background
DESCRIPTION
Residential mobility and migration of the separated Peteke Feijten and Maarten van Ham University of St Andrews. Background. Housing careers are strongly determined by household careers, as each new household situation requires and adjustment of housing and/or location (Rossi, 1955). - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Residential mobility and migration of the separated
Peteke Feijten and Maarten van Ham
University of St Andrews
Background
• Housing careers are strongly determined by household careers, as each new household situation requires and adjustment of housing and/or location (Rossi, 1955).
• In the 1950s and 1960s, life courses were fairly standard, and the housing career usually showed an upward trend.
• From the 1970s onwards, household careers and housing careers became more complex.
• One of the reasons was the increase in divorce rates.
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
20031993198319731963
Div
orc
es
pe
r 1,0
00
pe
rso
ns
Sweden
Germany
Netherlands
United Kingdom
Italy
Poland
Crude divorce rates in Europe, 1993-2003
Source: Eurostat, 2006
Divorce and the housing career
• We already know a lot about the effect of divorce on housing careers:– Separated people often move (temporarily) into shared housing
or with friends or relatives (McCarthy & Simpson, 1991);– There is an increased risk of falling out of homeownership,
especially for women (Feijten, 2005);– After separation, moves to smaller, multi-family, rented dwellings
prevail (Van Noortwijk et al., 1992).– Leaving the marital home after a divorce can cause severe grief
(Anthony, 1997)
• Little is known about how divorce affects people’s spatial careers.
Why separation may affect spatial careers
1. Separation makes moving urgent;
2. Moves after separation are subject to financial restrictions (especially for women);
3. Moves after separation are subject to spatial restrictions when strong social ties in the old place of residence remain (especially for non-custodial parents).
RESEARCH QUESTION: How does separation affect the spatial aspects of housing careers?
Hypotheses
• Frequency: separated people move considerably more often than singles and people in intact couples;
• Distance: separated people are less likely to move over long distances than singles and people in intact couples;
• Direction: separated people are expected to move more often to/stay in cities than people in intact couples.
Data and methods
• Longitudinal dataset from 3 retrospective surveys:– SSCW survey (1993)– Netherlands Family Surveys 1993 and 2000
• Data on 4,102 full life courses• Study population: the Dutch population, having left the
parental home and not living in an institution.• Data transformed into a person-year file.• Hazard analysis on discrete time data.• Separate models for frequency, distance and direction of
moves after separation.• Per aspect first a bivariate (or trivariate) analysis and
then a multivariate analysis.
Analysis part one:
Frequency of moving
Moving frequency
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
single in f irstrelationship
first yearseparated
secondyear
separated
third to f if thyear
separated
more than 5years
separated
in higherorder
relationship
w idow ed
All moves
Moves leading totliving arrangementexcluded
Relative risks of moving(from multivariate model)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Duration of living arrangement in years
Rel
ativ
e ri
sk steady single
in first relationship
separated single
new relationship
Analysis part two:
Distance of moving
Distance moved
25.2 25.3
18.4
22.1
6.87.5
8.4 8.4
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
steady single in first relationship separated single new relationship
Mean
Median
Proportion moves over long distance, by gender and child
status24.3
18.8
17.4
25.9
16.3
18.5
18.2
21.0
14.0
5.3
13.0
17.2
9.9
20.5
17.2
19.2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
no children
child(ren)
no children
child(ren)
no children
child(ren)
no children
child(ren)
no children
child(ren)
no children
child(ren)
no children
child(ren)
no children
child(ren)
Men
Wom
enM
enW
omen
Men
Wom
enM
enW
omen
stea
dy s
ingl
ein
firs
t rel
atio
nshi
pse
para
ted
sing
lene
w r
elat
ions
hip
Relative risks of moving over long distance (>40 km)
(from multivariate model)
No children Child(ren) Male Female Male Female
Steady single 0.51 0.47 1.12 1.41 In first relationship 1.12 1.18 1.00 1.01 Separated single 1.66 1.38 0.65 1.82 New relationship 1.28 2.99 2.32 1.75
Analysis part three:
Direction of moving
76.767.8
86.2
67.9
9.7
16.5
8.3
17.9
13.5 15.75.5
14.3
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
steady single in f irst relationship separated single new relationship
from city to rural area
from city to suburb
from city to city
Direction of moves – from city
29.5
13.820.0
10.5
48.5
65.3
69.2
59.6
22.0 20.810.8
29.8
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
steady single in f irst relationship separated single new relationship
from suburb to rural area
from suburb to suburb
from suburb to city
Direction of moves – from suburb
18.5
6.214.8
8.1
10.7
7.3
7.0
8.1
70.8
86.578.2
83.8
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
steady single in f irst relationship separated single new relationship
from rural area to rural area
from rural area to suburb
from rural area to city
Direction of moves – from rural area
Probability of moving within the city or out of the city (from multivariate model)
Moving within the city Moving out of the city
Coef. S.e. Exp(B) Coef. S.e. Exp(B)
Relationship situation (ref = first relationship)
steady single -0.443 0.072 *** 0.642 -0.528 0.170 *** 0.590
separated single 0.528 0.109 *** 1.696 0.434 0.281 1.543
new relationship 0.569 0.165 *** 1.767 1.355 0.346 *** 3.879
Probability of moving within the suburb/rural area or to the city (from
multivariate model)
Moving within suburban/rural area Moving to city
Coef. S.e. Exp(B) Coef. S.e. Exp(B)
Relationship situation (ref = in first relationship)
steady single -0.532 .070 *** 0.587 -0.247 0.209 0.781
separated single 0.615 0.094 *** 1.849 0.908 0.327 *** 2.480
new relationship 0.575 0.115 *** 1.778 0.529 0.465 1.697
Summary
• Separation leads to distinctive spatial behaviour. • Separated people…
– move much more often than people in other living arrangements; this effect lasts to up to five years after the separation.
– move over slightly shorter distances compared to singles and people in a first relationship; this is largely attributable to separated men with children
– tend to stay in the residential environment where they lived before separation. If they change residential environment, moves to the city prevail.
Conclusions
• Results show that past experience shapes future behaviour.
• Living arrangement in combination with relationship history is a robust determinant of spatial behaviour.
• As more people experience a separation, spatial careers will become increasingly disordered and discontinued.
• This increasing complexity and differentiation has to be taken into account when attempting to understand the functioning of housing markets.