|
Chapter 3: Internal Migration and Community Dynamics
Gemma Catney
Executive Summary
Key Findings and Recommendations
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background to the Study
Chapter 2: Population Statistics: Belfast and Donegall Pass, 1971-2001
Chapter 4: Housing and the Environment
Chapter 5: Health and Wellbeing
Chapter 6: Children and Young People
Chapter 7: Education in Context
Chapter 8: Education and Training Issues in Donegall Pass
Chapter 9: The Role of Community in Regeneration
Appendix 1 Donegall Pass Profile
Appendix 2 Focus Group Topics/Questions
Appendix 3 Recruitment Form
CHAPTER THREE - INTERNAL MIGRATION AND COMMUNITY DYNAMICS
Key Points
- It was quite common that individuals or households had moved once or even several times within the area. Movement in this case tended to be for factors relating to housing need changes, such as a larger property for growing families, or elderly people downsizing. This intra-area movement was most common amongst public sector housing tenants.
- A frequently cited reason for individuals choosing to leave the area was to ‘cash in’ on rising house prices in the area.
- Many residents commented that the loss of services and amenities had also contributed to the tendency for people to leave the area and move elsewhere.
- The main reason cited for residents leaving the area was due to housing shortages and this has undoubtedly had a major influence on levels of out-migration from the area.
- In general, in-movement from those who where perceived as ‘outsiders’ to the area was viewed negatively by participants.
- There were also some expressions of resentment over in-comers, particularly in relation to housing allocation, and the lack of mixing/integration by new-comers.
- A common view was that new developments were ‘hemming in’ the community. One resident commented, “they squeeze you in to squeeze you out’.
1. Introduction
This chapter focuses on issues surrounding migration, with a particular reference to community dynamics within and around Donegall Pass. The main focus is on internal migration – that is, movement which takes place within Northern Ireland, as opposed to transnational migration. This is important as many of the issues affecting the community relate to the causes and consequences of change brought about through local residential mobility and related factors. The chapter will draw upon qualitative data generated through the focus groups and interviews held with members of the community. One of the key themes to emerge from the qualitative research is the widely held view that the community of Donegall Pass is under threat, and this will be considered in more depth throughout this chapter. Indeed, threats, both internal and external to the area, are perceived to be causing instability and a loss of community cohesion. One of the major contributors to this loss is change brought about by in and out-migration, in addition to related processes which are generally perceived to be undesirable for the community, including ‘involuntary’ out-migration because of reduced housing choice and opportunity; residualisation; and gentrification. These themes, which will be defined in the text, are of principal concern in this chapter.
In addition to the focus groups detailed in Chapter 1, semi-structured in-depth interviews were held with residents who either lived in Donegall Pass at the time of interviewing, or had previously resided there. The aim of these interviews was to gain a deeper insight into the perspectives held by individuals on issues surrounding migration and housing. Each interview involved the reconstruction of the individual’s migration life-history, with questions on reasons for moving or staying, choice of relocation, attitudes to movement, and perceptions of the area, including housing. Interviewees were recruited through the focus groups. In addition, interviews were held with individuals who had not attended a focus group, through contacts established via other links. A mapping exercise was also used in order to further understand migration patterns and perceptions of movement and non-movement, and this is discussed in more depth in Section 2.
Chapter 2 has provided some insights into the dynamics of migration in Belfast and Donegall Pass, based on quantitative analyses of data derived from the Censuses of Population of Northern Ireland, which provides some context for the present chapter. In the next section some of the characteristics of migration within, into, and out of the area will be discussed, as well as perceptions about aspects of residential mobility. In addition, wider processes relating to migration will be considered. Section 3 will provide recommendations that relate to the themes addressed in this chapter.
2. Migration and community
Territoriality, segregation and community
In statistical terms, Donegall Pass can be viewed as a segregated area, with a very large Protestant majority. This is consistent with the perceptions held by many of the residents of the area. Indeed, many of the residents have defined the area as a Protestant or Loyalist, working class community. For some residents this identity was of great importance, viewing it as central to the community, while for others it was a less immediate concern. Expressions of this identity can be seen in the typical markers of territoriality visible in many segregated areas in Northern Ireland, through flags, murals and painted kerbstones. Many commented that the celebrations around the twelfth of July were important to them and to the wider community, and this helped to bring the neighbourhood together.
