Selective migration flows are thought to be a key means by which the intended benefits of area-based initiatives `leak out' of target areas, undermining their effectiveness. To date, direct evidence on the scale or impact of these flows has been weak since they are difficult to assess using survey methods. Using 2001 census data for England and Scotland, this paper looks at the scale and composition of flows for deprived neighbourhoods with a particular focus on educational attainment. It analyses the impacts of these flows on the characteristics of deprived areas, exploring differences between regions and comparing neighbourhoods involved in two major regeneration programmes with other deprived areas. The paper shows that selective migration flows do serve to reinforce spatial segregation but that the scale of this effect appears very modest and that impacts vary between regions. Flows for the regeneration areas are less adverse than for similarly deprived neighbourhoods.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anderson, R. and Bråmå, A. (2004) Selective migration in Swedish distressed neighbourhoods: can area-based urban policies counteract segregation processes?, Housing Studies, 19, pp. 517—539.
2.
Bailey, N. (2006) Does work pay? Employment, poverty and social exclusion , in: C. Pantazis, D. Gordon and R. Levitas (Eds) Poverty and Social Exclusion in Britain: The Millennium Survey, pp. 163—190. Bristol: Policy Press.
3.
Bailey, N. and Livingston, M. (2007) Population Turnover and Area Deprivation. Bristol: Policy Press.
4.
Bolt, G. and Kempen, R. van (2003) Escaping poverty neighbourhoods in the Netherlands , Housing, Theory and Society, 20(4), pp. 209—222.
5.
Card, D. and DiNardo, J.E. (2002) Skill biased technological change and rising wage inequality: some problems and puzzles. Working Paper 8769, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
6.
Carley, M. (2002) Community regeneration and neighbourhood renewal: a review of the evidence. Scottish Executive, Edinburgh.
7.
CEA (Cambridge Economic Associates) (2003) Developing a transition framework for Social Inclusion Partnerships: interim programme review. Research Report No. 19, Communities Scotland , Edinburgh.
8.
Cheshire, P., Flynn, N. and Jones, D.A. (1998) Harlesden City Challenge: final evaluation. LSE, London.
9.
Cheshire, P., Monastiriotis, V. and Sheppard, S. (2003) Income inequality and residential segregation: labour market sorting and the demand for positional goods, in: R. Martin and P. S. Morrison (Eds) Geographies of Labour Market Inequality, pp. 83—109. London: Routledge.
10.
Clark,W.A.V. and Huang, Y. (2003) The life course and residential mobility in British housing markets, Environment and Planning A, 35, pp. 323—339.
11.
Clark, W.A.V., Deurloo, M.C. and Dieleman, F.M. (2006) Residential mobility and neighbourhood outcomes , Housing Studies, 21(3), pp. 323—342.
12.
Communities Scotland (2004) Evaluation of social inclusion partnerships (SIPs). Communities Scotland, Edinburgh.
13.
Coombes, M., Wymer, C.,Atkins, D. and Openshaw, S. (2006) Localities and city-regions ( http://cdu.mimas.ac.uk//gopher/censushelp/helpfile/locality.txt.htm; last accessed 17 January 2008).
14.
CRESR (Centre for Regional, Economic and Social Research) (2005) New Deal for Communities 2001—5: an interim evaluation. Research Report 17, Neighbourhood Renewal Unit /Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London.
15.
Dabinett, G., Lawless, P., Rhodes, J. and Tyler, P. (2001) A review of the evidence base for regeneration policy and practice. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, London.
16.
Graversen, B.K., Hummelgaard, H., Lemmich, D. and Nielsen, J.B. (1997) Residential mobility in Danish problem housing estates. Institute of Local Government Studies, Copenhagen.
17.
Green, G., Grimsley, M. and Stafford, B. (2005) The dynamics of neighbourhood sustainability. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York.
18.
GROS (General Registers Office forScotland) ( 2003a) Census update 19: data quality. GROS, Edinburgh.
19.
Gros (2003b) The Registrar General's 2001Census report to the Scottish Parliament. GROS, Edinburgh.
20.
