Policy makers are showing increasing interest in factors that make places attractive for prospective new residents. This paper focuses on residential preferences for interregional migration and aims to explore what place attributes people would value highly if they considered migrating. Special attention is given to differences in preferences between population subgroups in terms of demographic, socioeconomic, and geographical determinants. An ambitious prestudy with 390 respondents was carried out to ascertain relevant place attributes for the main study. The main study was carried out via a survey sent to a national sample of 5000 Swedes, of whom approximately 53% took part. The results give valuable information on how demographic, socioeconomic, and geographical aspects determine residential preferences in Sweden, and make some contributions to methodological issues on researching preferences in a migration context.
References
1.
AnderssonR, 1999Attractive Cities: An Economic AnalysisThe Swedish Council for Building Research, Stockholm
2.
ÅslundO, 2005, “Now and forever? Initial and subsequent location choices of immigrants”Regional Science and Urban Economics35141–165
3.
BaileyA JBlakeM KCookeT J, 2004, “Migration, care, and the linked lives of dual-earner households”Environment and Planning A361617–1632
4.
BerggrenHTingvallL, 2005Local Government Financial Equalisation in SwedenMinistry of Finance and Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions, Eskilstuna
5.
BosI D Mvan der HeijdenR E C MMolinE J ETimmermansH, 2004, “The choice of park and ride facilities: An analysis using a context-dependent hierarchical choice experiment”Environment and Planning A361673–1686
6.
CarlsenF, 2005, “Migration plans, local fiscal variables, and local economic conditions”Finanz Archiv61154–177
7.
DahlströmM, 1996, “Young women in a male periphery: Experiences from the Scandinavian north”Journal of Rural Studies12259–271
8.
DielemanF MMulderC H, 2002, “The geography of residential choice”, in Residential Environments: Choice, Satisfaction, and Behavior Eds AragonésJ IFranscescatoGGärlingT (Bergin and Garvey, Westport, CT) pp 35–54
9.
DökmeciVBerközL, 2000, “Residential-location preferences according to demographic characteristics in Istanbul”Landscape and Urban Planning4845–55
10.
Ds, 2005: 23, 2005Ett förnyat strandskyddMinistry of Sustainable Development, Stockholm
11.
ElderG H, 1994, “Time, human agency, and social change: Perspectives on the life course”Social Psychology Quarterly574–15
12.
EliassonKLindgrenUWesterlundO, 2003, “Geographical labour mobility: Migration or community?”Regional Studies27827–837
13.
FindlayARogersonR, 1993, “Migration, places and quality of life: Voting with their feet?”, in Population Matters Ed. ChampionT (Paul Chapman, London) pp 33–49
14.
FindlayARogersonRMorrisA, 1988, “In what sense ‘indicators’ of quality of life?”Built Environment1496–106
15.
FischerP AMalmbergG, 2001, “Settled people don't move: On life course and (immobility in Sweden”International Journal of Population Geography7357–371
16.
FotheringhamA SReesPChampionTKalogirouSTremayneA R, 2004, “The development of a migration model for England and Wales: Overview and modelling out-migration”Environment and Planning A361633–1672
17.
FranssonURosenqvistGTurnerB, 2001Hushållens vårdering av egenskaper i bostäder och bostadsområdenInstitute for Housing and Urban Research, Uppsala University, Gävle
18.
FuguittG VBrownD L, 1990, “Residential preferences and population redistribution: 1972–1988”Demography21589–600
19.
GehrmannF, 1978, “‘Valid’ empirical measurement of quality of life?”Social Indicators Research573–109
20.
GentileM, 2005, “Residential preferences and satisfaction in the Former Soviet Union: Results from a survey in Ust'-Kamenogorsk, Kazakhstan”, in Studies in the Transformation of Post-Soviet Cities: Case Studies from KazakhstanGentileM PhD thesis, Department of Social and Economic Geography, Uppsala University
21.
GouldP, 1966, “On mental maps”, in Man, Space and Environment Eds EnglishWard PMayfieldR C (Oxford University Press, Oxford) pp 260–282
22.
