housing, home and neighbourhoods in the era of super-diversity · 1 housing, home and...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Housing, home and neighbourhoods in the era of super-diversity (draft June 2010)
Dr Jenny Phillimore
Institute of Applied Social Studies
University of Birmingham
[email protected] 0121 414 7822
Abstract
Commentators have argued that we have entered a new era of migration described by
Vertovec (2008: 1025) as a “transformative diversification of diversity”. Differences in
ethnicity, immigration status, rights and entitlements, age and gender profiles and patterns of
distribution, means that some parts of the UK, and many other EU countries, are now home
to the most diverse population ever experienced as we enter an era of super-diversity. Much
new migration has occurred into super-diverse escalator areas already challenged with high
levels of deprivation. Housing Market Renewal Areas have a particular challenge to address
housing market failure and the transience often associated with new migration while meeting
the housing and community needs of new and established communities. Lack of knowledge
about how residents in super-diverse areas respond to rapid changes, the nature of housing
and neighbourhood need and how regeneration organisations can work to meet those needs
risk hampering regeneration efforts. This paper uses qualitative data collected in
Birmingham exploring the diverse housing and neighbourhood needs of new and existing
residents. The paper argues that housing and regeneration services operating in super-diverse
areas must be reshaped to take into account the wide range of housing needs of all residents,
and look to meeting their wider aspirations for home, if super-diverse neighbourhoods are to
be stabilised.
Introduction
Over the past 15 years the nature of immigration to the UK has changed and brought with it
what Vertovec (2008:1025) describes as “a transformative diversification of diversity” as
Britain alongside other EU countries enters an era of super-diversity. Vertovec (2008)
argues it is not enough to see diversity in terms of ethnicity. We now encounter a wide range
of other variables including immigration status, different associated rights and entitlements,
divergent labour market experiences, gender and age profiles, and patterns of spatial
distribution. Increased numbers of asylum seekers fleeing from global conflict, the long
period of high economic performance and associated need for migrant workers that pre-dated
the global economic downturn, and EU accession are the main forces behind new migration.
Robinson & Reeve (2006) argue that new migrants are arriving into a very different social,
cultural and economic context to their predecessors. There are distinct changes in local
settlement patterns of new migrants, reflecting their motivations as well as the context into
which they arrive. Previous immigrants were forced into unpopular inner city areas by
poverty and hostility. Subsequent waves of immigrants gravitated to existing clusters for
2
“support, security and access to material necessities, including housing” (Robinson & Reeve
(2006: 7). Whilst many new migrants do move to existing areas of diversity, others are
“spatial pioneers” moving to places with little history or experience of immigration.
The pace and scale of change can be evidenced by looking at some of the national
immigration data. Foreign nationals made up 3.5% workforce in 1996, and 6% in 2006
(Audit Commission 2007). The 2004 enlargement of the European Union greatly increased
the scale and pace of migration. Nationally 662,000 National Insurance Numbers (NINOs)
were issued to foreign nationals in 2004/5, almost twice as many as the previous year (ONS
2005; Home Office 2007). Economic migration was welcomed by the then New Labour
Government, Confederation of British Industry, Trade Union Congress (TUC) and local
employers. In particular economic migration was associated with economic prosperity. Even
at the early stages of Accession country migration in 2004, Accession country migration was
said to have contributed an extra £240 million to the economy in the first eight months of the
operation of the Worker Registration Scheme (Homeless Link 2007). Towards the end of the
2000s assumptions that economic migrants could only enhance prosperity began to be
questioned (House of Lords Select Committee on Economic Affairs 2008; CIC 2008).
National enquiries into the impact of migration on prosperity, community relations and local
resources, found migration could have a diverse impact at local level and that while the
impact of migration might benefit the economy in general terms, some areas and
neighbourhoods bore a disproportionate burden of the social and economic costs associated
with migrant settlement. Sudden or rapid population change could place stress upon local
services or communities (IDeA 2007; ICOCO 2007) and was experienced by 63 authorities
that had greater than average change in 2002/3 and 2005/6. In some areas change was as
high as an 8-9% rise in the number of migrants moving into the area, way above the 3%
average. Many commentators see competition over resources, as migrants move to a new
area, as the central issue in the controversy around new migration (Amas 2008; Zetter et al.
2002; Robinson 2007) with Robinson arguing that the Government saw housing, over and
above all other areas of social policy, as both cause and potential cure of neighbourhood
tensions in super-diverse areas. This paper uses qualitative data to explore the diverse
housing and neighbourhood needs of new and existing residents in a rapidly changing super-
diverse area in a bid to identify common and diverging issues that can inform how the needs
of all residents could be met.
Housing and new migration
The importance of secure housing is recognised in much of the academic literature around
integration (see Fyvie et al. 2003 & Castles et al. 2002; Phillimore & Goodson 2008) as well
as the UK‟s integration strategy (Home Office 2005). Robinson & Reeve (2006) explain the
importance of housing to the settlement of new arrivals
3
Housing experiences are significant because housing is a critical determinant of
health, well-being, quality of life and settlement experience. In most cultures, and for
most people, housing provides the realm within which the ontological security and
safety of home is nurtured and, as such, can represent a sanctuary from hostility and
exclusion that many new immigrants encounter in wider society (25-26).
However regardless of how they arrived in the UK, and for most immigration statuses, the
majority of newly arrived migrants are said to live in poor quality private housing (Robinson
et al. 2007). A wide range of problems have been identified in the literature around
migration and housing. From the perspective of migrants these include over-crowded
accommodation (Gryszel-Fieldsned 2007), unsanitary conditions, the practice of hot-bedding,
lack of privacy, cooking or washing facilities (Anon 2007; Caller 2006), lack of tenancy
agreements (hact 2007), the growth of unlicensed houses in multiple occupation (HMOs)
(McKay & Winkelmann-Gleed 2005), fire hazards and disregard of safety precautions
(Koscielak 2007; McLaughlin 2005), poor conditions and associated ill-health (Zaronalte &
Tirzite 2007; Phillips 2006). Research also suggests landlords charge higher than average
market rents and rapidly evict those unable to pay, leading to high levels of homelessness in
some areas (Bell et al. 2004; Commission for Rural Communities 2007). Lack of knowledge
about housing rights and entitlements, coupled with inability to speak English sufficiently
well, meant that many migrants did not act to resolve housing related problems (Collins
2007; Green et al. 2007a &b). At neighbourhood level there are reports of racially motivated
attacks that range from extreme acts of violence to verbal abuse (Staniewicz 2007).