Kearns, A. and Parkes, A. (2003) Living in and leaving poor neighbourhood conditions in England, Housing Studies, 18(6), pp. 827—851.
21.
Kleinman, M. (1999) There goes the neighbourhood: area policies and social exclusion, New Economy, 6(4), pp. 188—192.
22.
Lawless, P. (2006) Area-based urban interventions: rationale and outcomes: the New Deal for Communities programme in England, Urban Studies , 43(11), pp. 1991—2011.
23.
Lee, B.A., Oropesa, R.S. and Kanan, J.W. (1994) Neighborhood context and residential mobility, Demography, 31(2), pp. 249—270.
24.
McGregor, A. and Fitzpatrick, I. (1995) The impact of urban regeneration partnerships on unemployment, Scottish Economic Bulletin, 51, pp. 15—28.
25.
Meen, G., Gibb, K., Goody, J. et al. (2005) Economic Segregation in England: Causes, Consequence and Policy. Bristol: Policy Press.
26.
Mori (2005) New Deal for Communities movers survey 2004: technical report. MORI, London.
27.
Newman, S.J. and Duncan, G.J. (1979) Residential problems, dissatisfaction and mobility , Journal of the American Planning Association, 45(2), pp. 154—162.
28.
Noble, M., Wright, G., Smith, G. and Dibben, C. (2006) Measuring multiple deprivation at the small-area level, Environment and Planning A, 38(1), pp. 169—185.
29.
Nord, M. (1998) Poor people on the move: county—county migration and the spatial concentration of poverty, Journal of Regional Science, 38(2), pp. 329—351.
30.
North, D. and Syrett, S. ( 2006) The dynamics of local economies and deprived neighbourhoods . Department of Communities and Local Government, London.
31.
ODPM (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister) Select Committee (2003) The Effectiveness of Government Regeneration Interventions: Vol. 1: HC 76-1. London: The Stationery Office.
32.
Odpm (2004) The English Indices of Deprivation 2004 (revised). ODPM, London.
33.
ONS (Office for National Statistics) (2005 ) Census 2001: quality report for England and Wales. ONS, London.
34.
Parkinson, M. (1998) Combating social exclusion: lessons from area-based programmes in Europe. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York.
35.
PMSU/ODPM (Prime Minister's Strategy Unit/ Office of the Deputy Prime Minister) (2005) Improving the prospects of people living in areas of multiple deprivation in England. Cabinet Office, London.
36.
Quillian, L. (2003) How long are exposures to poor neighbourhoods? The long-term dynamics of entry and exit from poor neighbourhoods, Population Research and Policy Review, 2, pp. 221—249.
37.
Rees, P., Thomas, F. and Duke-Williams, O. (2002) Migration data from the Census, in P. Rees, D. Martin and P. Williamson (Eds) The Census Data System , pp. 245—268. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
38.
Rosenbaum, J.E., Reynolds, L. and Deluca, S. (2002) How do places matter? The geography of opportunity, self-efficacy and a look inside the black box of residential mobility, Housing Studies, 17(1), pp. 71—82.
39.
Russell, G., Johnston, T., Pritchard, J. et al. (2000 ) Final evaluation of City Challenge. KPMG Consulting, London.
40.
SE (Scottish Executive) (2004) Scottish index of multiple deprivation 2004: summary technical report. Scottish Executive, Edinburgh.
41.
SEU (Social Exclusion Unit) (2001) A new commitment to neighbourhood renewal: national strategy action plan. Cabinet Office, London.
42.
South, S.J. and Crowder, K.D. (1997) Escaping distressed neighborhoods: individual, community and metropolitan influences, American Journal of Sociology, 102(4), pp. 1040—1084.
43.
South, S.J., Crowder, K. and Chavez, E. (2005) Exiting and entering high-poverty neighborhoods: Latinos, Blacks and Anglos compared, Social Forces, 84(2), pp. 873—900.
44.
Speare, A. (1974) Residential satisfaction as an intervening variable in residential mobility, Demography, 11(2), pp. 173—188.
45.
Wilcox, S. (2006) The geography of affordable and unaffordable housing: local measures of the limits to the ability of working households to become home owners. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York.
