Understanding the neighbourhood choice decisions of movers: An analysis of focus group discussions

Sultan, Z.; Moeinaddini, Mehdi; Asadi-Shekari, Z.; Shah, M. Z.

doi:10.11113/jt.v76.5842

Download

Article (Scientific journals)

Understanding the neighbourhood choice decisions of movers: An analysis of focus group discussions

Sultan, Z.; Moeinaddini, Mehdi; Asadi-Shekari, Z. et al.

2015 • In Jurnal Teknologi, 76 (14), p. 49-56

Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi

Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/2268/249962

DOI
10.11113/jt.v76.5842

Files (1)Send to Details Statistics Bibliography Similar publications

Files

Full Text

JT1.pdf

Publisher postprint (222.26 kB)

Download

All documents in ORBi are protected by a user license.

Send to

RIS BibTex APA Chicago Permalink X Linkedin

Details

Keywords :

Focus group; Neighbourhood choice; Residential environment; Safety

Abstract :

[en] Using a qualitative methods approach, this study explores the key factors that influence household neighbourhood choice. Three newly developed residential neighbourhoods have been studied to examine resident decision making around their neighbourhood preferences. Four focus group (n = 4) discussions with 29 individuals who were recent movers to the study areas were conducted to examine the reasons behind neighbourhood choice and the needs of the household. The results revealed that household neighbourhood choice decisions were multi-faceted and complex. The key findings can be classified into six categories: safety, residential environment, neighbourhood facilities, accessibility, economic and demographic factors. Residents emphasised that the combination of land-use and transportation planning may be one important part of multi-layered solutions to improve quality of life in residential neighbourhoods. © 2015 Penerbit UTM Press. All rights reserved.

Disciplines :

Regional & inter-regional studies
Special economic topics (health, labor, transportation...)
Civil engineering

Author, co-author :

Sultan, Z.; Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, UTM, Johor Bahru, Johor 81310, Malaysia

Moeinaddini, Mehdi ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département ArGEnCo > Transports et mobilité

Asadi-Shekari, Z.; Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, UTM, Johor Bahru, Johor 81310, Malaysia

Shah, M. Z.; Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, UTM, Johor Bahru, Johor 81310, Malaysia

Language :

English

Title :

Understanding the neighbourhood choice decisions of movers: An analysis of focus group discussions

Publication date :

2015

Journal title :

Jurnal Teknologi

ISSN :

0127-9696

eISSN :

2180-3722

Publisher :

Penerbit UTM Press

Volume :

Issue :

Pages :

49-56

Peer reviewed :

Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi

Available on ORBi :

since 06 August 2020

Statistics

Number of views

55 (4 by ULiège)

Number of downloads

87 (1 by ULiège)