The problems experienced by residents and service providers in areas that have received large
numbers of new migrants have also been documented and highlighted in national newspapers
and by the anti-immigration group Migration Watch (Migration Watch UK 2006). The
arrival of new migrants was said to have put considerable pressure on the housing market in
some areas. In urban areas pressure was placed upon the bottom end of the market removing
entry-level accommodation and excluding vulnerable renters (Cook 2008). In some areas
there was a shortage of accommodation, which had enabled landlords to charge higher rents
and to demand larger deposits (McKay & Winkelmann-Gleed 2005). Over-crowding
exacerbated the decline of already badly maintained housing stock, reduced the availability of
street parking and was alleged to exacerbate poor environment where migrants did not follow
rubbish disposal protocol (Phillimore et al. 2008a & b). At neighbourhood level competition
for already overstretched services was enhanced particularly where large numbers of
migrants moved into deprived areas in a bid to access affordable accommodation (House of
Lords 2008). Hostilities emerged when residents perceived that immigrants are prioritised
through the development of specialist services or where existing services were already
overstretched (Spencer et al. 2006). The arrival of large numbers of migrants can reinforce a
cycle of social exclusion, restrict people from active involvement in society, promote
community tensions by making people visible and lead people to feel disenfranchised (IDeA
2007). Established residents were more likely to feel hostility when they felt the identity of
their area was changing and they no longer felt connected to local people (IDeA 2007).
4
In urban areas with a tradition of diversity there is evidence that certain neighbourhoods or
even boroughs are taking on the function of escalators for new arrivals (Travers et al. 2007).
These areas accommodate new arrivals when they first reach the UK, and invest heavily in
them before they move on and are replaced with other new arrivals who also require
significant investment. Travers et al.s‟ (2007) study of the costs of new migration in London
Boroughs demonstrated that mobility “above trend” was associated with costs
disproportionate to the level of mobility. Additional costs included translation, rapid turnover,
increased demand for housing, higher administrative costs associated with temporary
households, increased provision of HMOs and associated regulatory costs and social services,
increases in council tax registration costs, increases in homelessness and associated
administrative costs. However Robinson et al (2007) found that outside of London new
migrants filled voids in housing stock, resulting in concentrations of new arrivals in particular
areas, and stabilising the housing market in low-demand areas. It is also suggested that the
arrival of new migrants could improve local housing conditions and increase community
safety (Robinson et al 2007).
New migration, neighbourhoods and regeneration
Certainly new migrants have either been dispersed, or have elected to move to, many of the
most deprived urban areas in Britain (Phillimore & Goodson 2006). Such areas have
frequently been the focus of regeneration initiatives aimed at improving the quality of the
housing stock and general environment, providing employment opportunities, and enhancing
community relations. In 2003 the Housing Market Renewal Area Pathfinders (HMRAs) were
introduced and focused on rebuilding housing markets and communities in low demand areas
where there has been a significant decline in population, dereliction, poor services and poor
social conditions (CLG 2010). The introduction of nine pathfinder areas preceded the
movement of significant numbers of new migrants into many of those areas. Cook (2008)
argues there are two new migrant housing markets: one catering for permanent and settled
migrants such as economic migrants who have decided to stay, and another catering for the
transient and the temporary. Many of the pathfinder areas changed from areas of low
demand to areas with high levels of transience, as HMRAs functioned as arrival zones where
new migrants arrived, found their feet and then moved on (Mruk 2005; MEL 2007). Thus
the challenge to stabilise housing markets in these areas was somewhat complicated by the
arrival of new migrants.
HMRAs were charged with the task of working at neighbourhood level to make housing
markets more secure through improving desirability of areas yet little was known about how
they could meet the needs of new residents, and encourage them to settle, while ensuring that
they were able to meet the needs of long-established residents who continued to represent a
significant proportion of the population in HMRAs. Super-diversity exacerbated the
problems faced by HMRAs and other providers as
5
The extent of the diversity among migrant groups (in terms of race, language,
immigration status, reasons for being in the UK) is now unprecedented, making the
challenge of addressing housing needs much greater (Cook 2008:2)
Understanding housing need is by itself not enough to aid organisations charged with the
regeneration of super-diverse areas to stabilise those areas. Understanding the concept of
home is important because it provides the mechanisms for policymakers to develop culturally
sensitive housing products and services (Perry & Blackaby 2007). There has been much
consideration of what constitutes home. The term is often closely tied to security, status,
stability, identity, culture and the centre for relationships (Gurney 1990; Rapoport, 1995;
Rapport and Dawson, 1998). Established residents may find neighbourhood change
threatening because changes raise questions about belonging. Scholars of migration have
challenged some of the western conceptualisations of „home‟ as a being unchanging. Instead
they argue that migrant communities occupy a transnational social space (Basch et al, 1994;
Portes 2000), within which the notion of „home‟ is constantly evolving (Lewin, 2001).
Attitudes to housing can be better understood if we appreciate the critical role of home at the
centre of a hierarchy from home, neighbourhood, city, region to country. Certainly for new
migrants the lack of permanent, secure or reasonable quality housing (Robinson & Reeve
2005) means that home does not always represent security and may reinforce identity as
outsider. Living in poor or declining neighbourhoods, or housing conditions, can impact on
residents‟ identity and sense of belonging and commitment to an area, prompting frequent
movement and the transience viewed as problematic in escalator areas.
