In search of counterurbanisation: Some evidence from Devon on the relationship between patterns of migration and motivation

Halliday, Joyce; Coombes, Mike

doi:10.1016/0743-0167(95)00032-1

Cited by 107 publications

(74 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The Latvian public is still in the distinct period of productionism, when economic resources are accumulated. In several studies in Western countries, the opposite trend has been seen: those people who live further away from metropolises choose to live there because of the high quality of life that is available there (Halliday and Coombest, 1995;Lewis, 2000). This is not the case in the Rîga agglomeration, even as population numbers in the outer zone of that agglomeration have increased.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Amenity Migration in Postsocialist Metropolis: The Case of Rīga Agglomeration

Bērziņš¹,

Krišjāne²

2008

Proceedings of the Latvian Academy of Sciences. Section B. Natural, Exact, and Applied Sciences.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTIONMobility studies in the past have offered an extensive description of migration models, flows of migration, factors which influence these, motivations for migration, as well as the intention of people to change their place of residence. Researchers have not developed a unified approach vis-à-vis the dominating factors in terms of characterising internal migration. The traditional belief in terms of factors leading people to migrate within their own country is that these are economic factors, urban factors (the urban lifestyle) and demographic factors (Lessinger, 1991;Richardson, 1973). The desire of individuals and households to change their place of residence is reviewed from two perspectives in the scientific literature-as an economic model related to human capital, and as an alternative hedonic model. The human capital model is used to analyse regional differences in terms of the labour market, along with the uneven economic development of various territories. The hedonic model accents the influence of non-traded goods on reasons as to why households move from one place to another (Clark and Cosgrove, 1991). Since the mid-20th century, the literature has extensively reviewed reasons for a deconcentration of populations, with residents abandoning densely populated regions and cities in favour of life in the countryside. These reasons for migration are often of a social nature, and in this they are in opposition to the once-dominant tendency of migration to flow toward urban areas. This has to do both with changes in the behaviour or individuals and with new opportunities for establishing a home (Frey, 1988).Deconcentration processes and prevailing motivations for migration. One process that can be used to characterise the deconcentration of populations as the result of migration is known as counterurbanisation. This term at first was used to describe all types of population deconcentration outside the boundaries of cities (Champion, 1989). Later the term was used to describe the move of local residents to lower levels of the urban hierarchy (small towns, villages and hamlets) or to more distant rural territories (Berry, 1976;Ford, 1999). In analysing the process of counterurbanisation in more than 20 countries, researchers concluded that the main reasons for deconcentration have had to do with a reordering of economic processes (Vinning and Kontuly, 1978). In trying to differentiate between counterurbanisation and suburbanisation, it has been suggested that use be made of analysis of the behaviour and motivation of migrants-the so-called individual level/behavioural approach (Fisher, 2003). Thus, counterurbanisation represents the desire of local residents to enjoy the advantages of a rural way of life-landscapes, less pollution, peace and quiet. Other researchers also address such issues as the attractiveness of the surrounding environment, improved communications, specific demographic circumstances, the development of the service sector, and the attractiveness and amenities of the countryside. T...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Amenity Migration in Postsocialist Metropolis: The Case of Rīga Agglomeration

Bērziņš¹,

Krišjāne²

2008

Proceedings of the Latvian Academy of Sciences. Section B. Natural, Exact, and Applied Sciences.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From the point of view of push-pull theory (Halliday and Coombes 1995), it was discovered that main reason for moving in (pull factors) into new amenity-rich place were the following reasons: 33% personal positive attitude toward nature and landscape, 21% bad environment at former place of residence. The rest stated that it was part of their housing or family problems solution (see Fig 9).…”

Section: Type Of Residencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The process of amenity migration can be described as a motion with two driving forces known as a push-pull theory: (1) "anti-urban" push factors from cities include crime, congestion, costs and low quality of environment, and (2) "pro-rural" pull factors include attraction of a better environment, a more tranquil lifestyle and/or a genuine move towards rurality "where the majority of daily needs can be met in local market towns" (Halliday and Coombes 1995). The first group of factors (anti-urban) is possible to understand as a push force for "environmental migration".…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Motivation and life style of the Czech amenity migrants (case study)