Although not universal, most of the residents described Donegall Pass as a close-knit community, often commenting that this was a valuable asset. Many discussed how they valued knowing many of the residents in the area personally, while others said that having a support network and ties in the area was important to them. However, most also regarded their community as being under threat. In their view, some of this threat has come from the decline of the community through factors such as the closure of services and amenities. The focus of the following sections, however, is on the threats to the community posed through community dissolution relating to in- and out-migration and various related themes.
Aspects of migration - Intra-area movement
Although not easily identifiable through census data, qualitative research has highlighted the fact that much of the movement which takes place in Donegall Pass is intra-area movement (i.e., changes of residence within the area, itself). It was quite common that individuals or households had moved once or even several times within the area. Movement, in this case, tended to be for factors relating to housing needs changing, such as a larger property for growing families, or elderly people downsizing. It was also relatively common that young people would obtain, or aspire to obtain, a property within the area after leaving the parental home. This intra-area movement was most common amongst public sector housing tenants, with movement facilitated by an application for a new, more suitable house through the NIHE. This desire to stay was reflected in the procedure in which public sector housing tenants moved house, with many reporting that Donegall Pass was either the first or only area of choice recorded on their application form.
Indeed, it is important to note that intra-area moves were often an active decision on the part of the migrant to stay in the area, and not simply a function of housing allocation procedures. This was not only reflected in the actual experiences of movers as highlighted above, but through discussions with residents about perceptions of movement and hypothetical migration. When asked about moving house, many of the residents reported that they would like to remain in the area, and would not consider moving to another area in the foreseeable future. Many of the respondents discussed how even if their housing needs changed, and if they were to change their current place of residence, it would be to a house in the same area. This reaction was most common amongst those residents who had lived in the area for a long time, particularly those who had been raised in the area from childhood. Undoubtedly, one of the main reasons for this view was due to familiarity. Many commented that the area is ‘what they know’ and that nowhere else would appeal because of this.
One male participant (26-59) remarked that “this is home”, and that he would not want to live anywhere else, an opinion expressed by many throughout the research. Similarly, since getting married, one interviewee had moved four times within Donegall Pass, and throughout that time had never considered moving outside of the area. In addition to this, many of the residents had ties in the area, with both family and friends, and long-established neighbourhood connections.
The desire to stay was not only confined to adults, or to those who had stayed in the area for a long time, but was also expressed by some of the young people. When asked about whether they could see themselves living in the area for a long time, most of the young females (13-17) stated that they intended to stay in the area upon reaching adulthood, with one participant claiming “I’m planning to stay here for the rest of my life”. Another female interviewee reported that “people who were born there…tend to stay there” (female, 36-45). In many cases, this desire to stay was taken for granted, and often treated as an expectation, with many commenting that if they grew up in the area all their lives, then it would be natural to stay. It was often discussed how there has been a long tradition in Donegall Pass of people tending to remain there for their entire lives. Similarly, there were cases whereby some had left the area, but then subsequently moved back at a later stage. One female interviewee who had moved out of Donegall Pass commented, “I just couldn’t settle down there…probably because I’ve been used to living here all my life” (46-60). Likewise, another individual reported on how he returned to the area after living elsewhere for several years, and was pleased to live in Donegall Pass once again, with many of the friends he had grown up with. Such return-migration was said to be reasonably common.
However, many residents reported problems with getting houses in Donegall Pass, and how this often acted as a barrier to being able to stay in the area. Of those most affected by such housing shortages, young single people, young families and the elderly were identified. More particularly, residents argued that there was a deficit of three and four-bedroom houses; a lack of public sector housing suitable for single people; and few opportunities for people on low incomes to access affordable housing. In terms of public sector housing, this lack of suitable housing has been made worse by the loss of stock through people purchasing their houses from the NIHE. Furthermore, the overall rise in house prices in Belfast has added to local housing pressures. As Adair et al. (2000) have argued, lower-income areas with good accessibility are likely to be disproportionately affected by rising house prices.
In the context of intra-area movement, it is worth noting that several residents claimed that the main reason why people leave the area is because they cannot get houses, and that they would stay if it were not for this shortage. Some were fearful of leaving the area, and for many, even if their housing requirements could be fulfilled elsewhere, it was considered very undesirable to migrate away. Again, in discussion on housing shortages in this context, there was an expectation that people from the area should be able to stay in the area, as has been the case in the past. Reflecting on the difficulties of a young person in Donegall Pass trying to get a house in stay in the area, one individual commented “…he was born here; why should he have to move to another part of Belfast?” (male, 18-25).
