Municipalities and housing organisations in Denmark are currently facing significant changes due to the launch of the Danish government’s strategy “One Denmark without Parallel Societies - No Ghettos by 2030” resulting in amendments to the Consolidation Act on Social Housing. The required transformation of disadvantaged ghetto areas is pushed high up on the political agenda, but there are other areas than the ones identified by the Danish government which are disadvantaged. Research shows there is not a collective understanding of what identifies a disadvantaged area. Neither international research nor the public sector in Denmark use the exact same methods or variables to identify disadvantaged areas. This project sat out to examine the discrepancy between how municipalities and the Danish government identify disad¬van¬¬¬¬taged areas and what implications the strategy has on the effort in disadvantaged areas not identified disadvantaged by the Danish government's definition. In this context, the effort to alleviate problems refers to social housing master plans from the National Building Fund.

This was examined using the theories of social mix and governance networks for two case municipalities Copenhagen and Aarhus. The interview design for the two municipalities were directed for the interviewees to possess the same positions in the municipality and were thus comparable. An analysis of the governance network actors for social housing master plans, showed the actors were dependent on another's resources and the amendments have linked the disadvantaged areas on the governmental list closer to funding for social housing master plans. The amendments have resulted in limited means for areas not on the list. Furthermore, it was analysed why Copenhagen and Aarhus municipalities use their own identification method instead of the Danish government’s. The analysis demonstrated their methods either aims to avoid stigmatising areas or proactively preventing disadvantaged areas.

The insights gained from this study led to the recommendation of extending the on-going social housing master plans to root valuable relations and positive development. Future research is needed to identify other ways to alleviate problems in disadvantaged areas without a social housing master plan if the amount of means remains unchanged. A discrepancy was identified on the allocation of finances to the national strategy by the National Building Fund. This paper reflected that disadvantaged areas identified officially by the Danish government were more likely to receive grants over areas that were not on the list. A consequence of not receiving funding, these areas were prone to face socio-economic development issues.