More statistics

Scopus citations^®

Scopus citations^®
without self-citations

OpenCitations

Bibliography

Bracy, N. L., R. A. Millstein, J. A. Carlson, T. L. Conway, J. F. Sallis, B. E. Saelens. 2014. Is the Relationship Between the Built Environment and Physical Activity Moderated by Perceptions of Crime and Safety? International Journal of Behavioural Nutrition and Physical Activity. 11-24.
Bontje, M. 2004. From Suburbia to Post-Suburbia in the Netherlands: Potentials and Threats for Sustainable Regional Development. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 19(1):25-38.
Lu, M. 1998. Analyzing Migration Decision Making: Relationships Between Residential Satisfaction. Mobility Intentions and Moving Behavior. Environment and Planning A. 30: 1473-1495.
Gobillon, L., H. Selod, and Y. Zenou. 2008. The Mechanisms of Spatial Mismatch. Urban Studies. 44(12): 2401-2427.
Clark, W. A. V., R. C. Deurloo, and F. M. Dieleman. 2004. Choosing Neighborhood: Residential Mobility and Neighborhood Careers. Paper Presented at the European Network of Housing Research Conference, Cambridge. UK.
Permentier, M., M. van Ham, and G. Bolt. 2007. Behavioural Responses to Neighbourhood Reputations. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment. 22(2): 199-213.
Ham, M. van and W. A. V. Clark. 2009. Neighbourhood mobility in context: household moves and changing neighbourhoods in the Netherlands, Environment and Planning A, 41(6):1442-1459.
Ham, M. van and P. Feijten. 2008. Who Wants to Leave the Neighbourhood? The Effect of Being Different from the Neighbourhood Population on Wishes to Move. Environment and Planning A. 40: 1151-1170.
Blijie, B. 2005. The Impact of Accessibility on Residential Choice: Empirical Results of a Discrete Choice Model. In: Proceedings international Housing Conference of the ENHR. 1-25.
Molin, E. and H. Timmermans. 2002. Accessibility Considerations in Residential Choice Decisions: Accumulated Evidence from the Benelux. TRB, Washington DC.
Dieleman, F. M., W. A. V. Clark and M. C. Deurloo. 2000. The Geography of Residential Turnover in 27 large US Metropolitan Housing Markets, 1985-1995. Urban Studies. 37(2): 223-246.
Coulson, J. C., K. R. Fox, D. A. Lawlor and T. Trayers. 2011. Residents’ Diverse Perspectives of the Impact of Neighbourhood Renewal on Quality of Life and Physical Activity Engagement: Improvements But Unresolved Issues. Journal of Health & Place. 17: 300-310.
Christine, A. Vogt and Robert W. Marans. 2004. Natural Resources and Open Space in the Residential Decision Process: A Study of Recent Movers to Fringe Counties in Southeast Michigan. Journal of Landscape and Urban Planning. 69: 255-269.
Carlijn, B. M., Frank J. Kamphuis, van Lenthe, Katrina Giskes, Johannes Brug and Ohan P. Mackenbach. 2007. Perceived Environmental Determinants of Physical Activity and Fruit and Vegetable Consumption Among High and Low Socioeconomic Groups in the Netherlands. Journal of Health and Place. 13: 493-503.
Marianne, I. C., R. B. Tanya, S. John, N. Candace, C. Marie and B. Christopher. 2010. Key Stakeholder Perspectives on the Development of Walkable Neighbourhoods. Journal of Health & Place. 16: 43-50.
Erwin, R. and R. Cervero. 2010. Travel and the Built Environment: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of the American Planning Association. 76(3): 265-294.
Chen, Y., and S. S. Rosenthal. 2008. Local Amenities and Life-Cycle Migration: Do People Move for Jobs or Fun? Journal of Urban Economics. 64: 519-537.
Borck, R., and M. Wrede. 2009. Subsidies for intracity and intercity commuting. Journal of Urban Economics, 66: 25-32.
Dahl, M. S. and O. Sorenson. 2010. The Migration of Technical Workers. Journal of Urban Economics. 67: 33-45.
Krueger, R. and M. Casey. 2000. Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications.
Hollander, J. A. 2004. The Social Contexts of Focus Groups. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography. 35(5): 602-637.
Hyden, L. C., and P. H. Bulow. 2003. Who’s Talking: Drawing Conclusions from Focus Groups-Some Methodological Considerations. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 6(4): 305-321.
Morgan, D. L. 1997. Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. 2nd edition. Qualitative Research Methods Series 16. Sage Publications.
Myers, G., and P. Macnaghten, 2001. Can Focus Groups Be Analyzed as Talk? In R. S. Barbour & J. Kitzinger (Eds.). Developing Focus Group Research: Politics, Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications. 173-185.
Webb, C., and J. Kevern. 2001. Focus Groups as a Research Method: A Critique. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 33(6): 798-805.
Hurworth, R. 2003. Book Review: Advanced Focus Group Research, E. F. Fern (Ed.). Evaluation and Program Planning. 26(1): 39-40.
Massey T. Oliver. 2011. A Proposed Model for the Analysis and Interpretation of Focus Groups in Evaluation Research. Evaluation and Program Planning. 34: 21-28.
Rioux, L. and C. Werner. 2011. Residential Satisfaction Among Aging People Living in Place. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 31: 158-169.
Ge, J.and and K. Hokao. 2006. Research on Residential Lifestyles in Japanese Cities from the Viewpoints of Residential Preference, Residential Choice and Residential Satisfaction. Journal of Landscape and Urban Planning. 78: 165-178.
Fishbein, M. 1968. An Investigation of Relationships Between Beliefs About an Object and the Attitude Towards That Object. Human Relationships. 16: 233-240.
Fishbein, M and I. Ajzen. 1974. Attitudes Towards Objects as Predictors of Single and Multiple Behavioural Criteria. Psychological Review. 81(1): 29-74.
Ajzen, I. 1991. The Theory of Planned Behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes. 50(2): 179-211.