There is a tradition of research into the housing choices and residential mobility of ethnic
minority households (Rex and Moore, 1967; Peach, 1996; Bowes et al, 2002; Tomlins et al,
2001). However, this is still an area that is not very well understood (Harrison et al. 2005)
and has barely been explored in relation to new migration. This paper aims to develop
understanding of the various different factors that influence decisions to remain or depart and
to shed light on the aspects of home that influence the decision making processes of
established, and new residents, living in super-diverse escalator areas.
Methods
The research was undertaken within the Urban Living Housing Market Renewal Area
Pathfinder (UL). The Pathfinder covers areas within two local authorities in the West
Midlands region: Birmingham City Council and Sandwell MBC. The area is located in the
deprived inner-city and contains 60,000 dwellings mainly consisting of Victorian terraced
housing and local authority housing mixed with long-established, often derelict industrial
areas. More than 65% of the 150,000 population of the UL area from black and minority
backgrounds (ONS 2001 Census). The poor quality of migration data in the UK means we
are unable to estimate the size of the new migrant population although we do know that
approximately 6% are recent asylum seekers. Previous research indicated that the majority of
asylum seekers remain in the area when they gain their refugee status. It is likely therefore
that there is a growing refugee population constituting several thousand refugees (Phillimore
6
2004). Recent research also indicated that several thousand Accession country migrants had
also moved to the area (Phillimore et al. 2008). Much of the housing in the area is said to fail
to meet the needs of the local population. The high levels of multiple deprivation in the area
have persisted for decades. Problems include high levels of crime, and unemployment and
poor quality environments and health outcomes. For many years the area has acted as an
arrival zone for newcomers to Birmingham. Recently this trend has increased. The
population is very ethnically diverse and can be transient. The housing market boom that
preceded the recession saw rising house prices, and an increase in demand which coupled
with low incomes has resulted in substantial overcrowding in some parts of the HMRA.
Urban Living (2010) sets out its objectives as creating “a vibrant and sustainable housing
market characterised by a thriving economy, cohesive communities and an appropriate range
of high quality neighbourhoods”. Urban Living has received £117 million of Government
funding and levered a further £350 million private funds to meet those objectives. The
research reported herein was undertaken in a bid to identify diverging and converging
perspectives on housing and home that could inform the HMRA‟s approach to regeneration
and community development.
The research was undertaken in two phases in 2009. In the initial phase we undertook some
analysis of primary data in order to develop a sampling frame for interviews with established
residents and new migrants. We defined established or settled residents as those who had
resided in the Urban Living area since at least 2001. We used estimates of the Urban Living
population based upon the 2001 census (Turvey 2006) to identify the ethnicity of established
residents (see Table 1). At this time the largest ethnic group was white (37%) followed by
Indian (19%), Black (15%) and Pakistani (14%).
Table 1: Ethnicity of Urban Living residents at 2001
Ethnicity Population % of total population
All 151,762
White 56646 37
Indian 28350 19
Black 23370 15
Pakistani 21800 14
Bangladeshi and Asian Others 13037 9
Mixed 5940 4
Chinese and non-Asian others 2619 2
To identify new arrivals we tried to find respondents who have not yet made a commitment to
the area and were using it as an arrival zone. We elected to look at residents who arrived
during or after 2007 and were living either in private rented accommodation or are staying
with friends or family. We opted to interview people from as many nationality/immigration
status groups as possible so that we focus on newness rather than ethnicity, nationality or any
7
particular part of the Urban Living area. Focussing on ethnicity or area would be difficult
given the sample size, and is something we might explore in a broader study. The analysis of
GP Registration data showed that between 2007 and 2009 some 12200 people had registered
in the area from overseas. These individuals had arrived from 170 different countries. Table
2 demonstrates the nationalities of the largest groups arriving in the area.
Table 2: Main nationality groups for new migrants 2007-2009
Sampling frame for new migrants 2007-2009 Count
India 1719
Pakistan 1515
Polish 1425
Somalia (Netherland, Scandinavia, N Europe)i 1342
Other African 1169
Bangladesh 1004
Other Europe/A8/A10 843
Jamaica 629
Asian 512
Slovakia 401
Iraqi 385
Other Middle-east 313
Nigeria 293
Afghanistan 275
Other 196
Other African-Caribbean 179
Total 12200
In depth qualitative interviews were then undertaken with 24 residents, 12 each from
established and new communities, living in the Urban Living area. Interviews were
undertaken by community researchers in mother tongue languages where appropriate.
Interviewees were selected from a sampling frame devised in Phase 1 based upon gender and
ethnicity to ensure a wide range of views was collected. They were identified through
researchers‟ personal networks, through community and other local organisations, and from
word of mouth and personal approaches made in the Urban Living area. Interviews explored
a number of key themes including housing aspirations and needs, understanding of, and
relationships with, regeneration processes, the relationship between home, housing, and
neighbourhood, and the ways in which housing providers can work with residents from a
range of backgrounds. Details of interviewees‟ self-reported nationality and gender are set
out in Table 3. We used a systematic thematic approach to analyse the qualitative data.
8
Table 3: Ethnicity and gender of interviewees
Established residents New residents
Male White British Grenadian Indian Somali Pakistani Bangladeshi Jamaican
Male Nigerian Bangladeshi Bulgarian Ghanaian Jamaican Afghani
Female Irish White British Indian African Pakistani
Female Iraqi Indian Pakistani Guinean Somali Polish
Findings
Home and neighbourhood
There were many similarities in the ways that existing and new residents discussed home. In
particular both groups described home as a place where they felt safe and secure, could
express themselves freely, be in control and feel at ease psychologically (see Table 4).
