This paper finds convincing evidence of upward progress out of poor Swedish neighbourhoods for individuals with a Swedish background, individuals with a European background, and those with a non‐European background. We use the 1986 cohort of the Swedish population and follow them from age 15 when they are living at home to age 30. We find that by age 30, they live in a neighbourhood that in terms of the poverty level is relatively distant from the initial neighbourhood where they grew up. Mobility into less poor neighbourhoods is clearly linked to higher income, but interestingly, initial context is even more important. Mobility to less poor neighbourhoods is found for those starting in high‐poverty neighbourhoods and vice versa for those starting in low‐poverty neighbourhoods. Moreover, large‐scale context and regional context strongly influence neighbourhood mobility along the poverty gradient. The analysis shows that a large proportion of individuals with a non‐European background improve their neighbourhood status from where they were living as teenagers, to where they live after leaving home. Individuals who stay in the poorest neighbourhoods come from less favourable backgrounds, from large‐scale poverty contexts, have low school grades, tend to have children early, and have low incomes and lower educational attainment. Individuals with a non‐European background are overrepresented in this group. Thus, despite the overall gains in neighbourhood quality, the process of spatial sorting still contributes to an increased spatial concentration of vulnerable populations.

中文翻译：

---

邻里环境和年轻人流动：一种人生历程方法

本文为具有瑞典背景的个人，具有欧洲背景的个人和具有非欧洲背景的个人发现了令人信服的证据，表明他们在瑞典贫困社区之外的地区取得了进步。我们使用1986年的瑞典人口队列，从15岁开始跟随他们，那时他们居住在家里，直到30岁。我们发现，到30岁时，他们生活在一个贫困地区，该地区的贫困程度与最初的居住地相距较远。他们长大的社区。迁移到贫困程度较低的社区显然与较高的收入有关，但有趣的是，初始环境更为重要。那些从高贫困社区开始的贫困人口流动性降低，从低贫困社区开始的贫困人口流动性反之亦然。而且，大规模环境和区域环境在很大程度上影响着沿贫困线的邻里流动性。分析表明，非欧洲背景的人中有很大一部分人从少年时代到离开家后的居住环境都得到了改善。居住在最贫困社区的个人来自不利的背景，大规模的贫困环境，学历低下，倾向于早育，收入低，教育程度低。具有非欧洲背景的个人在该组中的代表人数过多。因此，尽管邻里质量总体上有所提高，但空间分类的过程仍然有助于增加弱势群体的空间集中度。分析表明，非欧洲背景的人中有很大一部分人从少年时代到离开家后的居住环境都得到了改善。居住在最贫困社区的个人来自不利的背景，大规模的贫困环境，学历低下，倾向于早育，收入低，教育程度低。具有非欧洲背景的个人在该组中的代表人数过多。因此，尽管邻里质量总体上有所提高，但空间分类的过程仍然有助于增加弱势群体的空间集中度。分析表明，非欧洲背景的人中有很大一部分人从少年时代到离开家后的居住环境都得到了改善。居住在最贫困社区的个人来自不利的背景，来自大规模的贫困环境，学历低下，倾向于早育孩子，收入低，教育程度低。具有非欧洲背景的个人在该组中的代表人数过多。因此，尽管邻里质量总体上有所提高，但空间分类的过程仍然有助于增加弱势群体的空间集中度。离开家后到他们住的地方。居住在最贫困社区的个人来自不利的背景，大规模的贫困环境，学历低下，倾向于早育，收入低，教育程度低。具有非欧洲背景的个人在该组中的代表人数过多。因此，尽管邻里质量总体上有所提高，但空间分类的过程仍然有助于增加弱势群体的空间集中度。离开家后到他们住的地方。居住在最贫困社区的个人来自不利的背景，来自大规模的贫困环境，学历低下，倾向于早育孩子，收入低，教育程度低。具有非欧洲背景的个人在该组中的代表人数过多。因此，尽管邻里质量总体上有所提高，但空间分类的过程仍然有助于增加弱势群体的空间集中度。