Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-2h6rp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-26T04:06:50.996Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Residential dynamics and neighbourhood conditions of older migrants and native Dutch older adults in Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 October 2014

SABINE VAN DER GREFT*
Affiliation:
Department of Geography, Planning and International Development Studies, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
SAKO MUSTERD
Affiliation:
Department of Geography, Planning and International Development Studies, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
FRANS THISSEN
Affiliation:
Department of Geography, Planning and International Development Studies, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
*
Address for correspondence: Sabine van der Greft, Department of Geography, Planning and International Development Studies, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 15629, 1001 NC Amsterdam, The Netherlands. E-mail: s.vandergreft@uva.nl

Abstract

The share of older migrants in Dutch cities is increasing. However, only limited knowledge has been gained about the urban conditions that older migrants live in and how these compare to those of their native Dutch counterparts. This paper contributes to filling this knowledge gap using detailed information on residential patterns, housing conditions and levels of neighbourhood deprivation in the city of Amsterdam in the Netherlands, and links this information to data about housing and neighbourhood satisfaction and perceived safety. Empirical evidence demonstrates that there is strong path dependence with regard to the places in which one finds different groups of older non-Western migrants. Older non-Western migrants in Amsterdam are highly concentrated in disadvantaged neighbourhoods. The number of concentrations has increased significantly over the past decade, as well as the concentration levels. Nevertheless, we did not find indications of social isolation. With regard to housing conditions, we found better conditions for socio-economically similar groups of native Dutch and Surinamese 55+ residents, compared to Turkish and Moroccan 55+ residents. These conditions correspond with levels of housing satisfaction. Surinamese older people are more positive about their neighbourhoods. We hypothesise that this is related to the restructuring of neighbourhoods where Surinamese 55+ residents are concentrated. Although the immediate environment of older non-Western people is characterised by high levels of social deprivation, this does not translate into dissatisfaction with social relations or feelings of lack of safety. This suggests that their residential concentration in particular urban neighbourhoods may also bring significant opportunities.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abraham, E. 1996. Oudere mensen zijn als bomen die schaduw geven: Oudere Marokkaanse vrouwen en mannen in de Nederlandse verzorgingsstaat [Older People Are Like Trees Which Provide Shade: Older Moroccan Women and Men in the Dutch Welfare State]. Het Spinhuis, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Andersson, R. and Musterd, S. 2010. What scale matters? Exploring the relationships between individuals’ social position, neighbourhood context and the scale of neighbourhood. Geografiska Annaler: Human Geography, 92B, 1, 2343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arbaci, S. 2007. The residential insertion of immigrants in Europe: patterns and mechanisms in southern European cities. PhD thesis, The Bartlett School of Planning, University College London, London.Google Scholar
Atkinson, R. and Kintrea, K. 2004. Opportunities and despair, it's all in there: practitioner experiences and explanations of area effects and life chances. Sociology, 38, 3, 437–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baltes, P. B. and Baltes, M. B. 1990. Successful Ageing: Perspectives from the Behavioral Sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, G. 2003. Meanings of place and displacement in three groups of older immigrants. Journal of Aging Studies, 17, 2, 129–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolster, A., Burgess, S., Johnston, R., Jones, K., Propper, C. and Sarker, R. 2007. Neighborhoods, households and income dynamics: a semi-parametric investigation of neighborhood effects. Journal of Economic Geography, 7, 1, 138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolt, G., Özüekren, S. and Phillips, D. 2010. Linking integration and residential segregation. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 36, 2, 169–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolt, G. and Van Kempen, R. 2000. Concentratie en segregatie in Nederlandse steden [Concentration and segregation in Dutch cities]. In Kempen, Van, Hooimeijer, R., Bol, P., Burgers, G., Musterd, J., Ostendorf, S., , W. and Snel, E. (eds), Segregatie en concentratie in Nederlandse steden: Mogelijke effecten en mogelijk beleid [Segregation and Concentration in Dutch Cities: Possible Effects and Possible Policy]. Van Gorcum, Assen, The Netherlands, 1334.Google Scholar
Bolt, G., Van Kempen, R. and Van Ham, M. 2008. Minority ethnic groups in the Dutch housing market: spatial segregation, relocation dynamics and housing policy. Urban Studies, 45, 7, 1359–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booi, H., De Waal, H. and Slot, J. 2009. Wonen in Amsterdam 2009 [Living in Amsterdam]. Gemeente Amsterdam, Dienst Onderzoek en Statistiek, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Buffel, T. and Phillipson, C. 2011. Experiences of place among older migrants living in inner-city neighbourhoods in Belgium and England. Diversité Urbaine, 11, 1, 1338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buffel, T., Phillipson, C. and Scharf, T. 2012. Ageing in urban environments: developing ‘age-friendly’ cities. Critical Social Policy, 32, 4, 597617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buffel, T., Phillipson, C. and Scharf, T. 2013. Experiences of neighbourhood exclusion and inclusion among older people living in deprived inner-city areas in Belgium and England. Ageing & Society, 33, 1, 89109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheshire, P. 2007. Are Mixed-income Communities the Answer to Segregation and Poverty? Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York, UK.Google Scholar