Established residents were more likely to mention the proximity of family, either as co-
residents or visitors that could be hosted within a home. They saw their home as the centre of
family life. Some new arrivals mentioned family although they did so less than established
residents and in a different way, possibly because many of them first come to the UK alone,
and aspired to bring their family to the UK. Indeed new arrivals placed more emphasis on
home as a place where they felt they were safe, both from the new and unfamiliar world
outside, but also from harm in unsafe neighbourhoods or from persecution, if they had
experienced racist harassment in the UK, or even persecution in their country of origin. Only
new residents discussed the importance of financial self-sufficiency. It was clear that some
new migrants felt insecure because they worried about having insufficient funds to pay their
rent. This was partly because they knew that they could easily be evicted from their privately
rented accommodation but also because they saw home as being something that they alone
took responsibility for. Until they could be financially secure they felt psychologically
insecure
I am looking for a job and it is hard to earn a living. If you are not working it is hard
to make a home a home (Polish woman).
9
Many of the new residents talked about the importance of belonging to the neighbourhood
and feeling free to be themselves, being accepted for who they are by local people
Home is where I feel a sense of belonging where I can be myself and express myself
with total freedom (Pakistani woman).
Three new resident respondents were keen to stress that they could only visualise home in
relation to their country of origin. Feeling at home anywhere in the UK would be difficult for
them
Sometimes I am not yet to feel at home and I don’t think I will every feel at home. But
hopefully with my friends help I will (Indian woman).
Table 4: Respondents’ understandings of home
Established residents New residents
Independence A place I call my home
Where everything is as you left it Where I put my private belongings and sleep
Where you live with your family A place I draw satisfaction from
Where you can relax at the end of the day Where I can live peacefully with my family
Somewhere you can make as nice as you want A roof and shelter where I belong and pay my rent
You can do what you want Where you can develop it and make it look like a home with bedding, cooking utensils
Where I start the day from Where I belong
Where family can meet and come together Where I am free to do what I want
Where you feel safe I take responsibility for it
It means everything Where I bring up my kids
With my family Where you feel comfortable
Where everything is mine and I do not have to ask permission before I use anything
Where you can stay with your family
With people you can trust Where you were born
Where you feel safe and secure I don’t think I will ever feel at home
You feel in control No place like home, my country
Where the people who love you come together Where you spend most of your time and enjoy a good life
Where you have family and a roof over your head
Where you have a good clean kitchen
Where you feel safe
Where you can express your authority
Where I can express myself with total freedom
10
At this early stage in their lives in the UK, many new residents did not yet feel fully at home.
Five individuals said they did not feel at home at all while three others did not yet feel
completely at home.
I am still looking for a perfect place to live but for the moment I cannot afford it with
private landlords so I would say I do not feel at home yet (African woman).
The reasons for feeling at home related closely to the ways in which individuals understood
home. Many recognised that feeling at home was something which took time “it’s still early
days”. Newness and ability to understand people and be understood was an important feature
in whether or not people felt at home because they related to whether or not they felt they
belonged in the area. To some extent people could be helped to feel at home where there
were part of a community and could speak the language better so that they could
communicate with others living nearby. Also lack of ability to do what they wanted, when
they wanted and to have the safe space that they needed, left others feeling that they were not
at home “I don’t feel at home because my privacy and respect is not being taken into
consideration” (Afghan man). Conversely new residents said they felt at home where they
had friends who were helping them to settle in, able to support their family and pay the bills,
pay their taxes and be in control “I am able to make my decisions and manage my chores
without intimidation or coerced by anybody. My home is where I have my own rights, I feel
at home because I make my decisions freely and it is my right”. (Somali woman). While
another respondent felt at home because “I have my freedom, my privacy, my refuge”,
(Pakistani woman).
When we looked at the ways in which new residents could be helped to feel more at home
respondents focused upon economic, functional and social factors. For three respondents (all
male) getting a job was of primary importance. Associated with this were attending college
and improving language skills so that they could increase their employability and gain access
to an income that could guarantee paying the rent. Women respondents were more likely to
mention the importance of good neighbours and friends. Others mentioned the need for
furniture, heating, and household facilities.
All established residents said they felt at home. While new residents did not feel at home
because their housing was insecure or unsuitable, established residents referred to the secure
nature of their accommodation and their ability to choose what they could do to their home,
as important. Indeed two respondents felt that owning their own home was all important in
making them feel at home “its mine. I own it. If it wasn’t mine it won’t feel like
home”(Indian male). Their feelings of being at home often related to the presence of family
both within the home “I have my family around” (White British man), and also living in the
area. Respondents also mentioned how they felt safe and secure “because you know the
people and you can trust them” (White British man) and living without fear of crime within
their homes. The importance of having friendly neighbours and of knowing local people
“There are no strangers, only people who I know” (Pakistani man) was an important
dimension of feeling at home for established residents, which as we shall see later, meant that
11
some were prepared to remain in an area despite seeing a deterioration in environment and
community safety.
Some aspects of neighbourhood influenced both new and established residents feeling about
belonging, and wishing to remain, in the area. Both groups of respondents raised the
importance of a neighbourhood being safe, low crime, clean, well lit and having good
amenities (see Table 5). For established residents the availability of parking, good schools
and facilities for young people were important aspects of neighbourhood that affected the
way that they felt about the area. Established residents also talked about the importance of
living as a part of a community where people knew each other “where friends come together.
We talk to each other and try to get on”(Indian woman) “in a neighbourhood you should
know everybody”(Indian man). While new residents also talked about the importance of
community they stressed the importance of living in a neighbourhood where people tried to
communicate and make them feel at home. They were keen to stress the importance of being
treated as equals and not being discriminated against because they were newcomers when you
are not discriminated against or told to go back to your country. I feel at home when people
in the neighbourhood recognise and greet you” (Polish woman).
Table 5: Important aspects of neighbourhood
Established residents New residents
Safe place Safe place
Little crime No violent crime
No rubbish Clean
Good street lighting Good street lighting
Where people know me and I know them Social interaction
Sense of community Understanding each other
Where people communicate Social facilities
Good amenities Good amenities
Live without fear Employment
Less strangers Feeling equal
People from own community People from your own community
Community meeting place Cultural places
Somewhere with parking Church
Good schools No discrimination
Facilities for young people Good neighbours
Mosque Mosque
All but two established residents believed that neighbours were very important to them.