As outlined later, one of the major groups affected by these shortages is young people, and many discussed the difficulties they faced when trying to leave their parental home, yet still remain in the area. It is commonly acknowledged that this pressure has led to the sharing of houses in some cases. For example, young couples with a child may have to wait for a long time for a suitable house to become available and would, meanwhile, co-habit with relatives such as their parents. One resident noted how “there’s [sic] people down here with babies living with their parents… they would maybe stay with their parents ‘till something comes up” (female, 36-45), whilst another discussed how “young people in the area do have it hard…they do have trouble staying in the area…you can’t get a house big enough” (female, 36-45). Sometimes, after a lengthy time on the waiting list, individuals have had to leave the area as a house would not become available. In other cases, some reported on how they had managed to get re-housed in the area on account of their change in needs, but had been allocated an inappropriate house which did not meet those needs.
Out-migration
Of course, despite an overriding tendency for people to stay in the area, some do decide to leave for various reasons. This was explored through interviews with residents who had left, and in discussion with current residents about hypothetical outmigration. In many cases, there was an identifiable distinction between those who moved out of a conscious choice to live elsewhere, and those who felt they had to leave because of housing shortages. The latter is regarded as an ‘involuntary move’. There was a general recognition that Donegall Pass had lost many of its residents throughout the ‘Troubles’, when people migrated from inner city areas to live in suburban and rural areas outside Belfast and elsewhere in Northern Ireland. This was also a time of general mass-movement, during which people relocated to areas where those who shared their community background were in a majority (Darby 1986; Doherty and Poole 1997, 2000). This population restructuring meant that Donegall Pass lost many of its Catholic residents. Another reason for population loss in the past includes housing redevelopment, which saw people being re-housed in other areas of Belfast.
However, one of the most frequently cited contemporary reasons for individuals choosing to leave the area was to ‘cash in’ on rising house prices in the area. Many of the participants discussed how those who had purchased their property from the NIHE could make considerable profit, given the relatively low buying cost and subsequent increases in house prices. On the whole, residents commented that it was understandable that fellow residents had done this, but that it did contribute to a fragmentation of the community through subsequent out-migration.
Many residents also discussed how the loss of services and amenities had also contributed to people leaving the area to move elsewhere. More particularly, the loss of the local primary school, community activities and local shops were cited as contributing to the loss of population to other areas. Again, this loss was viewed negatively, with one participant commenting that this out-migration of residents is “splitting up the area” (female, 18-25). However, in some cases, the loss of services and amenities was discussed more directly, in relation to the impact this would have on the residents’ intentions to stay or leave the area. Indeed, although many of the older participants commented that their intentions would be to stay in the area, many of the younger residents stated that they plan to leave the area at some stage in the near future. Some of the younger males (aged 14-17), commented that they hoped to leave the area once they were old enough to get their own house, whilst the older males (18-25) claimed that they would leave the area if their circumstances changed, such as starting a family of their own. Again, the main reasons for this intention to leave included the loss of facilities in the area, with comments including that the area is “boring” (male, 14-17) and that in the area there is “…nothing to do. It’s dead” (male, 18-25). When discussing future plans, many said that they would be fearful of bringing up children in the area, when there are so few amenities for young people.
However, clearly the main reason cited for residents leaving the area was due to housing shortages, and this has undoubtedly had a major influence on levels of outmigration from the area. In reference to people who have left the area for this reason, one female resident commented:
|
“if there was [sic] bigger houses then obviously them [sic] people wouldn’t be moving on” (18-25), whilst another said “…they can’t get the housing they need – they can’t get what they need in the area, so they have to look elsewhere” (18-25).
|
|
The lack of suitable housing in the area was also discussed in the context of private housing in the area. Several residents remarked on how people in the area who may wish to purchase their own property could not afford to do so in the area, due to the high house prices. This has subsequently led to a loss of people who have moved to other areas where they could afford to purchase their own home. One resident discussed the consequences of this, saying:
|
“It does destroy the community…because the people in the area can’t afford to stay in the area…it does sort of force people in the area to move out…because they can’t afford to move anywhere bigger in the area.” (female, 36-45).
