Neighbourhood Attachment Revisited: Middle-Class Families in the Montreal Metropolitan Region

Neighbourhood Attachment Revisited: Middle-Class Families in the Montreal Metropolitan Region

Neighbourhood Attachment Revisited: Middle-Class Families in the Montreal Metropolitan Region

Neighbourhood Attachment Revisited: Middle-Class Families in the Montreal Metropolitan Regions

| Ajouter

Référence bibliographique [19870]

Fiche synthèse

1. Objectifs


Intentions :
«This article [explores] neighbourhood attachment (and detachment) of young immigrant and non-immigrant middle-class families living in two ‘ordinary’ middle-class neighbourhoods in recent ethnic transition […].» (p. 2569)

Questions/Hypothèses :
«Since middle-class families have generally less constraints over their mobility and they have the relative economic capital to afford to choose where they live, how and why are they electing to live in ‘average’, ‘ordinary’ middle-class neighbourhoods? How do they engage in their neighbourhoods and how do they live with changes in social and ethnic composition of their neighbourhoods? Around what is their neighbourhood attachment based? Does living in the suburb or the city centre have an impact on neighbourhood attachment and neighbourhood uses?» (p. 2569)

2. Méthode


Échantillon/Matériau :
«This study is based on 51 in-depth interviews with young families in two neighbourhoods: Ahuntsic, a peri-central inner-city neighbourhood of Montreal, and Vimont-Auteuil in the City of Laval, a suburb of Montreal. […] The 51 households interviewed a total of 66 individuals, all consisted of married or cohabiting couples with children between the ages of 0 and 15 years and residing at home.» (p. 2571)

Instruments :
Guide d’entretien

Type de traitement des données :
Analyse de contenu

3. Résumé


«Our results confirm that neighbourhood still matters nowadays for middle-class families, as it plays a central role in family-oriented decisions regarding daily life, neighbourhood choice and neighbourhood attachment.» (p. 2576) «Our case study […] showed how families display neighbourhood attachment through an extensive use of neighbourhood amenities (physical), in addition to embedded social ties (social) and distinctive lifestyles and identities (symbolic).» (p. 2578) «[W]e argue that living in the suburbs and in the city each embodies distinct representations, values and identities of middle-class family life that translate into distinct forms of neighbourhood attachment.» (p. 2576-2577) «Neighbourhood attachment of middle-classes is tied up to how they (want to) identify themselves and with places, and how they (wish to) conduct their everyday life in ways that encompass solely the production and reproduction of class and social status. It is also based on the expectations vis-à-vis middle-classes’ lifestyles and representations of family life in which the city and the suburbs are still portrayed differently by urban and suburban households.» (p. 2579) Additionally, «[d]espite reticent and ambivalent reactions over the growing ethnic diversity […] of previously homogeneous neighbourhoods, almost none of the families interviewed claimed it was a turning point that would lead them to move out of the neighbourhood […].» (p. 2579)