Neighbours were important to make them feel at home through social interaction “we say
hello to each other on the streets. We talk about things going on back home in Somalia and
our home countries....We send each other Eid cards.....when you go to a Pakistani friend’s
house or a Ghanaian friend’s house you all feel equal” (Somali man). Neighbours were also
important to help each other out and to help protect each other‟s property “you look out for
each other” (Indian woman). Respondents gave many examples of the ways in which they
12
and their neighbours helped each other. These included an elderly respondent being taken to
the doctors, putting out each other‟s rubbish, borrowing cars, helping to start cars, picking up
children from school, mowing each other‟s lawns and much more. Some argued that it was
willingness to offer and accept mutual help from neighbours that made a neighbourhood feel
like home.
New residents also felt neighbours were important but they discussed neighbourliness in a
more abstract way than existing residents. They focussed upon the importance of neighbours
in welcoming them and making them feel at home. The importance of neighbourly relations
was referred to in particular by respondents who were used to living in more communal
cultures and saw neighbours as being part of the family.
Building better relationships with neighbours is very important in helping me feel at
home (Afghani man)
Good relationships with neighbours and people around you are very important as one
cannot suffice on our own. I come from a background of people living as a
community (Pakistani woman)
Thus the social aspect of neighbourliness came through as being of greatest importance to
new residents, although five respondents had not yet spoken to their neighbours. Only three
new residents mentioned the importance of mutual support. It was clear that fewer
individuals had received help from neighbours than the established residents. In addition the
type of help they received was different, more about offering advice and signposting to local
services. New respondents were keen to stress that only through working with neighbours
could they improve the neighbourhood for everybody.
In recent times there has been a great deal of discussion about the importance of ethnic
clustering to new arrivals (see for example Flint and Robinson 2009; Finney and Simpson
2009). The importance of being part of an ethnic community and of living in close proximity
to others from a similar background varied for established and new residents. Most
established respondents thought that ethnic community was not particularly important.
Indeed some established residents thought that diversity was more important than similarity
“everybody is different, difference somehow brings something new to the area, otherwise it
would be a very dull place” (Indian woman). The remaining established residents felt that it
was important to have some people like them in the neighbourhood. Similarity could relate
to ethnicity for example an Indian man wanted more Asians to live in the area “it would help
when I’m feeling lonely. I could go to their homes and not feel isolated”. Alternatively
similarity could refer to religion or being working class.
New residents were more likely than the established community to feel that living in an area
with people of similar ethnicity was important. Some argued they would feel safer in such an
area “because you can communicate and share with each other and don’t fear that anyone
will discriminate against you” (Afghani man). Respondents also thought they might be able
to settle more easily if they had someone from their own community to help them “it helps
13
the integration process because you have someone there to guide and advise you” (Guinean
woman). A smaller number of new residents argued that it was not necessary to live in an
area with shared ethnicity or language because although they were from different
backgrounds they were all newcomers “there are many people from outside the UK, just like
me” (Nigerian man). They felt there was scope for newcomers to help each other and to
learn how to live in the area together. The main reason that people wanted to live with those
who were similar were the ability to communicate in a familiar language, to share common
problems, to make them feel like they belonged and to share knowledge and experience about
the UK and about adjusting to a new culture.
Physical aspects of neighbourhood
Although residents focussed largely on the social and psychological aspects of home we have
also noted that the physical aspects of housing and neighbourhoods were discussed. It is
important to understand the more material housing and wider neighbourhood needs in
addition to the softer aspects if we are to understand the ways in which renewal areas can be
shaped to meet the settlement needs of residents. The differences in housing needs between
new and established residents were more striking than their social/psychological needs (see
Table 6). These differences are likely to relate to two key factors: that established residents
had been around long enough to gradually acquire what they needed, and that they had often
exercised more choice, about housing or area, than new residents who had perhaps originally
been dispersed to the area as asylum seekers or had moved there because it was the only
housing on offer. Established residents were more likely to outline relatively minor or
specific needs such the desire for more off road parking or to improve the decor of their
homes. Five respondents discussed in some detail how they had modified their houses to
ensure that all their needs were met “well all of our needs have been met. We recently
extended the place to make it bigger. We extended at the back, we have a new kitchen area,
and extended sideways and up” (Indian woman). Most residents said their homes met all
their current space needs. By contrast five new residents needed larger properties
immediately because they lived in overcrowded conditions, another wanted self-contained
accommodation and two more wanted housing that they could better afford. Cost was not
mentioned by established residents, most of whom owned their own housing.
Table 6: Housing needs
Established residents New residents
Space to accommodate further children Bigger property x 5
Sufficient on road parking Need a lift so can access with pushchair
None x 5 as house modified to meet all needs None x 3
Room sizes More affordable x 2
Segregated reception space Self-contained accommodation
Garage x 2 Council property
Too big following bereavement Better, safer area
More space so can separate from in-laws
Decorating
14
Respondents also saw the facilities and amenities available in their neighbourhood as an
important aspect of the attractiveness of the area. Most respondents, whether new or
established, felt that the area offered a wide range of facilities that were important to them
(Table 7). Public transport was viewed by all respondents as the most important amenity
because it permitted low cost access to employment and other resources. While both groups
of respondents felt shops and schools were important, established residents were more likely
to voice specific needs i.e. “good” schools, “halal” or “walking distance” shops. Established
residents were also more likely to consider GPs and hospitals as important, than new
residents, who focused more upon employment opportunities, college and cultural facilities.
This is likely to result from new residents need to settle in, gain work or skills and build
social capital.