|
|
Some recent out-migrants from the area were also interviewed, and were able to give specific case-examples of their experiences and reasons for leaving the area. In these cases, either the main or only reason for leaving Donegall Pass was due to problems in getting appropriate housing in the area. One female interviewed discussed how, despite strongly wanting to stay in the area, she and her family had to leave as their housing needs changed. In this case, she was unable to obtain an affordable house with appropriate space and number of bedrooms to cater for her young family. Describing the moving experience, she commented that, despite viewing her new place of residence positively, moving out of Donegall Pass was “like a death in the family. It was really, really hard. It still is…” (36-45). Similarly, another out-mover from the area reported that her priority had been to get a house in Donegall Pass, but she had been unable to find one which was affordable and catered for the needs of her growing family. Consequently, she had to look elsewhere and then eventually leave the area: “…given the choice at the time I would never have left Donegall Pass; I really loved living in Donegall Pass” (female, 36-45). In one case, an interviewee who had moved commented that Donegall Pass “will always be my home” (female, 36-45) and that she had plans to return to the area in the future. This return-migration is also discussed in the following section. In addition, many of the residents who either had left the area at some stage in their lives, or were currently living elsewhere discussed how they maintained their ties and connections upon leaving, particularly as many still had family and friends in the area. In many cases, residents would return at least once a week to visit family or friends, while others continued to use services and amenities in the area, regardless of service provision in their new place of residence. For all, this was extremely important as it helped to maintain a connection with the area, and many commented that they would not have moved to an area from where such returns would be inconvenient.
When discussing people migrating in order to move up the property ladder, participants often commented that a factor here would be to “better themselves”, through purchasing their properties and moving to somewhere “nice and quiet” (male, 18-25). So, although there was a perception that such moves were positive for those able to do so, the fact that people would need to leave Donegall Pass to do so was viewed negatively.
To gain further insights into perceptions of migration, a mapping exercise was conducted as part of the focus groups. The results are of most relevance to discussions of out-migration, and so have been included in the present section. The exercise involved presenting individuals with two identical maps of Belfast, on which they were asked to identify areas they would and would not consider living in/moving to, and to annotate with reasons for their choices. Such approaches are often employed in understanding migration and residential preferences, and stem from research on mental mapping (see, for example, Cadwallader, 1992). This exercise was useful as a means of understanding residents’ hypothetical area choices and the residential desirability of particular areas. As a large amount of data were generated from this exercise, a summary table is provided below, which highlights the recurring themes to emerge from the exercise, along with selected annotations which were made beside participants’ choices, and examples of the ‘types’ of areas which were selected as applicable to such choices.
|
Hypothetical scenario
|
Themes
|
Example comments
|
‘Types’ of areas identified
|
|
Map 1: Areas you would consider moving to if you were to move house in the next few years / areas you would also consider living in
|
Aspirations
|
“good area”, “money here”, “nice houses”, “big houses”, “good houses”, “affluent”
|
Middle and higher income areas
|
|
Ties and connections with family / friends (often related to below)
|
“near family”, “sister lives here”, “friend lives”, “boyfriend from”, “near mates”, “family live there”
|
All across Belfast
|
|
Familiarity / previous connections
|
“grew up there”, “was born there”, “lived here for twenty years”, “familiarity” , “lived there before”
|
All across Belfast
|
|
Amenities and services
|
“shopping”, “daughter’s school”, “near good shops”
|
Centrally-located areas
|
|
Political / religious
|
“no paramilitary influence”
|
Generally Protestant, but some mixed areas, all across Belfast
|
|
General positive perceptions of area
|
“like area”, “nice area”, “peaceful”, “peace and quiet”, “friendly communities”, “quiet area”
|
All across Belfast, but mostly middle and higher income areas
|
|
Location
|
“countryside”, “out of town”, “easy access”, “views”, “open space, picturesque”, “central”, “closer to work”
|
A mixture of suburban areas and central areas, depending on justification
|
|
Map 2: Areas you would not consider moving to if were to move house in the next few years / areas you would not consider living in
|
Political / religious
|
“religion”, “politics”, “I am a Protestant”, “too Catholic”, “Catholics”, “Nationalists”, “would not feel comfortable”,
“would feel unwelcome”, “would not be able as I am a Loyalist”, “Republican areas”
|
Predominantly Catholic / Nationalist areas, generally working class
|
|
Fear
|
“wouldn’t feel comfortable”, “beatings”, “sectarian”
|
Mainly working class areas, often Catholic/ Nationalist, but some Protestant areas
|
|
General negative perceptions of area
|
“joyriders”, “break-ins”, “bad impression of area”, “snobby”, “troubled areas”, “too rough”, “don’t mind shopping, but not to live”, “drugs”
|
Mainly working class areas, often Catholic/ Nationalist, but some Protestant areas
|
|
The ‘other’ / unfamiliarity
|
“because of the reputation they have”, “not my type of people”
|
Middle and higher income areas or working class areas, depending on justification
|
|
Location
|
“too far from town centre”
|
Suburban areas
|
|
Theme?
|
“not afford it”
|
Middle and higher income areas
|
|
The results presented in the table clearly show that there is a diverse range of factors which are considered important in area choice. Those non-sectarian factors cited as considerations in positively influencing a potential destination area which may have been expected included various characteristics of the potential place of relocation, including a good location, a ‘nice’ area, provision of services and amenities, and familiarity. Similarly, areas which were seen as unsuitable by respondents were selected for reasons such as a perceived lack of safety, or often for reasons which are the ‘opposite’ of those characteristics in potentially desirable receiving areas, such as a poor location.
