Temporarily Out of Use

Yoad Shachar

Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies   www.jiis.org

The modern city serves us, its residents, in a variety of ways. We live, work, seek leisure and recreation, or simply walk around within the city. In the past, space was not sharply divided along its different uses, but during the nineteenth century the various uses of space within the city began to be differentiated so as to prevent nuisances or harm from certain uses of land to other parts.

The combination of land uses within a city varies across Israel’s various municipalities and local councils, and the particular mix generally reflects the character of the city. For example, a local council with a particularly high percentage of residential areas will serve primarily as a bedroom suburb whose residents seek employment and recreation elsewhere. Land use plays a major part in the socio-economic status of a city. We would expect, for example, that a town with large industrial zones – which are a main source of employment – would have many residents who are employed as blue-collar workers in the industrial sector. In contrast, a town with large areas of office space would serve as a home for many professionals. The combination of land uses is extremely significant in relation to the municipal budget, which is based on municipal taxes (Arnona) from apartments and properties in the city, some of which yield higher taxes than others: areas zoned for commerce yield a much higher Arnona than residential zones. In other words, the combination of land uses in large part determines the city’s economic base.

Jerusalem is Israel’s second-largest city after Dimona in terms of area of jurisdiction. It covers 125 square kilometers, significantly higher than the figures for Tel Aviv, with 52 square kilometers, or Haifa, with 65. Yet only 47% of Jerusalem comprises built-up areas, compared with 73% of the area of Tel Aviv and 55% of Haifa. The large discrepancies between these cities become strikingly apparent when we examine how their built-up areas are divided for various uses.

Among the major cities with a population greater than 200,000, Jerusalem dedicates the highest percentage of its built-up areas to residential purposes (71% of all built-up areas). This is a high percentage relative to what we might expect for the country’s largest city and the center of a metropolis. Among the major cities, Ashdod and Haifa have the lowest percentages of residential areas as a proportion of built-up areas. These cities have large areas zoned for industry as well as the infrastructure and transportation necessary for the ports they contain.

Another striking discrepancy among the major cities is the difference in percentage of area zoned for commerce and office space. Only 6% of the built-up area in Jerusalem serves as commerce or office space while in Tel Aviv the figure is 17% of built-up areas – nearly threefold. In Haifa 13% of built-up areas serve as commerce and office space, twice the figure for Jerusalem.

Areas zoned for commerce and office space are particularly significant in terms of the municipal budget because they yield higher Arnona municipal tax revenues than other land uses. As most of a municipality’s independent revenue comes from Arnona, the motivation to expand areas of commerce and office space is evident. This is apparently the reason that the big plans for city development focus on the business zone now taking shape and form at the entrance to the capital. It is important to keep in mind, however, that zoning land for commerce and office space does not guarantee that it will be used for this purpose. After zoning land for a particular use, and before printing those promising Arnona bills, the city must create incentives for companies and business owners to come and set up shop in the new business zone and thus actualize its intended use.

Translation: Merav Datan

A Time of Loneliness

Yoad Shahar

www.jiis.org

The High Holiday period is a happy family time for most of us. After the holidays, though, a sense of loneliness sometimes descends on us. Even though loneliness is a personal experience that differs for everyone, it is interesting to see which Jerusalemites tend to experience it more intensely than others. The annual Social Survey of the Central Bureau of Statistics asked respondents if there are situations in which they feel lonely, and whether there are people on whom they can rely for help if they do feel a sense of distress or crisis. 

We would assume that married people feel less lonely, and indeed, evidently 36% of the singles in Jerusalem feel lonely often or sometimes, compared with just 31% among married individuals. At the same time, if you have already married, its best to stay married, as 47% of divorced or separated individuals and 68% of widows and widowers reported feeling lonely. This data seemingly romanticizes married life, yet even marriage does not promise that life will be a rose garden, as it does not guarantee that there will be someone to lean on during a crisis. Only 77% of those married said they have somebody on whom they could rely in a crisis, compared with 80% among divorced people, 83% among the widowed, and 87% among singles. 

