ABSTRACT
Abstract This article aims to analyze residential segregation by race (racial segregation) and income (economic segregation) in Brazil and explore its relationship with socioeconomic and socio-spatial factors. Residential segregation was assessed using the dissimilarity index based on the 2010 demographic census and considering urban census tracts since segregation is sociologically considered an urban problem. The results for racial segregation showed that it is more evident in cities in the South and Southeast of Brazil and mainly affects the self-declared black population. The approach used to calculate economic segregation involved examining the income level of different low-income groups. Therefore, we consider families that earned between 0 and 1 minimum wage as the group with the greatest social vulnerability. We did not find significant correlations between racial and income segregation indices with aspects such as urbanization (urban population size). Finally, we present the racial segregation indices stratifying families by income thresholds for the 27 Brazilian capitals and conclude that per capita household income is a preponderant factor for the segregation of the poorest, especially in families whose residents self-identify as black.
Resumo Este artigo tem como objetivo analisar a segregação residencial por raça (segregação racial) e renda (segregação econômica) no Brasil e explorar sua relação com fatores socioeconômicos e socioespaciais. A segregação residencial foi avaliada pelo índice de dissimilaridade baseado no Censo Demográfico de 2010 e considerando setores censitários urbanos, uma vez que a segregação é entendida sociologicamente como um problema urbano. Os resultados mostram que a segregação racial é mais evidente nas cidades do Sul e Sudeste do Brasil, atingindo principalmente a população autodeclarada preta. A abordagem utilizada para calcular a segregação econômica envolveu examinar o nível de renda de diferentes grupos de baixa renda. Portanto, consideramos as famílias que ganham entre 0 e 1 salário mínimo - o grupo de maior vulnerabilidade social. Não encontramos correlações significativas entre os índices de segregação racial e de renda com fatores como a urbanização (tamanho da população urbana). Por fim, apresentamos os índices de segregação racial estratificando as famílias por faixas de renda para as 27 capitais brasileiras e concluímos que a renda domiciliar per capita é fator preponderante para a segregação dos mais pobres, principalmente nas famílias cujos moradores se autodeclaram pretos.
Resumen Este artículo tiene como objetivo analizar la segregación residencial por raza (segregación racial) y renta (segregación económica) en Brasil y explorar su relación con factores socioeconómicos y socioespaciales. La segregación residencial se evaluó utilizando el índice de disimilitud con base en el censo demográfico de 2010 y considerando las secciones censales urbanas ya que la segregación es considerada sociológicamente como un problema urbano. Los resultados para la segregación racial mostraron que esta es más evidente en ciudades del sur y del sudeste de Brasil y que afecta principalmente a la población autodeclarada negra. El enfoque usado para calcular la segregación económica implicó examinar el nivel de ingresos de diferentes grupos de bajos ingresos. Por lo tanto, consideramos que las familias que ganaban entre cero y un salario mínimo son el grupo con mayor vulnerabilidad social. No encontramos correlaciones significativas entre los índices de segregación racial y los de ingresos con factores como la urbanización (tamaño de la población urbana). Finalmente, presentamos los índices de segregación racial estratificando a las familias por umbrales de renta para las 27 capitales brasileñas y concluimos que la renta per cápita de los hogares es un factor preponderante para la segregación de los más pobres, en especial en las familias cuyos habitantes se autodeclaran negros.
Subject(s)
Humans , Socioeconomic Factors , Black People , Social Segregation , Housing Instability , Residential Segregation , Censuses , Social Vulnerability Index , Social VulnerabilityABSTRACT
ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To compare the death counts from three sources of information on mortality available in Brazil in 2010, the Mortality Information System (SIM - Sistema de Informações sobre Mortalidade ), Civil Registration Statistic System (RC - Sistema de Estatísticas de Resgistro Civil ), and the 2010 Demographic Census at various geographical levels, and to confirm the association between municipal socioeconomic characteristics and the source which showed the highest death count. METHODS This is a descriptive and comparative study of raw data on deaths in the SIM, RC and 2010 Census databases, the latter held in Brazilian states and municipalities between August 2009 and July 2010. The percentage of municipalities was confirmed by the database showing the highest death count. The association between the source of the highest death count and socioeconomic indicators - the Índice de Privação Brasileiro (IBP - Brazilian Deprivation Index) and Índice de Desenvolvimento Humano Municipal (IHDM - Municipal Human Development Index) - was performed by bivariate choropleth and Moran Local Index of Spatial Association (LISA) cluster maps. RESULTS Confirmed that the SIM is the database with the highest number of deaths counted for all Brazilian macroregions, except the North, in which the highest coverage was from the 2010 Census. Based on the indicators proposed, in general, the Census showed a higher coverage of deaths than the SIM and the RC in the most deprived (highest IBP values) and less developed municipalities (lowest IDHM values) in the country. CONCLUSION The results highlight regional inequalities in how the databases chosen for this study cover death records, and the importance of maintaining the issue of mortality on the basic census questionnaire.
Subject(s)
Humans , Socioeconomic Factors , Mortality Registries , Information Storage and Retrieval , Censuses , Death , Health Information SystemsABSTRACT
ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE Summarize the literature on the relationship between composite socioeconomic indicators and mortality in different geographical areas of Brazil. METHODS This scoping review included articles published between January 1, 2000, and August 31, 2020, retrieved by means of a bibliographic search carried out in the Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and Lilacs databases. Studies reporting on the association between composite socioeconomic indicators and all-cause, or specific cause of death in any age group in different geographical areas were selected. The review summarized the measures constructed, their associations with the outcomes, and potential study limitations. RESULTS Of the 77 full texts that met the inclusion criteria, the study reviewed 24. The area level of composite socioeconomic indicators analyzed comprised municipalities (n = 6), districts (n = 5), census tracts (n = 4), state (n = 2), country (n = 2), and other areas (n = 5). Six studies used composite socioeconomic indicators such as the Human Development Index, Gross Domestic Product, and the Gini Index; the remaining 18 papers created their own socioeconomic measures based on sociodemographic and health indicators. Socioeconomic status was inversely associated with higher rates of all-cause mortality, external cause mortality, suicide, homicide, fetal and infant mortality, respiratory and circulatory diseases, stroke, infectious and parasitic diseases, malnutrition, gastroenteritis, and oropharyngeal cancer. Higher mortality rates due to colorectal cancer, leukemia, a general group of neoplasms, traffic accident, and suicide, in turn, were observed in less deprived areas and/or those with more significant socioeconomic development. Underreporting of death and differences in mortality coverage in Brazilian areas were cited as the main limitation. CONCLUSIONS Studies analyzed mortality inequalities in different geographical areas by means of composite socioeconomic indicators, showing that the association directions vary according to the mortality outcome. But studies on all-cause mortality and at the census tract level remain scarce. The results may guide the development of new composite socioeconomic indicators for use in mortality inequality analysis.