Bartoš¹,

Kušová²,

Těšitel³

2009

European Countryside

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Amenity migration is a specific type of migration which is not motivated by higher wages -it has been brought about by the desire to render more valuable natural or socio-cultural environment of the target territory, and it is often directed from metropolitan to rural areas. The group of amenity migrants from chosen areas of the Czech Republic was described and identified on basis of collected empirical data set. Results are discussed with relevant authors who currently study amenity migration abroad. It follows from the mentioned results that amenity migrants in model areas are rather university educated, economically strong and more creative. They prefer natural amenities to cultural ones, their in-migration is not related to tourism and second homes phenomenon as it was expected earlier. They use current residential potential for permanent living in the amenity-rich places.Keywords: Amenity migration, tourism, second home, Czechia Souhrn: Amenitní migrace je chápána jako specifický typ lidské migrace, která není motivována ekonomicky, ale snahou žít v celkově hodnotnějším socio-kulturním prostředí a směřuje převážně z městského prostředí do venkovské krajiny. Ve vybraných modelových územích České republiky byly na základě terénního sběru dat identifikovány a popsány skupiny amenitních migrantů. Výsledky jsou diskutovány s autory zabývajícími se amenitní migrací v zahraničí. Z uvedeného průzkumu vyplývá, že amenitní migranti v modelových územích jsou převážně vysokoškolsky vzdělaní, mají větší ekonomickou sílu a zároveň jsou více kreativní. Dávají přednost přírodním hodnotám území před kulturními. Jejich migrace není svázána s cestovním ruchem či "druhým bydlením", jak se předpokládalo. Dávají zároveň přednost stávajícímu bytovému fondu na venkově před výstavbou nových objektů.Klíčová slova: amenitní migrace, cestovní ruch, druhé bydlení, Česko 1 Ing. Michael Bartoš, CSc.,

show abstract

“…Daugstad et al, 2006;Karjalainen & Komulainen, 1998;Scott, 2002) and, as a consequence, are often very favourable to farming as a landscape feature (Hall et al, 2004). This has an important economic and social role as the aesthetics of farmed landscapes attract both tourists (Garrod et al, 2006;Lowenthal, 2007;Vanslembrouck et al, 2005) and in-migrants (Halliday & Coombes, 1995;Paquette & Domon, 2003), thus helping preserve the economic and social vitality of rural areas.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding Farmers' Aesthetic Preference for Tidy Agricultural Landscapes: A Bourdieusian Perspective

Burton

2012

Landscape Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies of landscape aesthetics based on photographic assessment indicate that farmers have a unique perspective-seeing beauty in the same ordered and controlled arable agricultural landscapes that almost all other publics find monotonous and boring. This paper uses Bourdieu's theory of capital to explore why farmers hold this perspective. Interpretations farmers place on 'tidy' features such as straight lines and evenly coloured fields were explored through a cross-cultural study between Germany and Scotland. Results show how farmers 'read' agricultural landscapes for signs of skilled farming, and how their interpretation is dependent on knowledge of the connection between efficient farming practices and the appearance of forms and colours in the fields. The implications of agricultural landscape aesthetics for the development of cultural and social capital are discussed.

show abstract

In search of counterurbanisation: Some evidence from Devon on the relationship between patterns of migration and motivation

Cited by 107 publications

References 9 publications

Amenity Migration in Postsocialist Metropolis: The Case of Rīga Agglomeration

Amenity Migration in Postsocialist Metropolis: The Case of Rīga Agglomeration

Motivation and life style of the Czech amenity migrants (case study)

Understanding Farmers' Aesthetic Preference for Tidy Agricultural Landscapes: A Bourdieusian Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About