It is customarily believed that in traditional societies the feeling of togetherness is greater than, or replaces, the sense of loneliness. Yet when we examine the data for Jerusalem by population group, we find that feelings of loneliness are greater among the city’s Arabs. Among Arabs, 39% said they often or sometimes feel lonely, compared with only 25% among Jews. Regarding the question of whether they have someone to rely on in a time of crisis, apparently only 52% of Arabs have such a person, compared with 94% of Jews. 

The extent of religious belief or the nature of religious identity also affects one’s feelings of loneliness and the sense that there is someone to rely on. Among the ultra-orthodox (haredim), only 10% feel lonely often or sometimes. Among the religiously observant, 28% feel lonely, and among the secular this figure is 29%. Likewise, 96% of the ultra-orthodox reported having someone on whom they can rely, compared with 94% among the religiously observant and 91% among the secular. 

Loneliness, as well as the sense that one has or does not have someone to lean on, is related first and foremost to the state of reality. Yet it is also a product of the manner in which we experience and understand reality. The data reveal that feelings of loneliness and of having someone to rely on in crisis are linked to the lifestyle we have chosen for ourselves, which shapes both our reality and the manner in which we experience it. 

Translation: Merav Datan

Faith in the Future

Yoad Shahar

Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies

www.jiis.org

Jerusalem is considered one of Israel’s poorest cities. In 2011 the average gross monthly salary for employed individuals in Jerusalem was 8,014 NIS, compared with 10,409 NIS in Haifa, 11,445 NIS in Tel Aviv – Jaffa, and 9,461 NIS in Israel as a whole. Moreover, in the same year 44% of salaried employees in Jerusalem earned less than the minimum wage, compared with 38% of salaried employees in Haifa, 33% of salaried employees in Tel Aviv, and 38% in Israel.

In addition to these objective statistics, in the past summer the media published data from the annual social survey of the Central Bureau of Statistics. This survey provides another dimension that aids in understanding the standard of living and welfare in Israel – namely, the subjective dimension. The data painted a dismal picture of the manner in with Israel’s residents perceive their individual economic situation, and an even more dismal picture when respondents were asked about their expectations of the future in this regard. 

A total of 19% of survey respondents said they expect their individual economic situation to deteriorate in the future, 38% believed it would not improve, and 43% believed that their individual economic situation would improve in the future. One might expect that because Jerusalem is a poorer city in terms of objective indices, its residents would expect a bleaker future, as there would be fewer possibilities for financial savings and future planning. However, only 17% of Jerusalem’s residents believed that their individual economic situation would deteriorate in the future and 34% believed it would not change, whereas 49% believed their situation would improve – higher than the figure for Israel and the other major cities. In Tel Aviv and in Haifa only 40% and 42%, respectively, believed their situation would improve.

One of the factors that might explain this optimistic view of the future is the power of faith. The social survey also questioned respondents about the degree of their religiosity (ultra-orthodox, religious, traditional-religious, traditional and not very religious, and secular / not religious). A breakdown by outlook on one’s economic situation (among Jews) reveals that a greater degree of religiosity corresponds with a higher degree of optimism regarding one’s future economic situation. (A comparable trend was observed among non-Jews as well.)

Even though the economic situation of the ultra-orthodox in Jerusalem ranks among the lowest in the city in terms of objective indices, 59% of the ultra-orthodox stated that they expect their economic situation to improve in the future, compared with 46% of religious respondent, 43% of secular respondents, 35% of traditional and not very religious respondents, and only 31% of traditional-religious respondents. The effect of subjective expectations on the objective situation has not yet been demonstrated. If such an effect does exist, then believers have a brighter economic future.

Data source: The social survey, by the Central Bureau of Statistics

Translation: Merav Datan