Culture Clash and Second Home Ownership in the U.S. Northern Forest

Abstract

Culture clash, or intracommunity tensions related to rapid in‐migration, between permanent and newcomer residents has been well studied in relation to environmental conservation in natural amenity communities; however, less is known about culture clash within communities characterized by high rates of second home ownership. We examine the causes of perceived culture clash in communities of the U.S. Northern Forest using mail survey data from four case studies within New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine. In contrast to past culture clash research, we consider multiple dimensions of cultural capital that are independent of second home owners' rural or urban origins, and how key aspects of culture compare to economic standing and social interaction as drivers of perceived culture clash. Permanent residents perceive greater levels of culture clash than second home owners, net other measures, indicating that seasonal migration in and of itself encourages notions of otherness between residents. More frequent social interaction between resident groups helps to ameliorate intracommunity tensions. Cultural capital and social interaction measures were equally effective in explaining variation in perceived culture clash. Our findings indicate that the culture clash concept extends beyond scenarios of environmental conflict and applies to more general forms of intergroup tensions.

Sociocultural change facing ranchers in the Rocky Mountain West as a result of mountain resort tourism and amenity migration

“…As suggested by Golding (2014), "culture clash" can also have negative social consequences for amenity migrants, in the form of unfriendliness and social exclusion by the local population. Alternatively, as argued by Armstrong and Stedman (2013), permanent residents (such as ranchers) may perceive greater levels of culture clash than amenity migrants, which can exacerbate notions of "otherness" and separation between these two groups. Then again, the findings of this study suggest that newcomers and longstanding residents may actually occupy more common ground than is expected by either group (Smith and Krannich, 2000).…”

“…Yet, these rural communities also tend to exhibit lower levels of bridging social capital, as characterized by tolerance of diversity (Onyx and Bullen, 2000). Such findings are relevant to the context at hand, with the introduction of newcomers commonly seen as threatening to existing relationships, values and norms held by what are commonly tight-knit communities in the Rocky Mountain West (Armstrong and Stedman, 2013).…”

“…These amenity migrants have brought with them new ideas regarding land ownership and management that may conflict with existing customs (Gosnell and Abrams, 2011;Yung and Belsky, 2007). This "culture clash" (Smith and Krannich, 2000), can result in tensions and conflict and a sense of "otherness" that separates amenity migrants and longstanding residents (Armstrong and Stedman, 2013).…”

Second Homes and the Management of Local Development: Local Social Relations as a Predictor of Permanent and Temporary Residents’ Participation in the Development Planning Process

“…Naime, iako u društvu najčešće imaju više osoba iz skupine kojoj i sami pripadaju, samo se manji broj ispitanika druži isključivo s pripadnicima svoje skupine. Razvijeni društveni odnosi stalnih i povremenih stanovnika nije neka okruška ili isključivo hrvatska specifičnost (Quinn, 2004;Rogić, Mišetić i Zimmermann, 2006), a učestalija društvena interakcija na toj relaciji pomaže umanjivanju tenzija među tim dvjema skupinama (Armstrong i Stedman, 2013).…”

Changing Community Variations in Perceptions and Activeness in Response to the Spruce Bark Beetle Outbreak in Alaska

“…Many community-level social phenomena, such as community attitudes, experiences, and interaction, can often only be appropriately measured through pooling together information obtained from individuals [6,59]. This approach has been applied in the study of a variety of rural community issues including perceived socioeconomic and environmental impacts of energy and industrial development in various regions of the U.S. [60][61][62][63][64][65][66], the role of community agency in social wellbeing in rural Pennsylvania and Ireland [67], community perspectives on environmental change and natural resource management in North America [12,19,68,69], and migration effects on community interaction or participation in northeastern U.S. and southwestern China [70,71].…”