CGR Nashville
The Spatial Echo: A CGR Analysis of Displacement and Infrastructural Strain in Nashville and its Satellite Cities: Clarksville and Murfreesboro
Keywords: Critical Geography of Race (CGR), spatial analysis, receiver cities, Nashville, Clarksville, Murfreesboro, redlining, health disparities, educational infrastructure.
This study critically examines the spatial and racialized impacts of metropolitan growth in Nashville on the emerging "receiver cities" of Murfreesboro and Clarksville. Guided by the Critical Geography of Race (CGR) framework, we posit that the economic boom in the Nashville core creates a "spatial echo" of displacement and infrastructural strain in peripheral municipalities. This research employs a convergent mixed-methods design organized around two interrelated aims: (1) empirically modeling the structural drivers of displacement, and (2) conducting a comparative case study of policy responses in receiver cities. By linking archival HOLC redlining maps with contemporary indicators from the CDC PLACES dataset, Eviction Lab, and Tennessee Department of Education (TDOE) reports, we analyze how historical exclusions in the core correlate with present-day disparities in health, housing stability, and educational capacity in the periphery. Furthermore, we interrogate municipal zoning archives and policy discourse to reveal how Murfreesboro and Clarksville spatially manage this influx. This study provides a regional model for understanding how inequalities are not merely displaced but reproduced across municipal boundaries, transforming the "receiver" cities into new sites of stratified development.
Findings
Fiscal cliff
The top panel shows per pupil expenditure (PPE): Metro Nashville spends about $22,004 per pupil, while the receiver counties average roughly $11,660, producing a structural gap of about $10,344 per student (a roughly 47% reduction when crossing county lines). The bar chart makes the magnitude of that gap immediately apparent and frames the rest of the figure: students in receiver jurisdictions begin with substantially fewer dollars allocated to their education.
Efficiency paradox
The second panel contrasts instructional spending with an efficiency ratio. Although receiver districts spend less per pupil in absolute dollars, their efficiency ratios are higher—that is, a larger share of their smaller budgets is allocated to direct instruction. The visual shows Metro Nashville with higher instructional dollars but a lower efficiency percentage, while Rutherford (as an example) has lower instructional dollars but a higher efficiency percentage. The paradox is that higher instructional share does not compensate for the much smaller overall budget.
Infrastructural autonomy
The third panel displays debt service per pupil as a proxy for infrastructural autonomy. Metro Nashville’s debt service per pupil (about $1,848) dwarfs that of Montgomery ($54) and Rutherford ($7). The chart highlights how receivers lack the fiscal capacity to finance capital projects and long‑term investments, reinforcing persistent infrastructure gaps even when they allocate a high share of limited funds to instruction.
Disciplinary prevalence
The final panel links fiscal scarcity to student outcomes by showing disciplinary prevalence rates (actions per 100 students). Montgomery County records the highest rate (19.3), followed by Nashville (15.4) and Rutherford (12.2). The figure invites readers to see disciplinary outcomes as one measurable consequence of resource constraints: higher exclusionary discipline in some receiver districts aligns with lower per‑pupil funding and constrained infrastructural capacity.
Overall interpretation
Together, the panels tell a coherent story: municipal and county boundaries structure large fiscal disparities; receiver jurisdictions respond by allocating a greater share of smaller budgets to instruction but remain unable to match the absolute resources, capital capacity, or supportive services available in the urban core. The result is a regional pattern in which funding shortfalls and limited infrastructural autonomy are associated with adverse educational outcomes, reinforcing the study’s argument about how metropolitan growth reproduces inequality across municipal lines.