City-exit and Community-fit: Finding One’s ‘Place’ in Australia

Abstract

Understanding what prompts ‘community-fit’ (subjective feeling of alignment with one’s residential community) is vital for retaining city-leavers voluntarily choosing to live outside major cities and for community well-being/prosperity. In Australia, city-exit is supported by decentralisation policy and media using imagery of gentrified rurality, wholesome communities, and affordability to assuage metropolitan congestion and address non-coastal rural-regional depopulation. This results in land development accompanied by population turnover as a few urbanites permanently relocate inland. By presenting a thematic analysis of interviews with city-leavers and government/industry professionals, this article identifies key factors affecting (dis)satisfaction with communities sought/left. Findings show community satisfaction is achieved through sociocultural-affirming social interactions, not property/amenity consumption. Hence, developing rural-regional marketing strategies that better articulate communities’ sociocultural dimensions may increase awareness of place-based values/characteristics pre-relocation to avoid poor community fit and cost. Finally, to support resident retention, inclusivity practices accompanying community change are advocated.

Editorial

“…But it needs government policies and programmes to support it. Their study confirms some of the findings and recommendations of Ragusa's (2022) research published in the previous issue.…”

Let's stay together – The mediating role of self-congruity and place attachment on residents' likelihood to stay

“…The proposed direct influence of self-congruity on likelihood to stay did not manifest, but the study provides empirical support to hypotheses of a link between self-congruity and intention to stay, mediated by place attachment (Zenker & Petersen, 2014). This is in line with qualitative studies finding place attachment to be stronger among residents who evidence an identity congruent with their community and place of living (Ragusa, 2022;Twigger-Ross & Uzzell, 1996). It also lends support to a stream of research on place attachment incorporating place belongingness (Hammitt, Kyle, & Oh, 2009), and social bonding (Ramkissoon et al, 2013) as drivers of place attachment.…”

“…First, the study confirms the importance of understanding the complex place image of residents to capture positive and negative place attributes, to identify strong selling points and actions needed to retain residents (Ragusa, 2022;Strandberg & Ek Styvén, 2021;Stylidis, Belhassen, & Shani, 2015). Failure to take into account the perspective of residents leads to a practitioner-stakeholder perception gap (Peighambari, Sattari, Foster, & Wallström, 2016), image communication incongruent with residents' perceptions (Palmer et al, 2013), and serious negative implications for sustainable place development (Stylidis et al, 2015).…”

“…Second, as place attachment influences residents' likelihood to stay, inspiring emotions of place attachment among residents is essential. Coordinating place development projects promoting inclusivity and resident participation, engaging them in pro-social and proenvironmental community activities (e.g., helping behavior and environmental sustainability), provides a platform for social interactions that may not only improve the place image, but also mental health, feelings of place attachment, and resident retention (Bergström-Wuolo, Dahlström, Hertting, & Kostenius, 2018;Hereźniak, 2017;Hereźniak & Anders-Morawska, 2021;Ragusa, 2022;Ramkissoon, 2020). Furthermore, community events can help develop a local identity through storytelling about "who 'we' are […] to ourselves […] and to the media" (Karlsen, 2007, p. 186).…”

“…Third, capturing residents' perceptions of shared commonalities between the self and social identity characteristics, is equally important to design communication campaigns successfully reflecting residents' self-concept in communication messages (Palmer et al, 2013), thereby strengthening both psychological and emotional person-place bonds and ultimately residents' likelihood to stay. By incorporating community narratives of what it entails to be a resident, highlighting traits and values underlying social identification in place communication, a mutual resident identity may be reinforced, strengthening not only self-congruity, but also social cohesion, sense of community (Hereźniak & Anders-Morawska, 2021;Jenkins, 2014;Nene et al, 2009;Ragusa, 2022), place attachment (Hammitt et al, 2009), and likelihood to stay.…”