Table 7: Amenity needs
Established residents New residents
Affordable housing Church
College x 2 College x 5
Community centres x 2 Cultural facilities x 5
Employment x 3 Employment x 8
Good schools x 8 Schools x 6
GP x 6 GP x 2
Halal shops x 3 People from same background x 2
Shops within walking distance x 6 Shops x 7
Mosque Mosque
Transport x 8 Transport x 9
Hospital x 2 Leisure facilities x 3
Supermarket x 4
Parking
Plans for the future
Most established residents had noted some changes in their neighbourhoods in the time that
they had been living there. Changes were sometimes viewed as an improvement: with
reduced levels of crime, better street conditions and more facilities or as a decline with pretty
much the converse conditions. A small number of existing residents noted the change in
community composition as regeneration and clearance changed the nature of communities
and as large numbers of new migrants moved to the area. Five established residents were
planning to stay in the area, three definitely wanted to leave and four were undecided. Those
who wished to remain were committed to the area, even if they felt there was a decline in
safety or environment, because they had family nearby “my in-laws are here and extended
family is around, so it’s where we stay” (Pakistani woman) and they felt the area was very
conveniently located. Two of these respondents said they may still move in the longer term,
to an area with less crime and a better physical environment. Those wishing to move wanted
15
to be closer to people they knew and did not feel connected to neighbours with the arrival of
new communities or the demolition of housing. Those moving out would look to “safer”
more suburban areas of Birmingham, which had good schools for their children. They
would consider remaining if actions could be taken to improve crime rates and provide more
jobs.
By definition new residents had been around for less time than those who were established.
Nonetheless four respondents did feel that they were permanently settled in the area “I like
my house, the area, the people. I am leading an almost independent life” (Pakistani woman).
Two new residents argued that they needed to live in the area for some time before deciding
whether to stay and were not yet sure where they would live in the longer term. A whole
range of factors would determine where those who wished to move would eventually settle.
Key factors included the availability of work, an ethnic community “a place with a relatively
high Afghan population” (Afghani male), and bigger properties. Unlike established
residents, new residents were less clear about which areas they would like to move to. Key
features were accommodation suitable for families as several respondents hoped to either be
reunited with families or to get married and have children, and proximity to people “like
me””I need the company of my people”(Bulgarian man), with shared language and customs.
They also wanted to live in areas that were clean, quiet and safe. New residents could be
encouraged to remain in their neighbourhood if they were joined by more people from their
own country, could find a job or were offered council accommodation.
Some residents were aware that there was substantial regeneration and renewal work being
undertaken in their area. Established residents had seen some evidence of work locally,
largely in the form of new houses being built “all I see is new houses being built, it seems
whenever they find a piece of land they just build houses on it” (Bangladeshi man). Very few
residents, knew what changes would be occurring in their areas or how to influence the place
making process. While two established residents had some involvement in past initiatives
and some knowledge about how the process worked, no new residents had been involved.
Both new and established residents wanted more knowledge about the process and how they
might get involved. Two established residents suggested a starting point of explaining what
it involved “What is regeneration. No one has ever explained this to me” (Indian man). The
main focus was upon wanting regeneration professionals to communicate with residents to
explain what was possible and exploring the types of initiatives needed. New residents were
less clear about how they might get involved but also asked for more information and
communication.
Established residents were keen to see more affordable housing and social housing built in
the most popular areas. They also wanted housing providers to be more innovative and to
work with private landlords to contract in housing to reduce shortages and keep waiting lists
down. Two established residents were keen to push for housing providers to address
economic and social problems by using local labour in building projects and through
addressing anti-social behaviour in their properties and in private rented housing. New
residents were keen for housing providers to “organise an event and invite local people to
16
discuss their housing needs and to identify people who desperately need support” (Polish
woman). New residents talked of the importance of housing providers working with a wide
range of organisations so that the responsibility for meeting housing needs and addressing
homelessness in new communities was shared more widely.
Residents were keen for actions to be undertaken that would improve the area to the extent
that they would like to remain their permanently. New and established residents wanted to
see levels of crime reduced and the general urban environment improved through better street
cleaning. Established residents tended to outline specific needs around schools, leisure
facilities, banks and community and advice centres. Two also raised the arrival of new
migrants as an area that needed attention; suggesting that numbers needed to be reduced and
new migrants educated about acceptable behaviour. New migrants focussed on support that
would help them become more economically secure such as the provision of more jobs or
training.
Discussion
Despite the diversity in respondents‟ ethnicity and length of time resident in the area, there
was much convergence of understandings around housing, neighbourhoods, home and
regeneration. The fundamentals of housing need and home were the same for new and
established residents: housing of sufficient size, access to schools, medical services and
transport, seeking somewhere safe, secure and private. The findings reflect the importance of
regeneration efforts to develop the conditions necessary to underpin the ontological security
needed for old and new residents to feel at home. While the right physical provisions are
necessary to encourage residents to remain in their neighbourhood, it is clear that other
aspects of home are equally important. Without these even long established residents, who
have shaped their housing to meet their needs, may move away.
The concept of home is multi-dimensional and many of the aspects of home around security,
status, identity, belonging and relationships emerge in this study as being of critical
importance. The majority of old and new residents seek to move not because their housing
needs aren‟t met but because they do not feel safe, connected or secure. Possibly the most
important aspect of neighbourhoods is the ability to build relationships with local people and
eventually to be able to trust and rely on those people to help out in times of trouble as well
as to share good times. As IDeA (2007) suggest changing neighbourhoods could feel
threatening to established residents when changes were sufficiently extensive to lead existing
residents to question whether they still belonged in an area. Where new residents were
unable to construct relationships with neighbours either through lack of opportunity or
ability, or reluctance on the part of existing residents, they were likely to move away, thus
perpetuating the transience and rapid change that some residents and policymakers view as
problematic.
17
Some commentators suggest the arrival of newcomers can lead to established residents
deciding to leave an area (Phillips 2005). The change in neighbourhood composition played a
role in the expressed desire of a minority of established respondents to leave, although many
more felt tied to their neighbourhood by social relationships with friends and family.