However, there is evidence to suggest that the composition of an area was important in many of the resident’s hypothetical choices. As illustrated in the table, many of the residents cited reasons relating to religion, and this was reflected in both maps 1 and 2. In the case of areas which would be considered as a potential place of relocation, religion was either overtly stated, or reflected through the participant’s choices, with many choosing predominantly Protestant areas. Likewise, in the selection of ‘undesirable’ areas, many of the residents selected areas which were predominantly Catholic, and often stated this as a primary reason for not considering these areas. For many, this was because they feared they would not be welcome. Similarly, some residents stated that they would be hesitant to move to a mixed area, while others were more positive about such areas. However, it is also worth noting that the ‘undesirable’ areas selected on the grounds that they were dangerous or unattractive were not only Catholic areas, but some were also predominantly Protestant (and mainly working class) areas.
These choices were also qualified through discussion with residents who had actually migrated, and discussed the reasons behind their choice of relocation. Many of the themes which were generated from the mapping exercise were also revealed in interviews with movers.
In-migration
In general, in-movement from those who where perceived as ‘outsiders’ to the area was viewed negatively by participants. This was mainly discussed in the context of perceived threats by in-migration to the area, and a fear of being ‘taken over’ by people who had not always been part of the community. When asked if they felt that the community was welcoming to new-comers, many of the participants commented that the community would probably not be, until the new-comers had been in the area for some time. There were also some expressions of resentment over in-comers, discussed mainly in relation to housing allocation, and the lack of mixing/integration by new-comers. Several residents mentioned how in the past they used to know everyone in their neighbourhood, but now, given increased housing turnover, they do not. This was seen as a negative element, both in the context of a perceived breakdown of community integration, but also in terms of a fear of new-comers and potential loss of control. One participant stated “It annoys me…that you don’t know who’s living next door to you – who your neighbours are. I mean, they could be anybody.” (female, 18-25). Similarly, an interviewee remarked that the movement of “strangers” into the area had damaged community cohesion (male, 46-60). Some residents also empathised with these new-comers, arguing that those who have managed to obtain a NIHE house in the area are perhaps not aware that they will have taken residence in a house that the community would have preferred to be allocated to someone already in the area. Such perceptions are discussed in more detail below, in relation to certain groups of in-migrants to the area.
However, despite these negative perceptions, of those in-comers who took part in interviews and focus groups, most commented that although it took some time to integrate into the community, eventually they integrated and found the community welcoming. Some mentioned that they needed some sort of mechanism in order to mix with the community, such as through having previous links to the area or other contacts, or through participating in a community activity of some sort. Others mentioned how when there was a school in the area this helped new-comers with children to integrate into the area and feel part of the community. Those residents interviewed who had moved into the area from elsewhere were generally very positive about their movement into the area, with some claiming that they liked living in the area much more than previous places of residence.
In relation to in-migration, residents of Chinese ethnicity were frequently discussed. Although it was mentioned that there is a reasonably long history of Chinese people living in the area, there was a perception that this had increased substantially in recent years. Participants were keen to stress that the community was not racist, and that they may have suffered from this perception in the past. However, residents did want to discuss how they felt a considerable threat from the perceived increase of Chinese residents in the area. Some of the community pointed to several factors which made the increase in Chinese residents undesirable. Amongst these, there were complaints that Chinese in-movers did not make efforts to integrate with the community, isolating themselves through language and a lack of social mixing. In addition, many of the residents discussed how they felt that the community was at threat from Chinese incomers. Two participants commented: (male) “It’s fear of being taken over.”, (female) “It’s fear of them moving in and us having to move out.” (18-25). The most frequently cited manifestation of this threat was the infrastructure which surrounds the Chinese community in Donegall Pass. Many felt that the range of shops, restaurants and other services which were Chinese in orientation were a sign of being ‘taken over’ and ‘pushed out’ by the Chinese community. However, it is important to note that some residents discussed how negative perceptions of sub-groups in the area, such as Chinese residents existed only because of pressures such as housing shortages. Indeed, housing was discussed recurrently, with complaints that it seemed that housing was being allocated to Chinese people before existing residents of the community.
