The next stage in this research will be to map the specific patterns between immigrant households and tenure patterns, analyzing areas with many homeowners or renters, and the specific challenges these first generation Canadians face. This research however, can be unpacked in many different directions. Patterns of gentrification, decay, renewal, and expansion are illustrated through the various ten "cities." Take for example, the city termed "Go-Go Gentrification." This is a collection of neighbourhoods with high Gini coefficients (a measure of large income inequality), an outcome of wealthy homeowners moving into communities that previously were populated by lower income renters. These neighbourhoods, such as South Parkdale west of the business district, have become zones of contestation. The last parcels of affordable housing in the urban core are refurbished, sold to the highest bidder while the poor are forced out by higher rents and restrictive zoning ordinances (Slater, 2004). Other unique areas of the Toronto CMA also rise to the surface through this analysis. The "New Ethnoburbia" describes an area of rapid growth, housing many new Canadians on the rural-urban fringe of contemporary suburbia, while "Insecurity Deposit" captures the precarious housing status of many households, again many of whom are immigrants, living in high-rise, low-cost apartment complexes built as part of Toronto's suburbs constructed in the immediate decades following World War II.
Neighbourhood data has been collected through census tract - a boundary set out by Statistics Canada, measuring census data in groups of 4,000 people on average. In the data below, census tracts have been arranged into their respective "city," allowing for the examination of raw demographic data. With the results from both the factor analysis and cluster analysis, Toronto becomes represented as a fragmented landscape. Using the data compiled and additional secondary data from the Canadian Census, a number of research agendas are possible. Approaching Toronto through a view from above, these cities and the discussion attached to them are indicative of how the urban region of Toronto is being affected by a rising neoliberal policy agenda and uneven development caused by the invisible hand of capitalism (Harvey, 1978; Smith, 1986).
References
Harvey, D. (1978). "The Urban Process under Capitalism: A Framework for Analysis." International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 2(1-4): 101-131.
Hulchanski, D. (2010). The Three Cities Within Toronto: Income Polarization Among Toronto's Neighbourhoods, 1970-2005. Toronto: Cities Centre, University of Toronto.
Murdie, Robert. (2008). Diversity and Concentration in Canadian Immigration: Trends in Toronto, Montréal and Vancouver, 1971-2006. Toronto: Centre for Urban and Community Studies, University of Toronto.
Preston, V., Murdie, R., Wedlock, J., Agrawal, S., Anucha, U., D'Addario, S., Kwak, M.J., Logan.J., Murnaghan,A.M. (2009). "Immigrants and Homelessness - at Risk in Canada's Outer Suburbs." The Canadian Geographer, 53(3): 288-304.
Slater, T. (2004). "Municipally Managed Gentrification in South Parkdale, Toronto." The Canadian Geographer, 48(3): 303-325.
Smith, N. (1986). "Gentrification, the Frontier, and the Restructuring of Urban Space." In N. Smith and P. William (eds.) Gentrification of the City. Boston, MA: Allen and Unwin. Included in S. Fainstein and S. Campbell (eds.) Readings in Urban Theory. West Sussex, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
United Way of Toronto. (2011). Poverty by Postal Code 2: Vertical Poverty. Toronto: United Way.