Behavioural responses to neighbourhood reputations

Abstract

Most research on the effect of neighbourhood reputations focuses on the influence on attitudes and behaviour of non-residents. Much less attention is paid to the possible effects of a poor neighbourhood reputation on behaviour of residents. In order to get a better understanding of the effect of neighbourhoods on its residents (the so-called neighbourhood effects) and the role of neighbourhoods in the urban housing market, it is necessary to fill this gap. The aim of this paper is to review the literature on the reputation of places and to give an overview of possible behavioural responses of residents to negative neighbourhood reputations. The paper develops a model of behavioural responses of residents based on Hirschman's 'Exit, Voice and Loyalty' framework. Three basic responses are central to the discussion of the literature: leaving the neighbourhood, attempting to improve the neighbourhood through neighbourhood participation, and (dis)investing in social contacts within the neighbourhood.

Same Neighbourhood … Different Views? A Confrontation of Internal and External Neighbourhood Reputations

“…Apparently there is more agreement between residents and other city residents about the status of top-ranked neighbourhoods than there is regarding low-and middle ranked neighbourhoods. This can probably be explained by the fact that it is not in the interest of residents of the low-and middle ranked neighbourhoods to be too negative about their own neighbourhood (Permentier, et al, 2007). Interestingly, Figure 2 shows that estate agents rate neighbourhoods with a good reputation higher than neighbourhood residents do, while at the same time they give lower ratings to neighbourhoods with a poor reputation than the residents do.…”

Notorious Places: Image, Reputation, Stigma. The Role of Newspapers in Area Reputations for Social Housing Estates

“…Using Hirschman's model for responses to service dissatisfaction, Permentier et al (2007) argue that residential mobility-'the exit option'-is the most 'clear-cut' response to a negative neighbourhood reputation because of the negative effects on a person's status, self-image and well-being (Permentier et al, 2009). Several studies (e.g.…”

“…There is Area Reputation, Image and Stigma 583 also evidence that in response to what may be considered an undeserved negative reputation, residents may participate to fight back against reputation and stigma (Mazanti & Ploger, 2003). Indeed, Permentier et al (2007) argue that 'voice' deserves more attention as a response and should be studied alongside 'exit', since participation constitutes an investment in the area that may lower the probability of moving. This 'voice' approach has been taken further in the case of the WIMBY!…”

Voice, exit and efficacy: dealing with perceived neighbourhood decline without moving out

“…Although Hirschman's concepts and Graham and Keeley's elaboration of them are useful to describe some of the dynamics of urban neighbourhoods (see e.g. Permentier et al 2007), and helpful to understand why people make a choice to use exit or voice, they do not help much in understanding the effects of such choices or the success of a chosen coping tactic. Therefore we complement the EVL model with theoretical insights which have become known as efficacy theory (Bandura 1997) in order to understand how coping tactics can lead to a regained feeling of control and security.…”