Abstract

"Neighborhood effects" research, which maintains that poverty concentration generates a variety of social problems, has been questioned for concealing the role of powerful institutions. As an alternative, we focus on external institutions' practices in marginal neighborhoods and their impact on the emergence of social problems. Through a qualitative case-study of three neighborhoods in Santiago, we observed institutional practices and identified three distinct mechanisms. Through disinvestments, these neighborhoods have been turned into "Red Zones," because of public, private, and civil institutions' refusal to establish themselves and to deliver their services there. Through inaction and inefficacy, public intervention has been deeply intermittent, negligent, and uncoordinated. Finally, through territorial stigmatization, these neighborhoods have almost become no-go areas. Several material and symbolic consequences have resulted from these practices, including direct and indirect connections with social problems. These have implications for the debate on "neighborhood effects" and for social mix policies.