The role of non‐resident family ties in rural staying

Abstract

Internal migration research is paying increasing attention to the role in migration behaviour of having non‐resident family—family living outside of the household—living close by, and also to non‐migration and staying in general. Combining these two themes, this paper investigates the role of non‐resident family ties in rural staying for adults aged 31–64. Using a mixed methods analysis of survey and interview data from the Netherlands, Germany and Northern Ireland (UK), we examine if the presence of non‐resident family nearby relates to future intentions to stay in the rural region, and we explore the meanings of different family relations and how they relate to past and ongoing staying behaviours. Our findings reveal that living near non‐resident children and in‐laws increases the likelihood of the intention to stay in the rural region for the rest of one's lifetime. While the quantitative analyses suggest that the presence of parents in the area does not contribute to future staying intentions, the interviews revealed that parents' residential proximity was integral in the original staying decision. Non‐resident family members provide emotional and instrumental support, offer location‐specific structural opportunities, and provide a sense of security. Partly, family obligations also play a role in staying, yet not in the sense that rural stayers are ‘stuck in place’ because of family ties, but rather in an implicit way, intertwined with senses of belonging and attachment.

Who stays in their birthplace? The role of multigenerational local ties in young adults' staying behaviour

“…Stockdale and Ferguson (2020) similarly found "that attachment and belonging to the home place is entangled in complex patterns of family history, farm ownership and continuing familial networks" (p. 369). A sense of belonging has previously been found to contribute to the expectation to stay in rural areas (Hofstede et al, 2022), and has been reported as a motive for staying (Ferguson et al, 2023;Stockdale & Ferguson, 2020;Stockdale, Theunissen, et al, 2018) and returning (von Reichert et al, 2014). It seems especially likely that a shared place of origin with (grand)parents increases one's propensity to stay or return.…”

“…Geographic distances between adult children and parents are generally larger in countries with universal welfare models than in countries with family-based welfare models (Bordone, 2009;Hank, 2007). Nevertheless, ties to nearby, nonresident family members are found to constrain migration (Bjarnason & Haartsen, 2023) and contribute to intentions to remain immobile, also in countries with universal welfare models (Ferguson et al, 2023).…”

“…Geographic distances between adult children and parents are generally larger in countries with universal welfare models than in countries with family‐based welfare models (Bordone, 2009; Hank, 2007). Nevertheless, ties to nearby, nonresident family members are found to constrain migration (Bjarnason & Haartsen, 2023) and contribute to intentions to remain immobile, also in countries with universal welfare models (Ferguson et al, 2023). Several studies have shown that, also in Sweden, ties to parents deter adult children's migration and encourage staying behaviour (Artamonova et al, 2020, 2021; Chudnovskaya & Kolk, 2017; Kolk, 2017; Lundholm & Malmberg, 2009; Mulder & Malmberg, 2014; Pettersson & Malmberg, 2009) as well as return migration behaviour (Mulder et al, 2020).…”

Moving and staying in the context of the family: A review and an introduction to the Special Issue

“…‘The Role of Nonresident Family Ties in Rural Staying’ by Ferguson et al (2023—this issue) adopts a mixed‐method approach to explore how family networks in Germany, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom influence individuals' desires and decisions to remain in place. Their study brings further nuance to the discussion of rural staying and emphasises how family solidarity and a sense of belonging and identity promote immobility, particularly in rural contexts.…”