This resentment and fear of in-movers was also discussed in relation to other members of the community. Students were mentioned with reasonable frequency, and although most of the community agreed that there was minimal trouble from the student population, fears were expressed over the fact that they were ‘outsiders’ to the community, and that future in-coming students may be more troublesome, or contribute to community dissolution, particularly given the high turnover rate of the student population. There were also fears that if the private rented sector expanded in the area this would also contribute to a high turnover rate in the area. Many residents also commented that in-comers to the area who were owner-occupiers, such as those living in apartment developments, were potentially problematic for the community. There was a strong perception that such in-movers, made minimal or no effort to integrate with the community. Some claimed that these people were detached from the Donegall Pass community, and that they would identify themselves as residents of the Dublin Road. Residents of newly-built housing were generally perceived to be young professionals or business people, and there was agreement that the proximity of Donegall Pass to the city centre was an understandable attraction to this group. Indeed, one individual who had moved into an owner-occupied house from outside the area discussed how the location of the area, chiefly its proximity to his workplace, was the most important factor in influencing him to move to the area. In sum, although not regarded as troublesome or intrusive, there was a general agreement that more mixing from this group of in-comers would add to community cohesion.
Interestingly, some participants commented that they could view the growth of the community through in-movement positively. However, this tended to be focussed on particular ‘groups’ of people, particularly past residents who had previously left and were finding it difficult to get a house in the area again. In relation to this, although the proximity to the city centre was seen as a possible incentive for potential in-comers, concerns were also expressed over the area not being attractive to people.
Gentrification
Gentrification refers to the movement of comparatively affluent individuals or households into recently renovated or newly built housing in previously low-income areas, often in the inner city, with the displacement of working-class individuals who had formerly occupied these areas. The result is an area transformed in status and appearance, with the development of new and expensive apartment blocks, post modern office buildings and gated communities a common manifestation of the conversion. For a review of gentrification and its causes, see Hamnett (1991).
With improved stability and increased investment, inner-city Belfast has experienced a rise in gentrification in recent years. An area with good access to the city centre and some unoccupied land, Donegall Pass is a prime location for such capital reinvestment. Indeed, some elements of this are already taking place within and around the area, with building work on apartments and the development of the Gasworks site recently, with, amongst other assets, commercial office blocks and a hotel. A number of residents viewed these developments as positive, with some benefiting from jobs made available through the Gasworks development. House prices in the area are also increasing dramatically, and houses bought either privately or from the NIHE have become vastly more expensive in a short period of time. Some individuals saw this as a good opportunity, and had either already sold, or had intentions to sell, their houses and ‘cash-in’ on their assets.
However, for the most part, residents reported that they viewed these new developments as having detrimental impacts on the community. Most commented that they felt removed from any potential benefits. Indeed, few residents had gained employment from the Gasworks developments, claiming that they were either unqualified for, or unsuited to, the employment available there. One participant discussed how this was also the case in a nearby area, where local people were not benefiting from similar development in the area:
|
“…the people aren’t getting the advantage – Belfast is developing all around them and they are just being left in the middle…so they see the negative side of the development of Belfast, but none of the positive” (female, 18-25).
|
|
A commonly expressed interpretation of developments in the area was that the community was being enclosed by these developments. Indeed, many of the residents used terms like being ‘hemmed in’ and ‘squeezed’ by the developments. The fear was that this would continue and that eventually the existing community would be pushed out of the area. In relation to investors and subsequent developments in and around the area, one resident commented, “they squeeze you in to squeeze you out” (male, 26-59). This concern was heightened by the fact that the Donegall Pass is a small area, with a small community, and thus it would take minimal efforts and developments to ‘take over’ the area. Donegall Pass is located on an interface with large Catholic communities, and this contributes to the perception of being ‘enclosed’. It was frequently discussed how, given the potential threats to the sustainability of the community, land being developed should be being used instead for public sector housing for the existing community, or for local shops and amenities to benefit the current residents. Given the negative perceptions of such developments, there was a distinct lack of trust of the developers by the residents. Many remarked on how they felt that the ultimate plan was for the Donegall Pass community to be phased out and “swallowed up” (male, 46-60), and for the area to become a new, modern, extension of the city centre.
