The events in Ferguson, Missouri reveal the ‘resegregation’ of America’s once-aspirational inner suburbs, which – far from the social utopias they were meant to be – have become ethnic enclaves: white in one pocket, black in another

America’s “inner-ring” suburbs – the group of small, independent municipalities that surround the largest US cities – are undergoing a remarkable transformation. In the 25 years or so that followed the second world war, these neighbourhoods were the classic aspirational destination. People moved to the suburbs to purchase their slice of the good life – a spacious home, with a quiet yard, near a good school. The suburbs represented the American ideals of homeownership, education, low crime and complete autonomy. They represented, in other words, insulation from the perceived ills of urban living. Now it is that very insulation, which made them attractive in their early years, that may be sealing their doom.

The first inner-ring suburbs developed between about 1900 and 1930 – towns like Brookline and Somerville outside of Boston, and University City adjacent to St Louis. They were often called “streetcar suburbs”, after their principal mode of access to the downtown core. Their development stalled during the Great Depression and the war, but soon restarted: veterans received federally backed low-cost mortgages, and the interstate highway network opened acres of land to new housing.

There was another incentive for some of these new suburbanites: a desire to escape the complex social tensions at work in large cities in the postwar era. When faced with growing minority populations, particularly of African-Americans, white city dwellers often chose to pull up stakes. It wasn’t always the primary reason for moving, but it was often a part of the migration equation.

This pattern of “white flight” to the suburbs was characteristic of American metro areas until the 1970s and 1980s, when newer suburbs – bigger, more spacious, more contemporary – began stealing residents away from the older inner-ring suburbs. And by the 1990s, more minorities were beginning to follow the same aspirational path as the former white city dwellers before them. Just as previous generations did, minorities sought larger homes, quieter environments and better schools. And white residents who craved insulation from the perils of urban living now saw it coming to their front lawns – again.

The recent events in Ferguson, Missouri have brought this tension into sharp focus. Ferguson, an inner-ring suburb about 10 miles northwest of St Louis, was a city in transition long before officer Darren Wilson shot the unarmed black teenager Michael Brown. In 1990, three-quarters of Ferguson’s 22,000 residents were white; just 20 years later, by 2010, nearly three-quarters of them were black. These two groups of Fergusonians share little in common. In 2012, the median age of white residents in Ferguson was nearly 49; for black residents, it was only 29. The median household income of whites was nearly $52,000; for blacks, less than $30,000. The story of Ferguson is truly a tale of two suburbs.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Resegregation ... a girl holds a rose as she marches in Ferguson, Missouri to protest the 9 August shooting of Michael Brown by police. Photograph: Jeff Roberson/AP

But Ferguson is hardly unique. It was simply the place where a flashpoint exposed the tragedy of American inner-ring suburbs, conspired against by large-scale migration and development trends. In recent years, young, college-educated adults have begun to move into cities in great numbers, attracted by jobs and urban amenities; meanwhile, the suburban sprawl machine that created the inner-ring suburbs in the first place continues to expand, making newer, more desirable places even further from downtown.

To understand the implications of white flight and “resegregation”, look no further than the north side of St Louis. It was the primary destination for early black migrants, but quickly became an impoverished, isolated enclave. In recent years St Louis has been successful in broadening its citywide appeal as an immigrant destination, but few of those immigrants are interested in moving to black-majority areas. In the words of black St Louis alderwoman Sharon Tyus: “No one wants to live next to black people.”

Studies document this sentiment. Indiana University doctoral student Samuel Kye examined census data from 1990-2010, and found that, as affluent minority populations in the suburbs grow, “white flight” continues. White residents in these transitioning suburbs are “especially sensitive” to racial and ethnic change, he argues: “Ethnoburbs [Kye’s term for suburbs with large numbers of racial or ethnic minorities] have lost a steady flow of white residents over the past 20 years.” The end result? African-American suburban migration has only led to greater segregation, creating ethnic pockets: whites in one, blacks in the other.

This has been an active decision. As black people move into their suburban idylls, longtime white residents flee to other suburbs, or retreat to the highest value enclaves in town. They take other measures, too.

They limit the expansion of rental housing to restrict affordable housing options. They develop a strong law and order environment. And they do their best to insulate themselves, physically and socially, from minority transition. It works, after a fashion – until something like Ferguson shows the cracks.

It wasn’t always this way. In the 1960s, two suburbs took a decidedly different approach to racial transition: Oak Park, Illinois and Shaker Heights, Ohio (inner-ring suburbs of Chicago and Cleveland). When faced with the possibility of a destabilising resegregation in the 60s, both communities elected to take a proactive, race-conscious tack. They established community relations commissions, to develop and foster ongoing conversations around race. They worked hard to dispel rumours related to racial transition. They actively sought out white residents who would welcome black neighbours. They encouraged the dispersion of black residents to prevent clustering. They passed local open-housing ordinances. They even established equity assurance programmes to ensure residents against declining property values. Both communities weathered the racial transition of the 60s and 70s well. They’re proud of their accomplishments. They should be.

One place where it worked ... Chicago race map showing integration in the small suburb of Oak Park (top left, unmarked, just southeast of River Forest). Photograph: Dustin A Cable/Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service, University of Virginia

Because today, there are no inner-ring suburbs who follow a similar path. A number of metro areas have undergone significant black suburbanisation over the last two decades, but with very little of the same sensitivity. Why are there no more Oak Parks or Shaker Heights? Perhaps leaders believe that the “problem” of resegregation was “solved” during the civil rights era, and addressing it now is moot. Yet the spread of suburban enclaves has mirrored the patterns of segregation you can see in the large cities – south Cook County outside of Chicago; Prince George’s County near Washington, DC; parts of Delaware County adjacent to Philadelphia; eastern Cuyahoga County near Cleveland; parts of DeKalb County outside of Atlanta; and parts of North St Louis County, outside of St Louis – including good old Ferguson.

Meanwhile, everyone’s talking about downtown cores: a back-to-the-city movement led by well-educated young adults seeking the vigour and dynamism of urban living. Rapid gentrification – a predominantly white phenomenon – is associated with bold new ideas about city life. “Big data” can create a technology revolution, it is argued. Apps can make cities run with greater efficiency. A more pedestrian-oriented environment is the way to make your neighbourhood attractive. Many of the best of these ideas have been filtering through to the newest suburbs, too.

In the middle sit America’s inner-ring suburbs. They don’t enjoy the same attention. They are rapidly growing more diverse yet more impoverished – and are poorly equipped to handle transition, because adaptation simply wasn’t included in their development fabric. Will the time ever come to address their ills? The home of the American dream is ailing.

Pete Saunders is a leading demographics and urban planning consultant based in Chicago and publisher of The Corner Side Yard, about the redevelopment of the American Rust Belt