Planning for Amenity Migration in Canada

Chipeniuk, Raymond

doi:10.1659/0276-4741(2004)024[0327:pfamic]2.0.co;2

Cited by 59 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…How is social capital and civic engagement affected by displacement of longtime owners (often ''pillars of the community'' in ranching communities with significant ''local knowledge'')? This subject has been dealt with in regard to land use planning (Chipeniuk 2004;Travis 2007;Gurran and Blakely 2007), but what about governance related to ecological restoration, e.g. implementation of the Endangered Species Act in the American West, an increasingly vexing challenge for rural communities there?…”

Section: Summary and Future Research Needsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Amenity migration: diverse conceptualizations of drivers, socioeconomic dimensions, and emerging challenges

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rural communities throughout the postindustrial world are in the midst of a significant transition, sometimes referred to as rural restructuring, as traditional land uses, economic activities, and social arrangements transition to those associated with ''post-productivist'' or ''multifunctional'' landscapes. Amenity migration, the movement of people based on the draw of natural and/or cultural amenities, can be thought of as both driver and implication of this transition, resulting in significant changes in the ownership, use, and governance of rural lands, as well as in the composition and socioeconomic dynamics of rural communities. In concert with other social, economic and political processes, amenity migration is contributing to the fundamental transformation of rural communities throughout the world. This paper presents a review of the social science literature related to the concept of amenity migration, focusing on the ways in which it has been conceptualized, theorized, and documented by different communities of scholars. We then profile and summarize diverse perspectives on drivers and socioeconomic impacts, highlighting emerging challenges and opportunities related to this type of migration occurring at multiple scales and in multiple sites. The paper also identifies and discusses particular areas where further research is needed.

show abstract

Section: Summary and Future Research Needsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Amenity migration: diverse conceptualizations of drivers, socioeconomic dimensions, and emerging challenges

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many rural communities across North Carolina and the United States have experienced unprecedented growth in recent decades due to amenity migration (Chipeniuk, 2004;Marcouiller, Clendenning, & Kedzior, 2002;Moss, 2006;Ryan, 2002Ryan, , 2006. "One of the major forces of change in rural America" (Stewart, 2002, p. 369), amenity migration is characterized by "the purchasing of primary or second residences in rural areas valued for their aesthetic, recreational, and other consumption-oriented use values" (McCarthy, 2008, p. 130).…”

Section: The Genesis Of Cvm: Addressing Challenges Of Participation Imentioning

confidence: 99%

The Community Voice Method: Using participatory research and filmmaking to foster dialog about changing landscapes

Cumming¹,

Norwood

2012

Landscape and Urban Planning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Most definitions of amenity migration are limited to permanent residents (Chipeniuk, 2004), but some also cover seasonal and intermittent residents (Glorioso, 2000). Amenity migrants intend to settle in a new community either permanently or intermittently, to retire there, or to earn a living there (Glorioso and Moss, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

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

Planning for Amenity Migration in Canada

Abstract: BioOne Complete (complete.BioOne.org) is a full-text database of 200 subscribed and open-access titles in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses.

Cited by 59 publications

References 5 publications

Amenity migration: diverse conceptualizations of drivers, socioeconomic dimensions, and emerging challenges

Amenity migration: diverse conceptualizations of drivers, socioeconomic dimensions, and emerging challenges

The Community Voice Method: Using participatory research and filmmaking to foster dialog about changing landscapes

Amenity Migration in Postsocialist Metropolis: The Case of Rīga Agglomeration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About