| چکیده انگلیسی مقاله |
Introduction Mobility has attained a considerable significance as a topic in social theory and research in recent years. The so-called âmobility turnâ or ânew mobilities paradigmâ (Sheller & Urry, 2006) is the clearest effort to bring together different types of movements into a single analysis, and to challenge tendency of social sciences to treat stability as normal and mobility as problematic. The main reason for paying attention to the issue of urban mobilities and residential preferences in the past few decades was its social, demographic, cultural and spatial consequences. On the other hand, intra-urban migration which is done mainly from the old valuable urban cores into the new and the middle areas, influences the socio-spatial structure of urban areas and increases the exhaustion of old textures of urban areas. Now the problem of old urban areas is a major issue in most cities. Many studies (Lee, 1966 Kahn, 2007 Baker, 2002, (Pourahmad et al, 2011 Sajjad and Dastjerdi, 2008 Tavallaei and Yari, 2011 Yosefi & Agajani, 2011) have been done about the causes of residential mobility and their mechanisms. One of the classic and most cited works on residential mobility is Rossiâs âWhy Families Moveâ (1965) which suggested the lifecycle changes of families as the primary reason of their movements. Like Rossi, Speare et al (1974) also emphasize the adjustment to dissatisfaction. According to their analysis, dissatisfaction ultimately results in moving behavior and is the direct result of changes in the needs of a household, changes in the social and physical amenities offered by a particular location, or a change in the standards used to evaluate these factors. Lee and others (2011) have concluded that a subjective assessment of neighborhood has a significant impact on the thought of movement, but has little effect on the real movement. Besides these factors, increasing social capital and cohesion in neighborhood will strengthen neighborhood stability by encouraging residents to prolong their residence time. In the theory of relative deprivation, it is claimed that migration is not accidental behavior, but is a response to elimination of poverty. In general, most research projects conducted on the residential mobility tend to focus on the demographic characteristics of the household. These studies sometimes reported inconsistent results. Quigley and Weinberg (1977) mentioned many of the inconsistencies that have arisen from definitional differences, differing analytical methods and non-parallel sampling procedures. Having said all that, the theoretical framework of this study is a combination of different models in which most of the variables have been selected from the theoretical literature. While not relying on any particular theoretical approach or model, the sociological approach has the main weigh in the selection of variables. Materials and Methods This research was conducted in survey method, with the unit of analysis being the individual and the level of analysis being micro. The population of the study consisted of 20-year-and-older citizens of Khomeinishahr, a city located in 12th km north-west of Isfahan and currently divided into old and new tissues. According to statistics of the 2011 General Census, this city has a population of 61,240 individuals over 20 years old. Using Cochran formula, sample size was calculated to include 240 subjects. Satisfaction of residence, social capital, religiosity, a sense of relative deprivation, and the importance of privacy constitute our independent variables and tendency toward moving to a new area is the dependent variable. Also variables such as age, gender, education and variables related to characteristics of housing such as type of housing, construction period and area where it is located were considered as control variables. Face validity was used to assess validity and Cronbach's alpha coefficient was used to assess reliability of the measurement scale. Discussion of Results & Conclusions Results indicate that the overall tendency of residents to movement is low to moderate (46.7 out of 100) and the mean of the behavioral dimension is higher than both dimensions of feelings and behavior. In addition, about 65% of subjects responded to the question of relocation, definitely. The overall mean of all items indicate that satisfaction rate of the facilities is moderate. About overall residential satisfaction, most of the respondents have moderate satisfaction from district facilities (mean 51 out of 100). However, the rate of satisfaction with life is moderate to low and most of them think the region and the local space in which they live is a good place to live in (mean 41.6 out of 100). The amount of social capital in neighborhood is moderate to low (42.9 out of 100) Findings indicate that respondents give great importance to the privacy and solitude and prefer to live more conveniently, untouched by informal controls. When it comes to the feeling of deprivation, most respondents believed that the status of welfare, income, education and housing in their neighborhood is not much different from new neighborhoods. The results show that more than 80% of respondents endorse religiosity of their family. Among the socio-demographic variables, only gender is significantly related to the tendency toward moving. This is consistent with the findings of the Kin (1961) whereas age, education, household size, and the old housing is not in a significant relationship with tendency towards moving. Also, results indicate that there is not a significant relationship between different income groups and tendency toward moving. However, the findings suggest that there is a negative correlation between religious beliefs and the tendency toward moving. Hierarchical regression analyzes indicate that among all independent variables entered into the model (satisfaction, social capital, religiosity, importance of privacy, relative deprivation) with the control of socio-demographic variables, only three variables, namely, privacy, satisfaction, and social capital were able to stay in the model and explain 39% of the variance of the tendency toward moving to new neighborhoods. Also, it is observed that among the socio-demographic variables, only gender is significant however, this has very little impact on the increasing adjusted R square coefficient so it can be ignored. Logistic regression analysis partially confirmed the results of the hierarchical regression. |