Skip to main content

Why do residents want to leave deprived neighbourhoods? The importance of residents’ subjective evaluations of their neighbourhood and its reputation

Abstract

Many area-based initiatives in deprived urban neighbourhoods seek to reduce the number of residents who move away from the area. One common objective is to keep those with jobs or middle incomes in order to avoid further concentration of poor people and social problems. This paper is based on a study of how residents in 12 deprived urban areas in Denmark evaluate their neighbourhood and how this is connected to their wish to move or stay. The purpose is to expose the importance of residents’ subjective evaluations of the neighbourhood and its reputation for their inclination to stay or move away. Some conclusions are drawn for area-based initiatives that could reduce mobility. The study shows a strong connection between residents’ perception of the reputation of their neighbourhood and their plans to move, but it also shows that other factors have great importance too. Dissatisfaction due to social problems and crime are the main reasons for moving away from deprived neighbourhoods, especially among residents in employment. Strong social relations within the neighbourhood prove to significantly reduce the intention to move.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Atkinson, R., & Kintrea, K. (1998) Reconnecting excluded communities: The neighbourhood impacts of owner occupation. Research Report 61. Edinburgh: Scottish Homes.

  2. Basolo, V., & Strong, D. (2002) Understanding the neighbourhood: From residents’ perception and needs to action. Housing Policy Debate, 13(1), 83–105.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Beekman, T., Lyons, F., & Scott, J. (2001). Improving the understanding of the influence of owner-occupiers in mixed tenure neighbourhoods. Report 89. Edinburgh: Scottish Homes.

  4. Brown, L. A., & Moore, E. G. (1970). The intra-urban migration process: a perspective. Geografiska Annaler Series B, 52(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Burrows, R., & Rhodes, D. (1998) Unpopular places? Area disadvantage and the geography of misery in England. Bristol: The Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Carp, F., Zawadski, R., & Shokron, H. (1976) Dimensions of urban environmental quality. Environment and Behaviour, 8, 239–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Clark, W. A. V., & Ledwith. V. (2005). Mobility, housing stress and neighborhood contexts: Evidence from Los Angeles. California Center for Population Research. On-line Working Paper Series.

  8. Cole, I., & Shayer, S. (1998). Tenure mix as social fix? community diversity and social networks on mixed housing estates. Paper to ENHR conference, Cardiff 7–11. September 1998.

  9. Costa Pinho, T. (2000). Residential contexts of social exclusion: Images and identities. Paper for ENHR Conference, Gävle 2000.

  10. De Groot, C., Manting, D., & Mulder, C. H. (2007). Intentions to move and actual moving behaviour in the Netherlands. Paper for ENHR Conference Rotterdam 2007.

  11. Dekker, K., Musterd, S., & Van Kempen, R. (2007). Explaining differentials in housing and neighbourhood satisfaction in post-WWII large housing estates in European cities. Paper for ENHR Conference, Rotterdam.

  12. Feijten, P., & Van Ham, M. (2007). Neighbourhood change … reason to leave? Paper for ENHR Conference Rotterdam 2007.

  13. Franscescato, G., Wiedemann, S., & Anderson, J. R. (1987). Residential Satisfaction. In W. van Vliet, et al. (Eds.), Housing and neighbourhoods. Theoretical and empirical contributions (pp. 43–58). New York/London: Greenwood Press.

  14. Friedrichs, J., & Blasius, J. (2006). Attitudes of owners and renters in a deprived neighbourhood. Paper to ENHR Conference in Ljubljana 2006.

  15. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society. Outline of the theory of structuration. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Galster, G., Hayes, C., & Johnston, J. (2002). Identifying robust, parsimonious indicators of neighbourhood quality of life. Wayne State University.

  17. Johnston, R. J. (1973). Spatial patterns in suburban evaluations. Environment and Planning A, 5, 385–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kasarda, J. D., & Janowitz, M. (1974). Community attachment in mass society. American Sociological Review, 39, 328–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kearns, A., & Parkes, A. (2003). Living in and leaving poor neighbourhood conditions in England. Housing Studies, 18(6), 827–852.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Knox, P. (1995). Urban social geography. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Koopman, M. J. (2007). Looking from the inside out or from the outside in: Differences and associations between neighbourhood push and pull. Paper for ENHR Conference Rotterdam 200.

