Multi‐Local Living – The Approaches of Rational Choice Theory, Sociology of Everyday Life and Actor‐Network Theory

Abstract

There is no 'supra-theory', which might synthesise potential theoretical approaches for the study of multi-local living. Three selected theoretical perspectives are discussed: according to rational choice theory (RCT), multiple localisations represent just one of a number of choices, selected on the basis of individual preferences and given restrictions. Sociology of everyday life (SEL) addresses the reproduction of social life by focusing on practices of actors within the various social frameworks of multi-local everyday life. Actor-network theory (ANT) provides a 'toolkit' to 'de-scribe' the hybrid enactment of multi-local households. Materiality, processes, and multiplicity are emphasised. Each perspective reflects partial realities of the multiplicity of multi-local living. It is argued that the modelling of residential multi-locality pursued by the three approaches is highly productive if their results are compared with one another and interpreted as versions of reality differently shaped, which are partly congruent, partly incongruent due to incommensurable ontological and theoretical positions.Even though multi-local living is not a new phenomenon in most European countries, the multiplicity of practices of this organisation of life has gained a new dimension. Embedded in postmodern societies, multi-locality is mostly induced by processes such as individualisation, flexibilisation, acceleration, and mobilisation. Residential multi-locality may be explored against the background of diverse theory and by employing a variety of methods (see Weichhart 2015). In this contribution we aim to scrutinise the fruitfulness of three approaches: rational choice theory (RCT), sociology of everyday life (SEL), and actor-network theory (ANT) in order to gain greater insight into various aspects of the phenomenon of multi-local living. This selection, being one of many, should underpin current projects and narrow down specific research questions.These approaches have in common that they conceive multi-local living as a practice and a process. That is why they investigate how the practices evolve, how they can be maintained over longer periods, and how they are modified over time. The actors of multi-local living

Mobility experience and mobility decision‐making: An experiment on permanent migration and residential multilocality

“…The mobility decision depends on the values that are based on the individual's specific goals and the subjective expectation that these goals can be achieved through migration (e.g., Chemers, Ayman, & Werner, 1978). This general approach has also been frequently applied to the specific choice between different mobility alternatives (Abraham & Nisic, 2012;Eliasson et al, 2003;Green et al, 1999;Pfaff, 2012;Schmidt, 2014;Vickerman, 1984;Weiske et al, 2015;Yapa, Polese, & Wolpert, 1971).…”

“…In the wake of growing internationalisation and flexibility of labour markets, more complex forms of job‐related residential mobility have evolved in the last decades. Besides permanent relocations, various forms of circular mobility are gaining particular importance, such as seasonal migration, short and long‐distance commuting, and residential multilocality (e.g., Bell & Ward, ; Green, Hogarth, & Shackleton, ; Haas & Osland, ; McHugh, , ; Petzold, ; Pfaff, ; Reuschke, ; Rüger, Feldhaus, Becker, & Schlegel, ; Schneider & Collet, ; Schneider & Limmer, ; Van der Klis & Mulder, ; van Ham & Hooimeijer, ; Weiske, Petzold, & Schad, ).…”

Residential Multi‐Locality Studies – The Added Value for Research on Families and Second Homes

“…The in‐between represents a constitutive part of the arrangement. Within the practices of multi‐local living, relations are built up in many ways: via the movements of bodies, things, ideas with varying intensities, including stillness; via mediating technical devices (see Weiske et al ); by the assemblage of heterogeneous materials used for the living arrangements and by the multiple encounters of people here, there and on the move.…”

“…The complex and multi‐faceted issues of residential multi‐locality studies require interdisciplinary cooperation and the use of variable methodologies (see Weichhart ). The selection of the approaches ranges from rather structuralist to explicitly post‐structuralist approaches (see Weiske et al ).…”

Residential Multi‐Locality: In Search of Theoretical Frameworks

“…Some of these thing theories – above all post‐structuralist ANT – are highly contradictory to the basic axioms of most other social theories relevant to our topic. Nevertheless, they provide a significant framework for the analysis and interpretation of the phenomenon of residential multi‐locality (see Weiske et al ., ; Schad, ). ANT is not considered a theory but a description of complex processes and networks.…”