GustavusS OBrownL A, 1977, “Place attributes in a migration decision context”Environment and Planning A9529–548
23.
HartigT, 2004, “Do Europeans really consider the affordability of prescriptions in their neighbourhoods more important than access to open spaces and parks? A critical look at the Pfizer Healthy Neighbourhood Survey”Housing, Theory and Society2189–93
24.
KimT-KHornerM WMaransR W, 2005, “Life cycle and environmental factors in selecting residential and job locations”Housing Studies20457–473
25.
Lähteenmäki-SmithKPerssonL-O, 2002Restructuring the State—Regional Impacts (Nordregio, Stockholm)
26.
LindJ-EBergenstråhleS, 2004Boendets betydelser och boendes vårderingarSociologiska Institutionen, Göteborgs Universitet, Göteborg
27.
LindbergEHartigTGarvillJGärlingT, 1992, “Residential-location preferences across the life span”Journal of Environmental Psychology12187–198
28.
LuM, 2002, “‘Are pastures greener?’ Residential consequences of migration”International Journal of Population Geography8201–216
29.
LundholmEGarvillJMalmbergGWestinK, 2004, “Forced or free movers? The motives, voluntariness and selectivity of interregional migration in the Nordic countries”Population, Space and Place1059–72
30.
McCannE J, 2004, “‘Best places’: Interurban competition, quality of life and popular media discourse”Urban Studies411909–1929
31.
MaleckiE J, 2004, “Jockeying for position: What it means and why it matters to regional development policy when places compete”Regional Studies381101–1120
32.
MassamB H, 2002, “Quality of life: Public planning and private living”Progress in Planning58141–227
33.
MolinE J E, 1999Conjoint Modeling Approaches for Residential Group Preferences PhD thesis, Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven
34.
MulderC HClarkW A V, 2002, “Leaving home for college and gaining independence”Environment and Planning A34981–999
35.
NiedomyslT, 2004, “Evaluating the effects of place-marketing campaigns on interregional migration in Sweden”Environment and Planning A361991–2009
36.
NiedomyslT, 2005, “Tourism and interregional migration in Sweden: An explorative approach”Population, Space and Place11187–204
37.
NiedomyslT, 2006, “Re-examining migration motives in the Nordic countries with a focus on Sweden”, in Migration and Place Attractiveness PhD thesis, Department of Social and Economic Geography, Uppsala University, Uppsala, pp 111–127
38.
NilssonK, 2003, “Moving into the city and moving out again: Swedish evidence from the Cohort Born in 1968”Urban Studies401243–1258
39.
PaasiA, 1986, “The institutionalization of regions: A theoretical framework for understanding the emergence of regions and the constitution of regional identity”Fennia164105–146
40.
PacioneM, 2003, “Urban environmental quality and human wellbeing: A social geographical perspective”Landscape and Urban Planning6519–30
41.
RichardsGWilsonJ, 2004, “The impact of cultural events on city image: Rotterdam, cultural capital of Europe 2001”Urban Studies411931–1951
42.
RogersonR, 1999, “Quality of life and city competitiveness”Urban Studies36969–985
43.
SIKA2005Transport and Communications: Yearbook 2005Swedish Institute for Transport and Communications analysis, Halmstad
44.
StampsA E, 1999, “Demographic effects in environmental aesthetics: Meta-analysis”Journal of Planning Literature14155–175
45.
StjernströmO, 1998Flytta Nära, Långt Bort De sociala nätverkens betydelse för val av bostadsort PhD thesis, Department of Social and Economic Geography, Umeå University
46.
WangDLiS-M, 2004, “Housing preferences in a transitional housing system: The case of Beijing, China”Environment and Planning A3669–87
47.
WarnesT, 1992, “Migration and the life course”, in Migration Processes and Patterns, Volume 1: Research Progress and Prospects Eds ChampionTFieldingT (Belhaven Press, London) pp 175–187
48.
WesterlundOWyzanM L, 1995, “Household migration and the local public sector: Evidence from Sweden, 1981–1984”Regional Studies29145–157
49.
WilsonTReesP, 2003, “Why Scotland needs more than just a new migration policy”Scottish Geographical Journal119191–208