  22. Lee, B. A., Oreposa, R. S., & Kanan, J. W. (1994). Neighbourhood context and residential mobility. Demography, 31(2), 249–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Lu, M. (1998) Analyzing migration decision making: relationship between residential satisfaction, mobility intentions and moving behaviour. Environment and Planning A, 30, 1473–1495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lu, M. (1999). Determinants of residential satisfaction. Growth and Change, 30, 264–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Massey, D. (1995). The conceptualisation of space. In D. Massey & P. Jess (Eds.), A place in the world. Oxford: University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  26. McHugh, K., Gober, P., & Reid, N. (1990). Determinants of short- and long-term mobility expectations for home owners and renters. Demography, 27, 81–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Parkes, A., Kearns, A., & Atkinson, R. (2002) What makes people dissatisfied with their neighbourhoods? Urban Studies, 39(13), 2413–2438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Permentier, M., Van Ham, M., & Bolt, G. (2007). Behavioural responses to neighbourhood reputations. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 22(2), 199–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Rijpers, B., & Smeets, J. (1998). Housing challenge: Managing neighbourhoods image. Paper to ENHR conference, Cardiff 7–11. September 1998.

  30. Rossi, P. H. (1955) Why families move. Illinois. The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Speare, A. J., Goldstein, S., & Frey, W. H. (1974). Residential mobility, migration and metropolitan change. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Skifter Andersen, H. (1999). Virkningerne af Byudvalgets indsats i almene boligafdelinger 1994–97 (Effects of area-based initiatives on social housing estates in Denmark). SBI-report 321, Horsholm: Danish Building and Urban Research.

  33. Skifter Andersen, H (2002a). Excluded places. On the interaction between segregation, urban decay and deprived neighbourhoods. Housing, Theory and Society, 19, 153–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Skifter Andersen, H. (2002b). Can Deprived Housing Areas be revitalised? Efforts against segregation and neighbourhood decay in Denmark and Europe. Urban Studies, 39(4).

  35. Skifter Andersen, H. (2003). Urban Sores. On the interaction between segregation, urban decay and deprived neighbourhoods. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Skifter Andersen, H. (2004). Residents’ understanding of deprived urban neighbourhoods and its significance for plans to move. Paper to ENHR Conference Cambridge 2004.

  37. Skifter Andersen, H. (2006a). Moving to and from enclaves. Housing choices of ethnic minorities in Denmark. Paper to Workshop on Minority Ethnic Groups and Housing: Perceptions and Perspectives, ENHR Conference in Ljubliana, 2–5 July 2006.

  38. Skifter Andersen, H. (2006b). Undersøgelse af til- og fraflytningen fra 3 multietniske boligområder (Study of moves to and from three multietniske boligområder housing areas). Horsholm: Danish Building Research Institute.

  39. Skifter Andersen, H., & Kielgast, L. (2003). De syv første kvarterløft. Sammenfattende evaluering af udviklingen 1997–2002. Horsholm: Danish Building and Urban Research.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Wolpert, J. (1965). Behavioral aspects of the decision to migrate. Papers of the Regional Science Association, 15, 159–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Ærø, T. (2001). Boligpræferencer, boligvalg og livsstil (Housing preferences, choice of dwelling and lifestyle). PhD. Thesis. Horsholm: Danish Building and Urban Research.

  42. Ærø, T. (2004). Forebyggelse af normbrud og konflikter i boligområder (Prevention of violation of norms and conflicts in housing areas). In H. Skifter Andersen & H. T. Andersen (Eds.), Den mangfoldige by. Horsholm: Danish Building Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hans Skifter Andersen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Andersen, H.S. Why do residents want to leave deprived neighbourhoods? The importance of residents’ subjective evaluations of their neighbourhood and its reputation. J Hous and the Built Environ 23, 79–101 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-008-9109-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Deprived neighbourhoods
  • Neighbourhood dissatisfaction
  • Plans to move away