Gemma Catney PhD Research Student Centre for Spatial Territorial Analysis and Research (C-STAR)

1. Understanding Internal Migration in a Divided Society: Insights from Qualitative Research in Northern Ireland Gemma Catney PhD Research Student Centre for Spatial Territorial Analysis and Research (C-STAR) School of Geography, Archaeology and Palaeoecology (GAP) Queen’s University, Belfast 3rd International Population Geographies Conference, Liverpool 2006

2. The nature of the division in NI • Often taken as 2 groups: • Catholics • Protestants • Plus associated political alliances • An identity • Long history, but the ‘Troubles’ late 1960s • Good Friday Agreement, 1998 • Labelling: Religion and Community background

3. Religion question Community background as alternative

4. Residential Segregation in Northern Ireland • Religious residential segregation in NI – media and academic research • New academic research pointing towards residential segregation as either decreasing or staying the same • However, large geographic variations, with some increases in segregation in particular areas, and persistence in others • But why?

5. Internal migration in Northern Ireland • In-situ growth vs. migration • Simpson (2004), in Urban Studies • Migration – reinforcement, erosion, creation of residential segregation? • How far is community background (area composition, etc.) important in migration decision-making? • Under-explored and little understood

6. Presentation outline • Methodology • Qualitative research • Area selection • Interviews and focus groups • Cognitive mapping • 2 case study areas • Summary and conclusions

7. Methodology QUANTITATIVE Migration rates Geographically weighted regression (GWR) SI modelling DATA SOURCES Census of pop. of NI (2001) Census grid square data (1971-2001) Residents (movers and non-movers) Key informants (community reps, property developers, etc.) Estate agents QUALITATIVE Semi-structured interviews Focus groups Cognitive Mapping Participant observation

8. Qualitative research • Semi-structured interviews with: • residents of case study areas (movers and non-movers) • key informants – property developers, community representatives, etc. • Focus groups (and cognitive mapping exercise) with: • residents of case study areas (movers and non-movers) • Also, participant observation with estate agencies

9. Area selection • Interviewing in 6 case study areas as a basis for understanding case-specific and general processes and trends • Areas controlled for by: • Community background • Socioeconomic class (including tenure) • Location (inner city, middle city, suburban and near-rural) • A ‘representative’ sample according to demographic composition of area

10. Case study areas • A transect approach • South Belfast • Incorporates 6 areas with aforementioned characteristics, plus wider processes: • Suburbanisation and counterurbanisation • Inner city residualisation • Inner city gentrification • Decentralisation of Protestant communities • Possible life-course characteristics

11. Transect: South Belfast

12. Outline: Interviews • General context • 2 case study areas: • Middle city ‘mixed’ area • Inner city Protestant community • General / ‘universal’ trends

13. Area 1: Ballynafeigh • Middle city, ‘mixed’ community • 1990s – mixed, with a slight Protestant majority • Present – mixed status under-threat, with an increasing Catholic majority and decreases in Protestants • Predominantly middle class • Becoming more affluent • Development – apartment blocks (gentrifying)

14. Area 1: Ballynafeigh • Recruitment: Community facilitator and ‘For Sale’ & ‘To Let’ signs • Recurring themes: • Reputation as a mixed community important – in-migration of couples in mixed marriages • Graduates from the two universities (and some current students) • Starter homes for middle classes • Familiarity – either student near by, grew up in area, personal contacts • Perception that it is becoming more Catholic due to recent in-migration

15. Area 1: Ballynafeigh • Some ‘cashing in’ on rising house prices and selling up • Out-migration (actual and hypothetical) tends to be to suburbs and rural areas – growing families wanting more quiet settings, a garden, less desire to be so close to the city centre, etc. • Area choice tends to be: • middle class • mixed (community background) • generally would not consider homogenous areas, but if would is always the ‘same side’ - safety

16. Area 2: Donegall Pass • Inner city Protestant (Loyalist) area • Predominantly working class • ‘Typical’ of working class Protestant communities – under threat, with a loss of population • Lack of suitable housing (social) • Decline in services and amenities • Gentrified from all sides – feeling ‘squeezed’

