Internal Migration in the UK

17,220 views

Published on

Looks at North-South Shift, Counterurbanisation and Suburbanisation.

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
3 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
17,220
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
428
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Internal Migration in the UK

  1. 1. Case Studies – Internal Migration (UK) <ul><li>Since 1980 – the pattern of international migration in the UK has been from: </li></ul><ul><li>North – South Drift (Regional Migration) </li></ul><ul><li>Urban – Rural (Counter urbanisation) </li></ul><ul><li>Inner – Outer City Areas (suburbanisation) </li></ul><ul><li>Why? </li></ul><ul><li>Regions such as NE had relied on coalfields, shipyards, iron and steel and heavy engineering to provide 1000s of jobs – these industries declined – making 1000s unemployed </li></ul><ul><li>In contrast – the SE was a focus of economic growth – 1981-1996 – net inforw to the south (due to higher wages and lower unemployment – particular growth in Surrey, Kent, E Anglia, Dorset) </li></ul>Case Study 1. North – South Drift (1960s onwards)
  2. 2. ‘ perceived’ lower quality of life in North (older housing, derelict land from industry etc.) Rural regions of Scottish Highlands / Central Wales etc. – unemployment & decline in farming workforce – rural depopulation Decline in Heavy Industries – closure of ship building / coal mines etc. little alternative employment – moved to south South (pull) – experienced growth in service industries, close to EU and job opportunities, higher salaries, more social / sporting amenities and better communities (flatter) and channel tunnel E Anglia (growth) London / SE – growth core North-South Drift in the UK
  3. 3. Case Study 2. Counter-urbanisation <ul><li>See your notes on Counter urbanisation in the settlement unit for this (good cross over – will help with revision!) </li></ul><ul><li>Just a few reminders: </li></ul><ul><li>Who moves? </li></ul><ul><li>Younger families (looking for more open space and larger properties) </li></ul><ul><li>Higher Income Groups (able to afford larger houses and the costs of commuting) </li></ul><ul><li>Those with Higher Skills (looking for work in modern / footloose industries) </li></ul><ul><li>Reasons for Counter-urbanisation </li></ul><ul><li>Pressures in city (traffic, pollution etc.) </li></ul><ul><li>Technological Change (teleworking etc.) </li></ul><ul><li>Improved communications / car owershup </li></ul><ul><li>Urban renewal process (forced re-housing) </li></ul><ul><li>BUT REMEMBER - some reversal of movement in 1990s – regeneration of inner city areas – e.g. London Docklands. </li></ul>
  4. 4. Who is moving to rural areas? <ul><li>Traffic congestion </li></ul><ul><li>Pollution </li></ul><ul><li>Fear of Crime (muggings, burglary and car theft) </li></ul><ul><li>Rural dream (idea of the ‘rural idyll’ – pleasant surroundings, quiet etc.) </li></ul><ul><li>Estate Agents, housing developers etc.. All encourage outward movement through new developments / building more houses and marketing these areas. </li></ul>What are the push / pull factors? <ul><li>The most affluent and mobile people </li></ul><ul><li>Families with children (keen to avoid the possible disadvantages of city locations) </li></ul>
  5. 5. What factors have helped counterurbanisation? <ul><li>Technological change – fax, blackberry, email, phones, internet – led to growth of ‘teleworking’ or ‘electronic commuting’ (people working from home – encouraging rural living) </li></ul><ul><li>Freezers, telephone, TV etc.. allow rural lifestyle but not isolation </li></ul><ul><li>improvements in road / motorway networks make commuting easier encouraging people to move out from the cities (gradually congestion sets in and cycle begins again) </li></ul><ul><li>Urban renewal processes during the 50’s/60s meant that due to slum clearance large numbers of people had to move from inner city areas – most were rehoused on council estate on edge of city – or beyond the city in New Towns / overspill settlements. </li></ul>
  6. 6. Consequences for the Rural Settlement of Urbanisation <ul><li>Counterurbanisation leads to the growth of suburbanised / dormitory / commuter villages and towns e.g. St Ives (commuter town), Fulbourn, Cherry Hinton etc.. </li></ul><ul><li>Negative Effects </li></ul><ul><li>House prices increase – locals young people cannot afford to buy property in areas they grew up </li></ul><ul><li>local resentment caused </li></ul><ul><li>lack of appreciation of traditional customs of village life by newcomers – change in community spirit </li></ul><ul><li>dormitory villages lose vitality and community spirit (very quiet during the day) </li></ul><ul><li>increase in population </li></ul><ul><li>Positive Effects </li></ul><ul><li>Improvement in services – e.g. gas mains, cable TV, supports local schools </li></ul><ul><li>supports some local facilities (e.g. pub, builders etc.) – although others may close </li></ul><ul><li>increased car pollution, accidents in area. </li></ul>
  7. 7. Case Study 3. Inner city – Outer City movement - SUBURBANISATION Again – see your settlement notes – since 1930s – increasing movement from inner cities to the suburbs (related to improved public transport / car ownership) Table Source: Adapted from Waugh – An Integrated Approach <ul><li>Cleaner, less noise / air pollution, lower crime rate </li></ul><ul><li>Noise and air pollution from traffic, derelict land, higher crime rate </li></ul><ul><li>Newer and more services, fewer ethnic / racial problems </li></ul><ul><li>Fewer, older services e.g. schools & hospitals </li></ul><ul><li>Lower unemployment, often more skilled jobs in newer high-tech ind. </li></ul><ul><li>High unemployment, lesser skilled jobs in traditional industries </li></ul><ul><li>Growth of modern ind. Estates, footloose ind. Hypermarkets etc. </li></ul><ul><li>decline in older secondary industries </li></ul><ul><li>Less congestion, wider, well planned road system, close to ring roads </li></ul><ul><li>congestion, noise & air pollution </li></ul><ul><li>Modern high quality housing with amenities, low density </li></ul><ul><li>Poor quality housing, lacking basic amenities, high density and overcrowding </li></ul>Suburbs (Pull) Inner City (Push
  8. 8. CONSEQUENCES FOR THE INNER CITY Advantages Disadvantages CONSEQUENCES FOR THE SUBURBS Advantages Disadvantages <ul><li>Reduces unemployment </li></ul><ul><li>space for immigrants moving in </li></ul><ul><li>Reduced pressure on services </li></ul><ul><li>Leaves a decaying heart </li></ul><ul><li>reduced community spirit </li></ul><ul><li>Local councils receive less money from taxes </li></ul><ul><li>Less investment </li></ul><ul><li>Social unrest and increased crime </li></ul><ul><li>increased use and demand for services </li></ul><ul><li>increase house building </li></ul><ul><li>Cost of living and houses increase </li></ul><ul><li>Increase in industry and offices </li></ul><ul><li>Increase in pollution and traffic congestion </li></ul><ul><li>decrease in farmland due to the urban sprawl </li></ul>Consequences for the Receiving and Losing area:

×