Residential%20mobility%20and%20migration%20of%20the%20separated%20%20Peteke%20Feijten%20and%20Maarten%20van%20Ham%20University%20of%20St%20Andrews

1
Residential mobility and migration of the
separated Peteke Feijten and Maarten van
HamUniversity of St Andrews
2
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.

3
Crude divorce rates in Europe, 1993-2003
Source Eurostat, 2006
4
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
  peoples spatial careers.

5
Why separation may affect spatial careers

• Separation makes moving urgent
• Moves after separation are subject to financial
  restrictions (especially for women)
• 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?

6
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.

7
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.

8
Analysis part oneFrequency of moving
9
Moving frequency
10
Relative risks of moving(from multivariate model)
11
Analysis part twoDistance of moving
12
Distance moved
13
Proportion moves over long distance, by gender
and child status
14
Relative risks of moving over long distance (gt40
km)(from multivariate model)
15
Analysis part threeDirection of moving
16
Direction of moves from city
17
Direction of moves from suburb
18
Direction of moves from rural area
19
Probability of moving within the city or out of
the city (from multivariate model)
Moving within the city Moving within the city Moving within the city Moving within the city Moving out of the city Moving out of the city Moving out of the city Moving out of the city
  Coef. S.e.   Exp(B) Coef. S.e.   Exp(B)
Relationship situation (ref first relationship) Relationship situation (ref first relationship) 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
20
Probability of moving within the suburb/rural
area or to the city (from multivariate model)
Moving within suburban/rural area Moving within suburban/rural area Moving within suburban/rural area Moving within suburban/rural area Moving to city Moving to city Moving to city Moving to city
  Coef. S.e.   Exp(B) Coef. S.e.   Exp(B)
Relationship situation (ref in first relationship) Relationship situation (ref in first relationship) 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
21
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.

22
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.