測繪：城市如何按收入劃分

How Cities Are Divided By Income, Mapped

三種類型的可視化顯示了美國城市中嚴峻的經濟差異。

Three types of visualizations show the stark economic disparities in U.S. cities.

在費城的中心城市居住著最富有的居民 - 那些可以為那個適合步行，享受舒適的綠色社區付費的人。但就在河對岸，距離賓夕法尼亞大學鬱鬱蔥蔥的校園和德雷克塞爾大學的街區，城市的視覺景觀發生了變化：典當行，快餐店，木板店和破舊的房屋。西費城只有少數幾個地區變得更加繁榮（更白）。其餘的繼續遭受集中的貧困和衰退的困擾。

In Philly』s Center City live its richest residents—those who can pay the premium for that walkable, amenity-rich, green neighborhood. But just across the river, blocks away from the lush, expanding campuses of the University of Pennsylvania and Drexel University, the visual landscape of the city changes: Pawn shops, fast food eateries, boarded-up store fronts, and dilapidated houses. Only a few areas in West Philadelphia have become more prosperous (and whiter). The rest continue to sufferconcentrated poverty and decline.

這不僅僅是費城的特例。為了顯現美國城市經濟不平等的景觀，在映射學有專長ESRI已經創建了一個迷人的故事地圖多層。它呈現了美國明顯的收入差距 - 並且在其存在的少數地方，收入多樣性。

This is not just a Philadelphia story. To visualize the landscape of economic inequality in U.S. cities,the mapping whizzes atESRIhave created a captivating story map with multiple layers. It presents America』s stark incomedisparities—and in the few places where it exists, income diversity.

讓我們進一步放大費城，了解ESRI的三個指標。第一種類型的地圖將人口普查區劃分為四種不同顏色的類別，這些類別基於「主導」或最多家庭類型的收入等級。

Let』s zoom in further on Philadelphia to understand ESRI』s three metrics. The first type of map divides census tracts into four differently colored categories based on the income brackets of the 「predominant」—or most most numerous—household type.

橙色圓點簇顯示最常見的家庭類型低於25,000美元的區域; 粉紅色的那些顯示25,000美元到50,000美元範圍內的家庭是最大的群體; 紫色：介於$ 50,000和$ 100,000之間; 藍色的家庭可以賺到超過10萬美元的富裕家庭。注意：點越大，它標記的道就越多; 而且越亮，「主導」收入群體的集中度就越高。

在費城，您可以看到中心城區的藍點特別明亮。

The clusters of orange dots show the tracts where the most common household type makes below $25,000; the pink ones show where households in the $25,000 to $50,000 range comprise the largest group; the purple: between $50,000 and $100,000; and the blue ones are where rich households that earn over $100,000 live. Note: The larger the dot, the more populous the tract it is marking; and the brighter it is, the higher the concentration of the 「predominant」 income group.

In Philly, you can see that blue spots burn bright in the Center City area, in particular.

第二項指標讓我們了解收入範圍較低和較高端的群體比例與全國平均水平的比較情況。因此，下圖中的橙色集群顯示了低於25,000美元的家庭比例高於全國22.3％的份額。藍色的那些顯示每年超過10萬美元的家庭比例高於24.6％的總體份額。點數越亮，人口普查區的份額與國家之間的差距就越大。換句話說，這張地圖顯示了貧困或財富的極端情況。下圖所示，西部和北部的費城有很多紅色的聚合：

The second measure gives a sense of how the share of groups at the lower and higher end of the income spectrum compare with the national average. So, the orange clusters on the map below show the tracts where theshare of households making below $25,000 is higher than the national share of 22.3 percent. The blue ones show where the share of households making over $100,000 a year is higher than the overall share of 24.6 percent. The brighter the dots, the higher the gap between the Census tract』s share and the nation』s. Put another way, this map shows the extremes of poverty or wealth. West and North Philadelphia, the map below shows, have deep pockets of red:

