Segregation and Sentiment: Estimating Refugee Segregation and Its Effects Using Digital Trace Data

  • Neal MarquezEmail author
  • Kiran Garimella
  • Ott Toomet
  • Ingmar G. Weber
  • Emilio Zagheni


In light of the ongoing events of the Syrian Civil War, many governments have shifted the focus of their hospitality efforts from providing temporary shelter to sustaining this new long-term population. In Turkey, a heightened focus has been placed on the encouragement of integration of Syrian refugees into Turkish culture, through the dismantling of Syrian refugee-only schools in Turkey and attempts to grant refugees permanent citizenship, among other strategies. Most of the existing literature on the integration and assimilation of Syrian refugees in Turkey has taken the form of surveys assessing the degree to which Syrian refugees feel they are part of Turkish culture and the way Turkish natives view the refugee population. Our analysis leverages call detail record data, made available by the Data for Refugees (D4R) Challenge, to assess how communication and segregation vary between Turkish natives and Syrian refugees over time and space. In addition, we test how communication and segregation vary with measures of hostility from Turkish natives using data from the social media platform Twitter. We find that measures of segregation vary significantly over time and space. We also find that measures of intergroup communication positively correlate with measures of public sentiment toward refugees. Attempts to address the concerns of Turkish natives in order to minimize the traction of online hate movements may help to improve the integration process.


  1. 1.
    Carpenter TG (2013) Tangled web: the syrian civil war and its implications. Mediterranean Q 24(1):1–11., Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dinçer OB, Federici V, Ferris E, Karaca S, KiriŞci K, ÇarmIKlIEÖ, (2013) Turkey and Syrian refugees: the limits of hospitality. Tech. rep. Brookings InstituteGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    İçduygu A (2015) Syrian refugees in Turkey: the long road ahead— Tech. rep. Migration Policy Institute, Washington.
  4. 4.
    International Crisis Group (2016) Turkey’s refugee crisis: the politics of permanence.
  5. 5.
    Pacione M (1999) Applied geography: principles and practice: an introduction to useful research in physical, environmental and human geography. Routledge, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Legge JS (2003) Jews, Turks, and other strangers: the roots of prejudice in modern Germany. The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison.
  7. 7.
    Crush J, Ramachandran S (2009) Xenophobia, international migration and human development. Human development reports. Tech. rep. United Nations Development Programme, New York.
  8. 8.
    Balkan B, Tok EO, Torun H, Tumen S (2018) Immigration, housing rents, and residential segregation: evidence from Syrian refugees in Turkey. Tech. rep. IZA Institute of labor Economics, BonnGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    İçduygu A, Diker E (2017) Labor market integration of Syrian refugees in Turkey: from refugees to settlers. Göç Arasturmalari Dergisi 3(1)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Erdoğan MM (2018) Syrians barometer 2017. Tech. rep. İstanbul Bilgi University, IstanbulGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Alhayek K (2014) Double marginalization: the invisibility of Syrian refugee women’s perspectives in mainstream online activism and global media. Fem Media Stud 14(4):696–700., Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rettberg JW, Gajjala R (2016) Terrorists or cowards: negative portrayals of male Syrian refugees in social media. Fem Media Stud 16(1):178–181., Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bollen J, Mao H, Zeng X (2011) Twitter mood predicts the stock market. J Comput Sci 2(1):1–8., Scholar
  14. 14.
    Flores RD (2017) Do anti-immigrant laws shape public sentiment? a study of Arizona’s SB 1070 using twitter data. Am J Sociol 123(2):333–384., Scholar
  15. 15.
  16. 16.
    We Are Social (2018) Digital Report 2018.
  17. 17.
    Salah A, Pentland A, Lepri B, Letouzé E, Vinck P, de Montjoye Y, Dong X, Dağdelen Ö (2018) Data for refugees: the D4R challenge on mobility of Syrian refugees in Turkey. arXiv preprint arXiv:180700523
  18. 18.
    Erdoğan MM, Şener B, Sipahioğlu E, Kavukçuer Y, Basçeri EY (2017) Urban refugees from detachment to harmonization. Tech. rep. Marmara Municipalities Union’s Center for Urban Policies.
  19. 19.
    Land Cover Change (LCC) 2006–2012, Version 18.5 (2016)
  20. 20.
    Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN)—Columbia University (2016) Gridded population of the world, version 4 (GPWv4): population density. Tech. rep. Palisades, NY: NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC).
  21. 21.
    Lee DT, Schachter BJ (1980) Two algorithms for constructing a Delaunay triangulation. Int J Comput Inf Sci 9(3):219–242., Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wong DW, Shaw SL (2011) Measuring segregation: an activity space approach. J Geogr Syst 13(2):127–145., Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nielsen FÅ (2011) AFINN. Informatics and mathematical modelling. Tech. rep. Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby.
  24. 24.
    Toomet O, Silm S, Saluveer E, Ahas R, Tammaru T (2015) Where do ethno-linguistic groups meet? How copresence during free-time is related to copresence at home and at work. PLOS ONE 10(5):e0126093. Scholar
  25. 25.
    Narli N (2018) Life, connectivity and integration of Syrian refugees in Turkey: surviving through a smart phone. Quest de Commun 33(1):269–286.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Neal Marquez
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Kiran Garimella
    • 3
  • Ott Toomet
    • 4
  • Ingmar G. Weber
    • 5
  • Emilio Zagheni
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.University of WashingtonWashington, DCUSA
  2. 2.Max Planck Institute for Demographic ResearchRostockGermany
  3. 3.Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de LausanneLausanneSwitzerland
  4. 4.University of WashingtonWashington, DCUSA
  5. 5.Qatar Computing Research InstituteDohaQatar

Personalised recommendations