Mobile Menü

Navigation

Meta Navigation

service navigation

language selection

Global Navigation

Back to the original version in German.

Development of social status by neighbourhood

9.3.2017 - Andrea Büchi

A person's social status describes their social position in a society. The present analysis defines social status as a combination of education (highest level of education) and household income (gross, annual), whereby these two status variables are based on self-declaration of the respondents of the population survey of the city of Zurich. Gross household income was collected in seven specified income classes.

In the following, the development of the social status in the city as a whole is compared with that in individual districts or territorial units of the city at four measurement times. The population survey was conducted in odd-numbered years. In order to ensure a sufficient sample size, the data from two consecutive surveys were combined. Therefore, a double year is given as the measurement time (e.B. 2001/03). To anticipate it: Not in all districts was the development as linear as the overall urban changes suggested. Roughly five groups of quarters and the Werd/Langstrasse area with a special development can be distinguished.

 

1. Overall urban development

With a share of 49 percent, around half of the respondents in the city of Zurich had a high social status at the time of measurement in 2013/2015. 27 percent of respondents have a medium social status, 24 percent a low social status. This ratio has changed significantly since the first measurement date in 2001/2003: At that time, around one third of the respondents in the city of Zurich had a high, medium or low social status. The percentage of respondents with a high social status has thus increased by around half over a period of twelve years. At the same time, the proportion of respondents with a low social status has decreased. And the proportion of respondents with a medium social status has also decreased over the period under consideration. All three status developments were steady.

2. Developments by district

2.1 Districts with similar development to the city as a whole  
The development of the social status in the districts of Oerlikon and Altwiedikon is most similar to that of the city as a whole: Here, too, the proportions of respondents with a high, medium or low social status in 2001/03 accounted for around one third each. The proportion of people with a high social status has steadily increased since then, while the proportion of respondents with a medium or low social status has decreased.

A similar overall development as in the city as a whole can also be seen in the districts of Kreis 1/Enge, Unterstrass, Höngg and Wipkingen (for information on the summary of quarters, see text box at the end). However, the starting position differs in these districts: as early as 2001/03, the proportions of respondents with a low, medium or high social status were less balanced, while the proportion of respondents with a high social status was the highest everywhere. Over time, the proportion of respondents with a high social status continued to increase. Especially in Kreis1/Enge, Höngg and Wipkingen it has grown significantly since 2009/11 (in Kreis 1/Enge a strong increase was already recorded between 2001/03 and 2005/07). The most massive increase in status is in District 1/Enge: At the time of measurement 2013/15, the proportion of respondents with a high social status there is one of the highest (next to Oberstrass and Fluntern), and the proportion of respondents with a low social status is one of the lowest in the district comparison (together with Oberstrass and Fluntern).

2.2 Neighbourhoods with a stagnating share of high social status
In Wollishofen/Leimbach, District 8, District 5 and Witikon, the proportion of people with a high social status also increased until 2009/11, but remained constant afterwards or even decreased in Witikon. On the other hand, from 2009/11 onwards, the proportion of people with a medium social status tended to grow. In 2013/15, Wollishofen/Leimbach is one of the districts with the highest proportion of people with a medium social status (next to the Saatlen/Schwamendingen district).

2.3 High-status districts with further increase in status
In the districts of Oberstrass, Fluntern and Hottingen/Hirslanden, the proportion of respondents with a high social status was already high at the first measurement time in 2001/03. Over time, it rose even more. In Fluntern and Oberstrass, the proportions of people with a high social status are highest in 2013/15 compared to the districts (next to District 1/Enge). The proportion of respondents with a low social status tended to decline in Oberstrass and remained constant in Fluntern and Hottingen/Hirslanden. The proportion of people with a medium social status also decreased over time (Oberstrass, Fluntern) or remained constant in recent years (Hottingen/Hirslanden). In Fluntern, the proportion of people with a medium social status is the lowest in 2013/15 compared to all districts.

2.4 Status-depth districts with aligning shares
In Hard, Saatlen/Schwamendingen and Hirzenbach a different picture emerges compared to the city as a whole: The shares of the three social statuses were different in 2001/03 and converged over time. Here, too, the proportion of respondents with a high social status increased over time and the proportions of respondents with a low social status decreased. The difference can be seen in the initial situation: At the time of measurement 2001/03, there were conspicuously high proportions of respondents with a low social status (highest in Hard) and at the same time conspicuously low proportions of respondents with a high social status (lowest in Saatlen/Schwamendingen). Although the proportion of people with a low social status has fallen over time, in 2013/15 they are still the highest in a neighbourhood comparison. The proportion of people with a high social status increased over time, but they only came close to the same level as the lower statuses in Hard. Saatlen/Schwamendingen and Hirzenbach therefore have the lowest proportions of people with a high social status in 2013/15. In addition, Saatlen/Schwamendingen 2013/15 has the highest proportion of people with a medium social status.

2.5 Werd/Langstrasse area: Status depth starting position and massive status increase
In Werd/Langstrasse, too, the proportion of respondents with a low social status was remarkably high in 2001/03. At the same time, however, the proportion of respondents with a high social status was significantly higher than in Hard Saatlen/Schwamendingen or Hirzenbach, and it grew so strongly over time (especially since 2009/11) that at the time of measurement 2013/15 it is as high as in Altwiedikon, Wipkingen, Witikon or Unterstrass. Between the measurement dates 2001/03 and 2005/07, the proportion of people with a medium social status increased sharply, the proportion of respondents with a low social status decreased markedly.

2.6 Neighbourhoods with less significant changes
Finally, there are a number of neighbourhoods in which the proportion of respondents with a high social status was the smallest at the time of measurement in 2001/03 and developed into the largest by 2013/15. Especially in Friesenberg, Albisrieden and Sihlfeld, the proportion of people with a high social status rose sharply, so that in 2013/15 it was significantly higher than the proportion of people with a medium or low social status. Especially in Affoltern and Seebach, the changes over time are comparatively small.   

3. Conclusion

In general, it can be stated that all city districts recorded an increase in status between 2001/03 and 2013/15. The proportion of respondents with a high social status has increased continuously throughout the city. Although the shares of the three status groups in most districts moved in the same direction, the developments in the districts – sometimes due to different initial situations – proceeded to different degrees and / or time.

More information

more information