Another reason why the community feel threatened by such developments is that they perceived there was a lack of integration to the community by owner-occupiers moving in. As discussed previously, there was a mix of ‘blames’, with some residents commenting that the new residents should make an effort to integrate into the area and become part of the community, whilst others blamed the existing community, claiming that they would see the community as unwelcoming to new-comers. On the contrary, some felt that they would not, or should not, have to integrate with the existing community in their area, who should be able to simply see the area as somewhere to live and relax, but not have to get involved. Whatever the perception, this is certainly a contributing factor to the fact that members of the existing community do not feel that such developments are for their benefit. Indeed, much of the literature on gentrification has pointed towards the development of a new, class-based segregation, resulting from such a separation (Wyly and Hammel, 2004) and it seems that this could be in danger of deepening in Donegall Pass.
Residualisation
The lack of stability in the community which has taken place as a result of the closure of amenities and services is outlined in Chapters 4 and 8. However, it is important to identify the consequences of this in the context of the theme of the present chapter. Of particular concern in this section is the impact of residualisation on the Donegall Pass community, a process in which the composition and status of the population in an area changes due to out-migration of the most affluent and upwardly mobile, leading to a concentration of poverty.
A large and growing body of academic research has examined the causes and consequences of residualisation of the social rented sector, and has argued that a variety of processes have led to the intensified concentration of lower income households over the last few decades. Research has highlighted how both housing and non-housing factors have contributed to this effect, including those social, economic and demographic in nature (Forrest 1987; Burrows 1999; Lee and Murie 1999; Norris and Murray 2004). While it is widely recognised that changes to the social rented sector, itself, have contributed to residualisation, namely through the sale of previous local authority housing to tenants through the Right to Buy (RTB) scheme, Burrows (1999) has also demonstrated that the movement of people is an important factor in this process. He argues that those leaving social housing, to move into either private rented or owner-occupied accommodation, demonstrate differential characteristics to those who remain in social housing. In particular, he discusses how those households with an economically active head are more likely to leave the social rented sector, leaving behind an increasingly marginalised group of lower-income households. He is keen to stress that those in social housing have therefore not become more poor over time, but that those with greatest means have left the sector, and thus changing the sector’s composition, and concentrating this poverty. There is also evidence that this leads to a concentration of older and younger people who are less mobile (Atkinson and Goodlad, 2002). This is important when we consider the consequences of such trends and its potential impact on a community like Donegall Pass.
Although difficult to quantify, given the limitations of census data, there is certainly evidence that a considerable proportion of the out-migration from the area had been by those with the means to do so – generally those more affluent and mobile, and often ex-public sector housing tenants who have purchased their homes. As stated previously, there is certainly a sense that out-migration from Donegall Pass is eroding the community and leading to instability in the area. There is also considerable agreement that the area had been more stable in the past, and, as mentioned previously, home to a greater amount of amenities and services. Discussions from interviews and focus groups have suggested that this is viewed as a two-way process: that this decline may have contributed to a loss of population, and likewise a loss of population may have contributed to the declining infrastructure. A considerable number of residents expressed a sense of being ‘left behind’, and it was often discussed how people may have left the area to, for example, “better themselves” (female, 18-25), thus leading to a “shrinking community” (male, 18-25). There was considerable fear over the prospect that this may continue: “we are scared of losing the community” (male, 26-59). There were also concerns that this would intensify, given the development ongoing in the area (as discussed in the previous section). There was a sense that the Donegall Pass community is powerless in comparison to developers in the area, particularly given the loss of population, and that in future the remaining residents in public sector housing could be pushed out of the area to make way for the apartments and offices perceived to be an inevitability. There was also a fear that this would happen more quickly, given the fact that many houses had now been bought from the NIHE and are thus not only being occupied by new residents who are viewed as ‘outsiders’ to the area, but are now available for purchase from residents by developers for persuasively high amounts. This would also continue to decrease the likelihood of the maintenance of the existing community due to housing pressures, firstly due to the fact that house prices in the area continue to rise, and there is a danger that the community least able to afford this would therefore be priced out of the area, and secondly because there is a decrease in the social housing stock, and it is therefore difficult to get a house in the area.