第三種類型的地圖受到今日美國多樣性指數的啟發，研究了在特定人口普查區內家庭屬於不同收入階層的可能性。綠色的更多樣化;在這裡，你更有可能遇到來自不同經濟背景的人。粉紅色的那些不那麼;這些地區的大多數家庭都屬於單一的收入階層，無論是高收入，低收入還是中等收入。雖然中心城和西費城的一些地區可能分別擁有高濃度的富人和窮人，但他們的收入多樣性往往比北部的地區多一些。

The third type of map, inspired by aUSA Today diversity index, examines the likelihood that households belong to different income brackets in a given census tract. The green ones are more diverse; here, you』re more likely to run into people from different economic backgrounds. The pink ones are less so; most households in these tracts fall into a single income bracket, whether it be high, low, or moderate. While Center City and some areas in West Philly may have high concentrations of rich and poor folks, respectively, they also tend to have a little bit more income diversity than areas in the North.

ESRI在選項卡上有一些其他城市，都有自己獨特的模式。下面是第一種顯示洛杉磯地圖的地圖，洛杉磯是大多數有色人種，但仍然明顯受到收入的影響。低於25,000美元（橙色）的低收入家庭聚集在市中心，聖費爾南多和聖貝納迪諾山谷等地區。

ESRI has a handful of other cities on the tab that all have their own distinct patterns. Below is the first type of mapshowing Los Angeles, which is majority residents of color, but still starkly divided by income. Lower-income households that make below $25,000 (in orange) are clumped together in areas including downtown and the San Fernando and San Bernardino Valleys.

在芝加哥，西部和南部的家庭擁有較高的貧困家庭（橙色），與全國平均水平相比。

In Chicago, the West and South sides contain households that have higher concentrations of poor households (in orange) compared to the national average.

然後是底特律，根據收入集中的濃度在下面繪製。儘管它已經從經濟困境中恢復過來，並且有望成為一個重要的區域性參與者，但該市尚未將其收益分配給最脆弱的居民。該市四分之一的居民仍然生活在貧困中- 通常位於市中心區域，這些地區基本上只有很少的其他經濟家庭。

And then there』s Detroit, mapped below based on the concentration of income brackets. Even though it has been recovering from its economic woes, and is poised to becomea crucial regional player,the city has yet to distribute its gains to the most vulnerable residents. A quarter of the city』s residentsstill live in poverty—usually in the inner city area which, by and large, has very few households of other economic profiles.

在一天結束時，地理上表現出的經濟不平等的方式可以通過多種方式來衡量- 所有這些方式都有其優缺點。但是，確定富人和窮人的集中度是一項至關重要的社會學活動。紐約時報的政治經濟學家羅伯特·賴克（Robert Reich）寫道，富裕的飛地傾向於「為自己的利益集中資源」。

At the end of the day, the way economic inequality manifests geographically can be measured in anumber ofways—all of which have their pluses and minuses. But pinpointing concentrations of rich and the poor is a crucially important sociological exercise. Rich enclaves tend to 「pool their resources for the exclusive benefit of themselves,」writespolitical economist Robert Reich in theNew York Times:

對美國生活中「社區」的重新強調使這些經濟飛地合理化併合法化。如果慷慨和團結在類似的有價值的財產的邊界結束，那麼最幸運的可以是很有成本的公民。由於一個社區或城鎮的大多數人同樣富裕，所以沒有理由感到內疚。如果另一個地區的居民更窮，那就讓他們互相看看。我們為什麼要為他們的學校買單？

The renewed emphasis on "community" in American life has justified and legitimized these economic enclaves. If generosity and solidarity end at the border of similarly valued properties, then the most fortunate can be virtuous citizens at little cost. Since most people in one neighborhood or town are equally well off, there is no cause for a guilty conscience. If inhabitants of another area are poorer, let them look to one another. Why should we pay for their schools?

簡單地說：隨著富人群聚集在一起，窮人變得更窮，因為生活在貧困社區的影響從一代傳到下一代。這就是為什麼拆除城市內的經濟孤島可以提高其總體福祉和經濟健康。

Put simply: As the rich cluster together, the poor get poorer, because the effects of living in poor neighborhoods are passed down fromone generation to the next. That』s whydismantling economic siloswithin a city can boost its total well-being and economic health.