Urban Inequality: Theory, Evidence and Method in Johannesburg (Politics and Society in Urban Africa)

Proponents of the social polarization theory argue that the distributional structure of employment is becoming more polarized in terms of occupations and the earnings that they attract. Specifically, they argue that there has been more employment growth among highly skilled and highly paid occupations, on the one hand; and among low-skilled, low-paid occupations, on the other. Correspondingly, they argue that there has been slower growth of semi-skilled, middle-income jobs. The theory therefore claims that workers are becoming more concentrated at the extremes of the earnings distribution. In the urban studies literature, the theory of occupational 'professionalization' was advanced, at least partially, as a response to the social polarization theory (Esping-Anderson et al., 1993;Hamnett, 1994;Hamnett, 2020). These scholars argued that de-industrialization did not result in the occupational and income polarization among the employed workforce. Instead, they argued that deindustrialization led to increased employment in high-income managerial and professional occupations, with substantially less growth in all other occupations. These scholars also argue that professionalization of the occupational structure has been accompanied by high levels of unemployment among low-skilled workers. This theory therefore argues that employed workers are increasingly concentrated at the high-income end of the earnings distribution, while the growth of poverty is caused largely by unemployment rather than the growth of low-skilled jobs. In the United States of America, a separate debate on the fate of low-skilled workers living in the inner cities entailed a similar argument. Wilson (1996) and Kasarda (1989) both argued that chronic unemployment among low-skilled innercity workers was caused by de-industrialization. The decline of manufacturing employment and the growth of service sector jobs resulted in growing demand for highly educated workers and the decline in demand for poorly educated workers. This change in the demand for labour is therefore argued to be an important cause of unemployment among poorly educated workers. This theory is also known as the 'mismatch' theory because it identifies the skills disparity or 'mismatch' between the demand for highly skilled workers and the supply of lowskilled workers as the cause of rising levels of unemployment. So, in contrast to the social polarization argument, Wilson and Kasarda argued that the growth of service sector employment led to fewer low-skilled manual jobs and to the growth of highly skilled non-manual jobs. The 'professionalization' or 'mismatch' theory of urban inequality therefore argues that de-industrialization causes inequality through the growing number of low-skilled unemployed workers, on the one hand, and growing number of highly paid, highly skilled employed workers, on the other. Unlike the social polarization theory, the professionalization theory provides a coherent explanation for rising unemployment: It is theoretically consistent to argue that the decline in the demand for low-and middle-income jobs can lead to unemployment among less-educated workers. But it is not consistent to argue that unemployment among low-skilled workers is caused by, or is consistent with, social polarization. This is because social polarization entails an increase in the numbers of low-income service sector jobs. Since these are low-and semi-skilled jobs, their growth will result in the increased demand for poorly educated workers, which, Total 1, "Based on new evidence that challenges existing theories of urban inequality, Crankshaw argues that the changing pattern of earnings and occupational inequality in Johannesburg is better described by the professionalism of employment alongside high-levels of chronic unemployment. Central to this examination is that the social polarisation hypothesis, which is accepted by many, is simply wrong in the case of Johannesburg. Ultimately, Crankshaw posits that the post-Fordist, post-apartheid period is characterised by a completely new division of labour that has caused new forms of racial inequality. That racial inequality in the post-apartheid period is not the result of the persistence of apartheid-era causes, but is the result of new causes that have interacted with the historical effects of apartheid to produce new patterns of racial inequality."-- Provided by publisher Cover Contents List of Figures List of Tables Acknowledgements Chapter 1 Introduction: Theories of urban inequality Part I De-Industrialization and the Labour Market Chapter 2 The changing occupational structure: Social polarization or professionalization? Chapter 3 Professionalization, unemployment and racial inequality Part II From a Fordist to a Post-Fordist Spatial Order Chapter 4 Johannesburg’s Fordist spatial order Chapter 5 The edge city of Sandton Chapter 6 From racial ghetto to excluded ghetto: Soweto, Eldorado Park and Lenasia Chapter 7 Racial residential desegregation in whites-only neighbourhoods Chapter 8 Conclusion: Urban inequality References Index Introduction: Theories of Urban Inequality -- Part One: De-Industrialisation and the Labour Market -- The Changing Occupational Structure: Social Polarisation or Professionalisation? -- Professionalisation, Unemployment and Racial Inequality -- Part Two: From a Fordist to a Post-Fordist Spatial Order -- Johannesburg's Fordist Spatial Order -- The Edge City of Sandton -- From Racial Ghetto to Excluded Ghetto: Soweto, Eldorado Park and Lenasia -- Racial Residential Desegregation in White Neighbourhoods -- Conclusion: Urban Inequality.