17. Area 2: Donegall Pass • Recruitment: Community facilitator, focus groups and other contacts • Recurring themes: • For most, want to stay – lots of intra-area movement • Substantial out-migration due to shortage of suitable housing (Housing Executive) • Some ‘cashing in’ on rising house prices and selling up (mostly bought through RTB)

18. Area 2: Donegall Pass • But few choose to move if can stay – mostly movement for space – migration a huge event: “[Moving was] like a death in the family…it was really really hard…still is” (Protestant female, mid-40s) • Retention of networks and contacts • Movement tends to be highly segregated – Protestants in, and movement out to Protestant areas – same with hypothetical area choice • Reinforced by those selling homes – advice to viewers • Housing Executive area choice – both choice and offered

19. Mapping exercise • ‘Fixed’ views reinforced in the mapping exercise: • Area perceptions and residential desirability

20. Mapping exercise (Area 2) • Hypothetical scenario • Areas would/ would not consider moving to if were to move house in the next few years • Areas you would also/ would not consider living in • Responses: Map 1 (areas would consider) • Aspirations: “nice area”, “money here”, “nice houses” • Family/ friends: “near family”, “sister lives here” • Familiarity: “grew up there” • Amenities: “shopping”, “daughter's school” • Political/ religious: “no paramilitary influence”

21. Mapping exercise (Area 2) • Responses: Map 2 (areas would not consider) • Political/ religious: “Religion”, “politics”, “I am a Protestant”, “too Catholic”, “Catholics”, “Nationalists” • Fear: “wouldn’t feel comfortable”, “beatings”, “sectarian” • Negative perception of area: “joyriders”, “break-ins”, “bad impression of area”, “snobby” • The ‘other’: “because of the reputation they have”, “not my type of people”

22. General/ ‘universal’ trends Reasons why move: • Dissatisfaction with current area/ property • More space • Garden • Closer to work • Closer to sick/ elderly relative • Health reasons • ‘Up and out’ • Intimidation

23. General/ ‘universal’ trends Factors considered when do move/ have moved: • Familiarity – family ties, friends, where grew up, work, etc. • Most search few areas and few properties – fairly fixed ideas about ‘acceptable’ or not • Composition of the area (religion/ community background) a factor in most individuals’ decisions: • Fear / safety • Sectarianism

24. General/ ‘universal’ trends • This may be overt: “Completely Catholic areas. Because, I mean, I wouldn’t get a chance to live in it” (Protestant female, 40, Protestant area) “Idon’t think we would move into Loyalist areas…I mean, it stands to sense” (Catholic male, mid 20s, mixed area) • Or less direct • For those claiming religion was not an issue, still had firm views about areas to avoid – mainly highly segregated areas, both Nationalist and Loyalist, regardless of the religion of the interviewee

25. General/ ‘universal’ trends • Most tend to consider areas of same ‘type’ as those already in – e.g. residents of working class areas choose working class areas – familiarity, horizons, but also more conscious – the ‘sense of community’. • However, for some, social aspirations come to the fore • Areas selected tended to be similar for individuals within each area • Some forced/ designed segregation – role of institutions

26. Summary and conclusions • Themes which are area/case-specific and general • Reasons why people move tend to relate to ‘usual’ factors, plus NI effect • Area selection (real and hypothetical): • Familiarity • Similar ‘types’, plus some aspirations • Mixed, or ‘same side’ • Potential reinforcement of segregation • In addition to natural increase (in-situ growth), spatial reorganisation of the population is also having a major impact on changes in segregation

27. Acknowledgements • My supervisor, Dr Ian Shuttleworth, for his comments and advice • The participants in my interviews and focus groups • The community representatives, for their insight, and assistance in recruitment • Department for Employment and Learning (DEL), for funding • Contested Cities, Urban Universities (CU2) research team and funding body (European Programme Peace 2)