However in general the rationale for both established and new residents wanting to move
away from the neighbourhood were safety, quality of facilities, suitable housing and access to
employment. New residents were far more likely to wish to leave than established residents.
The lack of social relationships in their neighbourhood appeared to be an important push and
pull factor. Feeling like they did not belong or were unwanted could make them look
elsewhere, as would the desire to live closer to their own ethnic or language group.
Many new residents were undecided about their future and certainly had little knowledge
about alternative neighbourhoods, while a number of existing residents were also undecided.
Clearly there is still potential for intervention that could help to stabilise the area. At this
early stage in the housing careers of new arrivals it is possible they could be encouraged to
remain if some of the fundamentals that could make them feel at home were in evidence. In
particular the provision of some degree of economic security and improved social
connections could encourage more permanent settlement. The evidence presented herein
suggests that changes in these areas would also meet some of the needs of established
residents, especially if they were coupled with regeneration activity that focused on the
quality and safety of the local environment, rather than housing provision.
At the present time most residents viewed regeneration activity as something that happened
to them rather than with them or for them. Old and new residents were keen to improve their
understanding of, and get more involved in, the regeneration process. Indeed the desire to
come together in an organised way, both as a community and with housing providers, and
regeneration organisations, emerged as key themes that have relevance to those working to
improve environments and cohesion in super-diverse areas. Regeneration organisations
could consider running events at neighbourhood level enabling new and old residents to meet
and to get involved in discussions around regeneration. This may help to build social
connections between old and new residents that could act as a first step to encouraging
residents to stay in the neighbourhood and the beginning of a process that would see residents
working with regeneration organisations to develop neighbourhood based strategies to
provide the conditions to make both new and established residents feel at home.
Conclusion
The research discussed in this paper has shown that there are important similarities and
differences in the housing needs and understandings of home held by new and established
residents in super-diverse escalator areas. Clearly the paper has focused on one super-diverse
area. While there are likely to be similarities in other urban areas with an equally diverse
population, other variables such as the nature of housing stock, extent of deprivation, local
demographics and economy are likely to be important. The experience of rural areas, and
urban areas with a less diverse population is likely to be very different. Much research
18
around ethnicity and housing need focuses on the needs and experiences of single ethnic
groups (Bowes et al. 2002). The practicality of such an approach is questionable in super-
diverse areas such as the Urban Living area, where meaningful engagement with people from
170 different countries is simply not practical. Vertovec (2008) raises the problems of
representation and providing suitably sensitive services as two of the many dilemmas facing a
super-diverse society. Perhaps a way forward is to undertake research that looks for
convergence between very diverse samples in order to identify common ground on which to
progress. Through working to understand housing need and notions of home it may be
possible for policymakers in the fields of housing and renewal to introduce initiatives to meet
peoples‟ needs, and build the local identity that Wallman (1998) argues is critical in multi-
cultural areas to imply a sense of belonging, a right to belong and to build a relationship
between people and place. Further wider scale research is needed to develop further
approaches to understanding the factors that underpin home and the relationship of those
factors to housing need in the era of super-diversity.
References
Amas, N. (2008) Housing, new migration and community relations. A review of the evidence
base. London: ICAR.
Anon (2007) Migrant workers’ housing needs: consultation and case studies. Integration
Lincolnshire
Audit Commission (2007) Crossing borders: responding to the local challenges of migrant
workers. London: Audit Commission
Basch, L., Glick Schiller, N., and Szanton Blanc, C. (1994): Nations Unbound: Transnational
Projects, Postcolonial Predicaments and Deterritorialized Nation-States. New York: Gordon
and Breach Publishers.
Bell, K. Jarman, N. & Lefebre, T. (2004) Migrant workers in Northern Ireland. Belfast:
Institute for Conflict Research
Bowes, A., Dar, N. & Sim, D. (2002) Differentiation in housing careers: the case of
Pakistanis in the UK. Housing Studies 17 (3) 381-400
Caller, T. (2006) Migrant workers in South Somerset. South Somerset District Council
Castles, S. Korac, M. Vasta, M, & Vertovec, S. (2002) Integration Mapping the Field.
Oxford: Oxford University
CLG (2010) Housing market renewal.
http://www.communities.gov.uk/housing/housingsupply/housingmarketrenewal/ Accessed 26
May 2010
19
Collins, M. (2007) Housing, work and welfare experiences of new migrants in Scotland.
Glasgow: Door Step Equal Access
Commission for Integration and Cohesion (CIC) (2007) Our shared future. Commission on
Integration and Cohesion or www.integrationandcohesion.org.uk
Commission for Rural Communities (2007) A8 migrants in rural areas. Briefing paper
Cook, L. (2008) Housing report for the Migration Impacts Forum
Finney, N. & Simpson, L. (2009) Sleepwalking to Segregation? Challenging Myths About
Race and Migration. Bristol: Policy Press.
Flint, J. & Robinson, D.(2008) Community Cohesion in crisis? Bristol: Policy Press
Fyvie, A., Ager, A., Curley, G. & Korac, M. (2003) Integration Mapping the Field Volume
II: distilling policy lessons from the “mapping the field” exercise. Home Office Online
Report 29/03.
Green, A. Owen, D. & Jones, P. (2007a) The economic impact of migrant workers in the West
Midlands. Coventry: University of Warwick
Green, A., Jones, P. & Owen, D. (2007b) Migrant workers in the East Midlands Labour
Market. Coventry: Warwick Institute for Employment Research.
Gryszel-Fieldsned, T. & K, Reeve (2007) The housing pathways of Polish new immigrants in
Sheffield. CRESR: Sheffield Hallam.
Hact (2007) Opening Doors Literature Review. London: hact.
Gurney, C (1990) The Meaning of Home in the Decade of Owner Occupation: Towards An
Experiential Research Agenda, Bristol, SUAS working paper.
