All scholars in the field of urban studies will agree on the fact that neighborhoods differ in their physical representation, their amenities, service-level and population composition. Most will also consent to the fact that neighborhoods manifest individual differences in economic, cultural and social capital and in their intertwinement with structural forces such as the housing market and related institutional practices.

There is less agreement, however, on the extent to which and in which ways the neighborhood context directly influences people’s lives. Moreover, the idea that our residential location structures our opportunities, preferences and attitudes, as well as the choices we make in life, is forcefully debated. In this debate, much attention is paid to the consequences of spatial segregation – the relative concentration or uneven spread of residents with different socioeconomic and/or ethnic or immigrant backgrounds across residential locations – for the life chances of the residents concerned. Researchers studying ‘neighborhood effects’ aim to assess to what extent – if at all – the spatial segregation or concentration of advantaged or disadvantaged groups is of significance with respect to the (re)production of social inequality. This dissertation relates to the well-established field of research into neighborhood effects by examining the effects of ethnic concentration1 on migrants’ outcomes, but also includes an analysis of how people choose their neighborhoods (neighborhood sorting). The central aim of this study is to present a more holistic view of how ethnic residential segregation occurs and its potential importance for individual life chances.

In northwestern European cities and on a smaller scale in US cities it has already become established policy practice to intervene in relation to urban residential segregation. The general aim is to generate, on a neighborhood level, a ‘better’ mix of residents in terms of income, ethnicity and immigrant status. The reasons for social mixing vary in terms of the time frame envisioned and include the aims of increasing social cohesion, strengthening a neighborhood’s economic base and reputation, improving residents’ social mobility and ‘integrating’ immigrants. Although integration as such is usually not mentioned in policy aims, the Dutch Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment did make the following statement: “Integration begins close to home, in your own neighborhood.