Same neighbourhood ... different views? A confrontation of internal and external neighbourhood reputations
Date
27/10/2008Keywords
Metadata
Show full item recordAltmetrics Handle Statistics
Altmetrics DOI Statistics
Abstract
Residents and non-residents are likely to think differently about a neighbourhood's reputation. Relatively little is known about the similarities and differences between these internal and external types of neighbourhood reputation or the relationship between reputations and 'real' or 'objective' neighbourhood characteristics. This paper addresses two points: first, the extent to which neighbourhood reputations differ between and within groups; second, the extent to which these neighbourhood reputations are associated with measured neighbourhood characteristics. Data from a specially designed survey carried out in 24 neighbourhoods in Utrecht, the fourth largest city in the Netherlands, are used. Analysis of the data showed that neighbourhood reputations are rated higher by residents and estate agents than by other city residents. Within the group of other city residents, differences were found in how neighbourhood reputations are rated by socio-economic status, ethnicity and educational background. Further, it was found that neighbourhood reputations are correlated with measured social characteristics of the neighbourhood, while physical and functional neighbourhood characteristics are of less importance.
Citation
Permentier , M , Van Ham , M & Bolt , G 2008 , ' Same neighbourhood ... different views? A confrontation of internal and external neighbourhood reputations ' , Housing Studies , vol. 23 , no. 6 , pp. 833-855 . https://doi.org/10.1080/02673030802416619
Publication
Housing Studies
Status
Peer reviewed
ISSN
1466-1810Type
Journal article
Rights
Copyright 2008 Taylor & Francis. This work is made available online in accordance with the publisher’s policies. This is the author created, accepted version manuscript following peer review and may differ slightly from the final published version. The final published version of this work is available at: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02673030802416619
Collections
Items in the St Andrews Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.