3. Conclusions and recommendations for the future
- Some academic literature has pointed towards the benefits of providing a range of households of differing income levels, via a mix of housing tenures in an area, in order to ensure that the location shares in new in-coming wealth and opportunities, and that the potential negative effects of residualisation are minimised (Atkinson and Kintrea 2000; Minton 2004). This may help to minimise the loss of existing residents due to housing shortages. However, although this is beginning to take place in Donegall Pass, care needs to be taken over the following, to ensure that the benefits of these are felt:
- That private housing does not dominate, and that existing social housing is maintained, with new public sector housing being provided. This could be achieved, in part, by ensuring that a proportion of new private housing developments are assigned to public sector or affordable housing
- That, where possible, mixing (or at least understanding) is encouraged between in-comers to the area and the existing community, so that a ‘them and us’ culture does not develop between either party
- To ensure a maintenance of the existing community, stability, and a reduction of out-migration due to housing shortages, housing needs should also be met more generally, through specific developments for certain sub-groups of the population. This could be achieved by providing, for example, maisonettes for young and single people, and sheltered accommodation for the elderly, to free up housing for young and growing families. It is also essential that developments like the proposed Posnett Street go ahead, in order to provide new public sector housing for local people. Such developments help to ensure that more of those who want to stay in the area can do so.
- That the NIHE works with the community to build trust and understanding, so that housing needs are met, the loss of community is reduced, and to thus encourage good relations between in-movers and the existing community.
- That any future developments (housing, commercial or otherwise) should be undertaken sensitively, and with community awareness, thus preventing a demonisation of the developments, and ensuring that the potential benefits of these for the community are realised. Cameron (2003: 2379) has highlighted the potential of ‘positive gentrification’, whereby the needs of local people are met, as well as the in-comers: “A ‘win-win’ outcome would see a successful transformation of the areas which brings them new people and life but also helps the original population by improving local schools and services and removing the stigma…”. Also of relevance is Murtagh’s (1999) call for community involvement in planning. These arguments should certainly be considered in the case of Donegall Pass.
References
Adair, A., McGreal, S., Smyth, A., Cooper, J. and Ryley, T. (2000) House prices and accessibility: the testing of relationships within the Belfast Urban Area. Housing Studies, 15(5): 699-716.
Atkinson, R. and Kintrea, K. (2000) Owner-occupation, social mix and neighbourhood impacts. Policy and Politics, 28(1): 93-108.
Atkinson, R. and Goodlad, R. (2002) Reforming house sales in the social rented sector: implications for Northern Ireland’s Housing Associations. Report to the Northern Ireland Federation of Housing Associations, Glasgow: University of Glasgow.
Burrows, R. Residential mobility and residualisation in social housing in England. Journal of Social Policy, 28(1): 27-52.
Cadwallader, M. (1992) Migration and Residential Mobility: Macro and Micro Approaches. Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press.
Cameron, S. (2003) Gentrification, housing redifferentiation and urban regeneration: ‘Going for Growth’ in Newcastle upon Tyne. Urban Studies, 40(12): 2367-2382.
Darby, J. (1986) Intimidation and the Control of Conflict in Northern Ireland. Dublin: Gill and MacMillan.
Doherty, P. and Poole, M.A. (1997) Ethnic residential segregation in Belfast, Northern Ireland, 1971-1991. The Geographical Review, 87(4): 520-536.
Doherty, P. and Poole, M. (2000) Living apart in Belfast: residential segregation in a context of ethnic conflict, in Boal, F.W. (Ed.) Ethnicity and Housing: Accommodating Differences. Aldershot: Ashgate, pp. 179-189.
Forrest, R. (1987) Spatial mobility, tenure mobility, and emerging social divisions in the UK housing market. Environment and Planning A, 19: 1611-1630.
Hamnett, C. (1991) The blind men and the elephant: the explanation of Gentrification. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series, 16(2): 173-189.
Lee, P. and Murie, A. (1999) Spatial and social divisions within British cities: beyond residualisation. Housing Studies, 14(5): 625-640.
McPeake, J. (2000) Owner occupier residential search in a divided society, in Boal, F.W. (Ed.) Ethnicity and Housing: Accommodating Differences. Aldershot: Ashgate. p. 198-214.
Minton, A. (2004) Mind the Gap – Tackling Social Polarisation through Balanced Communities. London: The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors.
Murtagh, B. (1999) Listening to communities: locality research and planning. Urban Studies, 36(7): 1181-1193.
Norris, M. and Murray, K. (2004) National, regional and local patterns in the residualisation of the social rented tenure: the case of Ireland and Dublin. Housing Studies, 19(1): 85-105.
Wyly, E.K. and Hammel, D.J. (2004) Gentrification, segregation and discrimination in the American urban system. Environment and Planning A, 36: 1215-1241.
|
