The ways in which residents can respond to neighborhood problems are well understood. Residents can act politically, move or stay put and remain inactive. Less understood are the temporal and empirical relationships between these different strategies. Social scientists and policy makers currently believe, with little empirical evidence, that the decision to move from the community is a function of one's political experiences and involvement in institutions that resolve conflicts. Using survey data collected in Seattle, Washington during the late 1970s, the empirical results are initially more consistent with this view for residential mobility than thoughts about moving. Subsequent analysis reveals that the results for residential mobility are questionable as well. Mobility is also related to perceptions about specific sets of issues in the community, including neighborhood decline and service delivery.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CoxKevin R.McCarthyJefferey J., 1980. Neighborhood Activism: Contexts, Interests, and Communication. Center for Real Estate Education and Research. Columbus: The Ohio State University.
2.
ClarkW.A.V.1982. “Recent Research in Migration and Mobility: A Review and Interpretation.”Progress in Planning18(1).
3.
DearMichael J.LongJonathon. 1978. “Community Strategies in Locational Conflict.” Pp. 113–127 in Urbanization and Conflict in Market Societies, edited by CoxKevin. Chicago: Maaroufa Press.
4.
DeJongGordon F.GardnerRobert W., 1981. Migration Decision-Making. New York: Pergamon Press.
5.
FainsteinNorman I.FainsteinSusan S., 1980. “Mobility, Community, and Participation: The American Way Out.” Pp. 242–262 in Residential Mobility and Public Policy. Urban Affairs Annual Reviews. vol. 19, edited by ClarkW.A.V.NooreEric G., Beverly Hills, Ca: Sage.
6.
GuestAvery M.LeeBarrett A., 1983. “Consensus on Locality Names within the Metropolis.”Sociology and Social Research67:374–391.
7.
GuestAvery M.OropesaR.S., 1984. “Problem Solving Strategies of Local Areas in the Metropolis.”American Sociological Review49:828–840.
8.
GuestAvery M.OropesaR.S., 1986. “Informal Social Ties and Political Activity in the Metropolis.”Urban Affairs Quarterly21:550–574.
9.
HertingJerald R.GuestAvery M., 1985. “Components of Satisfaction with Local Areas in the Metropolis.”Sociological Quarterly26:99–115.
10.
HirschmanAlbert O.1970. Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
11.
HunterAlbert. 1974. Symbolic Communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12.
JanowitzMorris. 1978. The Last Half Century. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
13.
JanowitzMorrisStreetDavid. 1978. “Changing Social Order of the Metropolitan Area.” Pp. 90–128 in Handbook of Contemporary Urban Life, edited by StreetDavid and Associates. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
14.
KnokeDavid. 1982. “Political Mobilization by Voluntary Associations.”Journal of Political and Military Sociology10:171–182.
15.
LandaleNancy S.GuestAvery M., 1985. “Constraints, Satisfaction, and Residential Mobility: Speare's Model Reconsidered.”Demography22:199–222.
16.
LeeBarrettOropesaR.S.MetchBarbara J.GuestAvery M., 1984. “Testing the Decline of Community Thesis: Neighborhood Organizations in Seattle, 1929 and 1979.”American Journal of Sociology89:1161–1188.
17.
NewmanSandra J.DuncanGreg J., 1979. “Residential Problems, Dissatisfaction, and Mobility.”Journal of the American Planning Association45:154–166.
18.
OlsonPhilip. 1982. “Urban Neighborhood Research: Its Development and Current Focus.”Urban Affairs Quarterly17:491–518.
19.
OrbellJohn M.UnoToru. 1972. “A Theory of Neighborhood Problem Solving: Political Action vs. Residential Mobility.”American Political Science Review66:471–489.
20.
OropesaR.S.1987. “Local and Extra-Local Orientations in the Metropolis.”Sociological Forum2:90–107.
21.
ParkRobert E.1967. “The City Suggestion for the Investigation of Human Behavior in the Urban Environment.” Pp. 1–46 in The City, edited by ParkRobert E.BurgessErnest W.McKenzieRoderick D., Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
22.
QuiglyJohn M.WeinbergDaniel H., 1977. “Intra-Urban Residential Mobility: A Review and Synthesis.”International Regional Science Review2:41–66.
23.
SabaghGeorgesvan ArsdolMaurice D.Jr.ButlerEdgar W., 1969. “Some Determinants of Intrametropolitan Residential Mobility: Conceptual Considerations.”Social Forces48:88–98.
24.
SpeareAldenJr.. 1974. “Residential Satisfaction as an Intervening Variable in Residential Mobility.”Demography11:173–188.
25.
SuttlesGerald D.1972. The Social Construction of Communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
26.
TillyCharles. 1978. From Mobilization to Revolution. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
27.
VerbaSidneyNieNorman H., 1972. Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality. New York: Harper and Row.