Harrison, M., Phillips, D., Cahal, K., Hunt, L. & Perry, J. (2005) Housing, race, and
community cohesion. Coventry: Chartered Institute of Housing.
Homeless Link (2007) A8 nationals in London Homelessness services. London: Homeless
Link
Home Office (2005) Integration Matters: National Strategy for Integration. London: Home
Office.
Home Office (2007) Accession monitoring report A8 countries May 2004 - March 2007.
House of Commons Select Committee on Economic Affairs (2008) The economic impact of
immigration. London: Stationary Office.
20
ICOCO (2007) Estimating the scale and impacts of migration at local level. Report for LGA.
IDEA (2007) New European Migration. Good practice guide for local authorities.
Koscielak, M. (2007) Migrant worker network development project report. Exeter: CVS.
Lewin, F. (2001) The Meaning of Home among elderly immigrants: directions for future
research and theoretical development. Housing Studies 16 (3) 353-370
McKay, S. & Winkelmann-Gleed (2005) Migrant workers in the East of England Working
Lives Institute for EEDA.
McLaughlin, B. (2005) Supporting migrant workers in rural areas: a guide to CAB
initiatives. London: CAB
MEL Research (2006) Urban Living BME Communities Housing Aspirations. Birmingham.
Migration Watch UK (2006) The impact of immigration on housing demand.
http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefingpaper/document/56 Accessed 27th May 2010.
Mruk Research (2005) Gateway Housing Market renewal Pathfinder: migrant workers.
Manchester: Mruk
Office for National Statistics (2005) Total international migration (TIM) estimates, 2005.
Peach, C. (1996) Good segregation, bad segregation. Planning perspectives 11 (1) 1-20.
Perry, J. & Blackaby, B. (2007) Community cohesion and housing: a good practice guide.
London: Chartered Institute of Housing.
Phillimore, J. (2004). The housing needs and aspirations of asylum seekers and refugees
living in the Birmingham Sandwell Pathfinder Area, Urban Living HMRA.
Phillimore, J., Goodson L. (2006). Problem or Opportunity? Asylum Seekers, Refugees,
Employment and Social Exclusion in Deprived Urban Areas, Urban Studies, 43, 10, 1-22.
Phillimore, J., Goodson L. (2008) Making a Place in the Global City - The Relevance of
Indicators of Integration, Journal of Refugee Studies 21: 305-325
Phillimore, J., Goodson, L., Hennessy, D. & Thornhill, J. (2008a) The Neighbourhood Needs
of New Migrants. University of Birmingham for Birmingham City Council
Phillimore, J., Thornhill, J. & Goodson, L. (2008b) Migrants from A8 Countries and Housing
in the East Midlands. University of Birmingham Report for Decent and Safe Homes and
Government Office East Midlands.
Pollard, N., Latorre, M. & Sriskandarajah, D. (2008) Floodgates or turnstiles? Post-EU
enlargement migration flows to (and from) the UK. London: IPPR.
21
Portes, A., (2000) Globalisation from below: the rise of transnational communities. In Kalb,
D. Ed. The ends of Globalization: bringing society back in. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield
pp: 253-272.
Phillips, D. (2006) Black minority ethnic concentration, segregation and dispersal in Britain.
Urban Studies 35 (1) 1681-1702.
Phillips. T. (2005) After 7/7: sleepwalking to segregation. Speech to the Manchester Council
for Community Relations
Rapoport, A (1981) „Identity and Environment: Across Cultural Perspectives‟, in J. Duncan
(ed.) Housing and Identity, London: Croom Helm
Rapport, N and Dawson A (1998a) Migrants of Identity, Oxford: Berg
Rex, J. & Moore, R. (1967) Race, community and conflict. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Robinson, D & Reeve, K. (2006) Neighbourhood experiences of new immigration: reflections
from the evidence base. Joseph Rowntree Foundation
Robinson, D. (2007) European Union Accession State Migrants in Social Housing in
England. People, Place and Policy Online 1/3 pp. 98-111
Robinson, D. Reeve, K. and Casey, R. (2007) The housing pathways of new migrants. Joseph
Rowntree Foundation
Spencer, S. Ruhs, M. Anderson, B. & Rogaly, B. (2006?) Migrant lives beyond the
workplace: the experiences of Centre and East Europeans in the UK. Joseph Rowntree
Foundation.
Staniewicz, T. (2007) A critical evaluation of factors inhibiting A8 Polish Migrants’ full
participation in civil society. Centre for Rights, Equality and Diversity.
Tomlins, R., et al. (2001) A Question of Delivery: An Evaluation of how RSLs Meet
the Needs of Black and Minority Ethnic Communities. London: Housing Corporation.
Travers, T. Tunstall, R. Whitehead, C., & Pruvot, S. (2007) Population mobility and service
provision: a report for London Councils. London: LSE.
Turvey (2006) Population projections for the Urban Living Area. Birmingham: Urban
Living in conjunction with Ecotec
Vertovec, S. (2008) Super-diversity and its implications. Ethnic and racial studies 30: 6
1024-1054
22
Wallman, S. (1998) New Identities and the Local Factor - or When is Home in Town a Good
Move? In (Rapport, N. & Dawson, A. Ed.s) Migrants of Identity: Perceptions of 'Home' in a
World of Movement London: Berg Publishers pp. 181-205
Zaronalte, D. & Tirzite, A. (2007) The dynamics of migrant labour in South Lincolnshire.
EEDA and Lincolnshire Enterprise.
Zetter, R., Griffiths, D., Sigona, N. and Hauser, M., (2002) Survey on Policy and Practice
Related to Refugee Integration, Oxford, European Refugee Fund Community Actions
2001/2002; conducted by School of Planning, Oxford Brookes University.
Urban Living (2010) Urban Living Birmingham and Sandwell Pathfinder
http://www.urbanliving.org.uk/index.aspx Accessed 26 May 2010.
i Note that in the UK many of the Somali migrants come via mainland Europe with EU citizenship.