Discredited Neightborhoods

In this essay I'm going to critically analyze Warr's argument on "Discredited Neighborhoods" and then use her findings, to find similarities and differences to discredited neighborhoods in Jakarta, Indonesia. Using my own first hand point of view, and several sociological journals that focus on poverty and social capital in Indonesia and Australia, I'm going to compare the social economic differences between the two suburbs in Geelong, and a Kampung in South Jakarta.

In the article "Social Networks in a Discredited Neighborhood" Deborah J. Warr. Warr discusses the social difficulties, and behavior of people living in discredited neighborhoods in a town off Melbourne called Geelong. Warr compares two different neighborhoods, Corio, and Norlane, both known to have high unemployment ratings as well as a large amount of government housing. Warr, puts across a strong argument by the method she uses. By picking the two different suburbs she can get more of a diversity which further strengthens her argument. She further uses testimonials of people living in the neighborhoods to further strengthen her study by getting first hand information. Another way Warr is able to strengthen her argument is the use of referencing to many other studies of this subject, in doing that she gets more then one educated opinion rather then just hers. I believe one area that can still be improved on is the diversity of the study. It would have been a much stronger argument if the study was done across several different towns/cities. By doing that her argument would be a lot stronger because of the diversity of people that would have participated in the study.

A main point put across by Warr is that individuals and or families that live in discredited neighborhoods tend to try and limit social activities and interactions with people outside of there community. She explains they don't do this out of ignorance, rather to stay away from the stereotype that comes with living in poverish neighborhood. Individuals even go to the extent of hiding there place of residence explains Warr. Within the article an example is giving where a woman with two children has just moved into the neighborhood and explains:

"...before moving out here, I didn't have half as much trouble as I'm having now, like just the way I perceive my self, how I am more aware of how, ahm, the wider community is perceiving me..."

Because of the stereotype that the neighborhood has, it makes the individual living in the community reluctant to search out for social interactions purely out of embarrassment. Because of the isolation they put them selves in a box, and then in turn limits there social networks. It's said in the article that social networks should not be limited by transactions over the counter, as in talking to a doctor when ill, or withdrawing money from a bank and talking to the teller. The article also explains that for a community to thrive there needs to be a strong social connection within the community itself as well as outside. According to Warr, people that live in these neighborhoods usually have strong connections with there neighbors, given that, through testimonials from people living in the area one of the strongest points of the neighborhood is that they have family near by. In doing so, having family members around is a good support system in times of need. Through the article it is seen that people living in these neighborhoods even limit there social interactions with people living around them. Warr, explains that even though most people have a strong connection within the community there are still people that get left behind. The term "No Hoper" is used by several different participants in the study. These are people that are loners, or have substance abuse problems or third generation unemployment within the family. People around them rather then wanting to help them, they just stay clear of them. According to Grootaert(1999) the reason for this is the stigma behind living in discredited neighborhood anyways. People living around "No Hopers" don't want to be officiated with them because they feel it will further lower them socially. Because of this, these "No Hopers" even have less of a chance of strengthening social networks and continuously get left behind. Warr, explains the key to strengthening a communities social capital is by making social networks and connections. She goes on and explains the only way this is possible is changing the stigma behind people living in these sorts of neighborhoods. This in turn will strengthen the possibilities for stronger social connections.

Discredited neighborhoods in Indonesia particularly in the capital city of Jakarta and small villages surrounding the city, have many similarities, but very particular social differences then the communities used in Warr's study. Through some research and my own first hand point of view from living in Jakarta I still found it difficult to compare the differences. One major difference is rate of poverty in the two countries. According to Suryahadi(2000) a researcher from the SMERU institute in Indonesia, 40-60% of all Indonesians live in poverty, while according to Smeeding(2000) in Australia the percentage is a much lower 5.5-10%. This obviously changes the social outlook of people living in these poverish communities in Indonesia. For one, the stigma behind living in discredited areas is not as strong as it would be if you lived in a bad