B. Haynes (Eds.),
The Ghetto: Contemporary Global Issues and Controversies (pp. 1–32).
Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Wacquant, 2016

Wade, P. (2010). Race and ethnicity in Latin America (2nd ed.. .). New York: Pluto
Press.

38
Waldman, G. (2004). Chile: Indígenas y mestizosnegados. Política y Cultura, 21(1),
97–110. DOI
Wallerstein, I. (1991). The Ideological Tensions of Capitalism: Universalism versus
Racism and Sexism. En E. Balibar& I. Wallerstein (Eds.), Race, Nation, Class.
Ambiguous Identities. London, New York: Verso.
Webster, C., Glasze, G., & Frantz, K. (2002).The global spread of gated
communities. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 29(3), 315–
320. DOI
Williams, J. (2006). Cambiourbano y evolucióndiscursivaen el análisis de la ciudad
latinoamericana: De la dependencia a la globalización. Bogotá, Colombia:
Unibiblos.
Wilson, K., & Portes, A. (1980). Immigrant Enclaves: An Analysis of the Labor
Market Experiences of Cubans in Miami. American Journal of Sociology, 86(2),
295–319. DOI
Wilson, W. J. (1987). The truly disadvantaged: The inner city, the underclass, and
public policy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Wirth, L. (1927). The ghetto. American Journal of Sociology, 33(1), 57–71. DOI

39