desires, expectations and actual moving behaviour Rory Coulter, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

A longitudinal analysis of moving desires, expectations and actual moving behaviour

Rory Coulter, Maarten van Ham & Peteke Feijten

23rd ENHR Conference Toulouse, 7th July 2011

• Introduction and motivation
• Context, aims and hypotheses
• Data and methods
• Results and analysis
• Conclusions

Outline

• Mobility is a very important social process
• UK- 10.3% individuals move per year (Bailey and Livingston, 2007)
• Important for households and the economy-moves produce the

urban mosaic (Clark and Ledwith, 2006)

• Moving is both a temporal and a spatial process
• To understand this process we can‟t just study movers (Kan, 1999)
• Need to link „thoughts about moving‟ to subsequent

actual behaviour

• Desires, intentions, plans, expectations etc…

Introduction

• Focus on linking moving desires and expectations

to subsequent moving behaviour

• Conceptually distinct, but sometimes used interchangeably
• This will enable us to…
• 1. Develop our understanding of who desires or expects to move
• 2. Uncover groups neglected in the literature
• „Frustrated stayers‟ and „undesired movers‟
• Policy relevance
• potential negative effects of an inability to move when this is

desired (eg. for satisfaction, wellbeing)

Motivation

Dissatisfaction Desire to move Expect to move Actual move

• Lots of research investigates…
• 1. The pre-move stages
• 2. Actual moving behaviour
• Recent literature has begun to address this gap
• Linking desires (Buck, 2000), intentions (de Groot et al, 2011),

expectations (Kan, 1999) to actual moves

Context

• However-so far studies have only linked one

thought to subsequent behaviour

• It may be important to consider whether these

thoughts are held in distinct combinations

Fulfilled stayer Reluctant anticipator Wishful thinker Wishful anticipator

No expectation

Expectation No desire Desire

Context

Research aims

• 1. To develop our understanding of moving desires and expectations,

separately and in combinations

• 2. To investigate how different desire-expectation combinations are linked

to subsequent moving behaviour

Working hypotheses

• 1. Moving desires and expectations are distinct „pre-move thoughts‟
• 2. Desires and expectations can be held in combinations
• 3. The likelihood of realising a moving desire is dependent upon whether

an expectation is also expressed (& vice versa)

Aims and hypotheses

• Use British Household Panel Survey (BHPS)
• 1998-2006 waves
• Useful data source for two key reasons
• 1. Records desires, expectations and moves each year
• 2. Low attrition rate (relatively few people drop out each year)
• Selected 1 individual per household and tracked

them over time

• Left 63,083 observations provided by 14,506 respondents (ie.

each respondent was contacted on average 4.3 times)

Data and methods

• Moving defined as change of address t to t+1
• Large number of independent variables
• Values are lagged for analysis of moves t to t+1
• Also constructed transition variables-measuring

life events by comparing values over consecutive waves

• Eg. childbirth, union formation and dissolution, becoming

unemployed

Data and methods

Respondent‟s desire-expectation combination (wave t) No desire or expectation Desire, no expectation No desire, expectation Desire and expectation Total N Housing satisfaction (%) Satisfied 76.12 16.20 3.33 4.35 48,871 Dissatisfied 37.77 38.94 3.90 19.39 14,212 Liking the neighbourhood (%) Likes 72.04 18.27 3.68 6.00 58,673 Dislikes 6.83 61.86 0.43 30.88 4,410 Total N Total % 42,569 67.48 13,450 21.32 2,181 3.46 4,883 7.74 63,083 100.00

Descriptive results

Respondent‟s actual moving behaviour between t and t+1 Respondent‟s desire- expectation category at wave t (%) Stayer Mover Total N No desire or expectation 95.62 4.38 42,569 Desire but no expectation 92.00 8.00 13,450 No desire but expectation 51.90 48.10 2,181 Desire and expectation 45.14 54.86 4,883 Total % Total N 89.43 56,414 10.57 6,669 100.00 63,083

Descriptive results

Note that extra control variables are not shown here

• 0.5

0.5 1 1.5 2 Age Partner status t to t+1 (ref=remained couple) Remained single Formed partnership Partnership dissolution/termination

• N. children t to t+1 (ref=remained without children)

Children-same number Increased number of children Decreased number of children

• Emp. status t to t+1 (ref=remained emp.)

Remained unemployed Remained outside labour force Entered employment Entered unemployment Exited labour force Household income (£10,000) Housing tenure(ref=homeowner) Social renter Private renter Dissatisfied with dwelling Dislike neighbourhood Coefficient

Multivariate results

Note that extra control variables are not shown here

• 0.5

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 Desire-expectation (ref=no Des or Exp) Desire but no expectation Expectation but no desire Desire and expectation Age Partner status t to t+1 Remained single Formed partnership Partnership dissolution/termination

• N. children t to t+1

Children-same number Increased number of children Decreased number of children

• Emp. status t to t+1

Remained unemployed Remained outside labour force Entered employment Entered unemployment Exited labour force Household income (£10,000) Housing tenure Social renter Private renter Dissatisfied with dwelling Dislike neighbourhood Coefficient

Multivariate results

• 1. Desires and expectations are distinct thoughts about moving
• Desires more closely linked to dissatisfaction, while life

events have a stronger link to expectations

• 2. Desires and expectations seem to be held in combinations
• Considerable heterogeneity amongst those who desire to

move

• 3. Combinations are associated with moving propensity
• Desires are only likely to be realised if accompanied by

an expectation

Conclusions

1.Conceptually valuable

• Analysing combinations may help us to understand how

moving is a response to both dissatisfaction and life events (such as childbirth, partnership changes etc)

2.Empirical relevance

• Combinations reveal within group heterogeneity
• May enable us to model moving more precisely

3.Importance for policy

• Moving desires are often unfulfilled

Contributions

Bailey N, Livingston M, 2007 Population turnover and area deprivation (Policy Press, Bristol) Buck N, 2000, “Using panel surveys to study migration and residential mobility”, in Researching Social and Economic Change: The Uses of Household Panel Studies Ed. D Rose (Routledge, London) pp 250-272 Clark W A V, Ledwith V, 2006, “Mobility, housing stress, and neighborhood contexts: evidence from Los Angeles” Environment and Planning A 38 1077-1093 De Groot C, Mulder C H, Das M, Manting D, 2011, “Life events and the gap between intention to move and actual mobility” Environment and Planning A 43 48-66 Kan K, 1999, “Expected and unexpected residential mobility” Journal of Urban Economics 45 72-96

References