Clark, K. and Drinkwater, S. 2002. Enclaves, neighbourhood effects and employment outcomes: ethnic minorities in England and Wales. Journal of Population Economics, 15, 1, 529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Groot, C. 2004. ‘Zwarte vlucht’: De (sub)urbane lokatiekeuze van klassieke allochtonen in Amsterdam [‘Black Flight’: The Suburban Location Choice of the Traditional Migrant Groups in Amsterdam]. Ministerie van VROM, Den Haag, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
De Jong Gierveld, J. and Fokkema, T. 1998. Geographical differences in support networks of older adults. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 89, 3, 328–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deeg, D. J. H. 2002. Ouder worden, een kwetsbaar succes [Ageing, a Vulnerable Success]. Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Deurloo, M. C. and Musterd, S. 1998. Ethnic clusters in Amsterdam, 1994–1996: a micro-area analysis. Urban Studies, 35, 3, 385–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deurloo, M. C. and Musterd, S. 2001. Residential profiles of Surinamese and Moroccans in Amsterdam. Urban Studies, 38, 3, 467–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dienst Onderzoek en Statistiek 2011. Eigen woningbezit 1e en 2e generatie allochtonen: aandeel stijgt, maar afstand blijft [Home ownership 1st and 2nd generation migrants: numbers increase, but distance remains]. Fact Sheet 1, January, Gemeente Amsterdam, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
ERA-AGE (European Research Area in Ageing) 2007. Report of the Fifth Meeting of the European Forum, 26–27 November, Paris.Google Scholar
Galster, G., Andersson, R. and Musterd, S. 2010. Who is affected by neighbourhood income mix? Gender, age, family, employment and income differences. Urban Studies, 47, 14, 2915–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garssen, J. 2011. Demografie van de vergrijzing [Demography of Ageing]. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek, Den Haag/Heerlen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Gemeente Amsterdam and Amsterdamse Federatie van Woningcorporaties 2010. Wonen in Amsterdam 2009: Stand van zaken [Living in Amsterdam 2009: State of Affairs]. Gemeente Amsterdam and Amsterdamse Federatie van Woningcorporaties, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Hastings, A., Flint, J., McKenzie, C. and Mills, C. 2005. Cleaning Up Neighbourhoods: Environmental Problems and Service Provision in Deprived Areas. The Policy Press, Bristol, UK.Google Scholar
Heygele, Y., Vreeswijk-Manusiwa, J. and Schellekens, H. 2009. Bagaimana – Hoe gaat het? Een verkenning van kwetsbaarheid bij oudere migranten [Bagaimana – How Are You? An Exploratory Study of the Vulnerability of Older Migrants]. Noom, Utrecht, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Krause, N. 1996. Neighborhood deterioration and self-rated health in later life. Psychology and Aging, 11, 2, 342–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Massey, D. S. and Denton, N. A. 1993. American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Ministerie van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport 2005. Ouderenbeleid in het perspectief van de vergrijzing [Ageing Population Policy Within a Greying Population Perspective]. Ministerie van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport, Den Haag, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Musterd, S. and Andersson, R. 2005. Housing mix, social mix and social opportunities. Urban Affairs Review, 40, 6, 761–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musterd, S., De Vos, S., Das, M. and Latten, J. 2012. Neighbourhood composition and economic prospects: a longitudinal study in the Netherlands. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 103, 1, 85100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musterd, S. and Ostendorf, W. 2009. Residential segregation and integration in the Netherlands. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 35, 9, 1515–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musterd, S. and Van Kempen, R. 2009. Segregation and housing of minority ethnic groups in Western European cities. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 100, 4, 559–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nieuwbeerta, P., McCall, P. L., Elffers, H., Eising, K. and Wittebrood, K. 2008. Buurtkenmerken en slachtofferschap van moord en doodslag. Tijdschrift voor Criminologie, 50, 1, 1734.Google Scholar
Nitsche, B. and Suijker, F. 2003 Allochtone ouderen en wonen [Older Migrants and Housing]. FORUM, Instituut voor Multiculturele Ontwikkeling/NIZW, Nederlands Instituut voor Zorg en Welzijn, Utrecht, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Ostendorf, W., Musterd, S. and De Vos, S. 2001. Social mix and the neighbourhood effect: policy ambitions and empirical evidence. Housing Studies, 16, 3, 371–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, D. 1998. Black minority ethnic concentration, segregation and dispersal in Britain. Urban Studies, 35, 10, 1681–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, D. 2006. Parallel lives? Challenging discourses of British Muslim self-segregation. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 24, 1, 2540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillipson, C. 2007. The ‘elected’ and the ‘excluded’: sociological perspectives on the experience of place and community in old age. Ageing & Society, 27, 3, 321–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Philpott, T. L. 1978. The Slum and the Ghetto: Neighborhood Deterioration and Middle Class Reform, Chicago, 1880–1930. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Pinkster, F. M. 2009. Living in concentrated poverty. PhD thesis, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Razin, A. and Sadka, E. 2000. Unskilled migration: a burden or a boon for the welfare state? Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 102, 3, 463–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinprecht, C. 2006. Nach der Gastarbeit; Prekäres Altern in der Einwanderungsgesellschaft [After the Guest Worker Phase: Precarious Ageing in an Immigration Society]. Braumüller, Vienna.Google Scholar
Robinson, V. 1980. Lieberson's isolation index; a case study evaluation. Area, 12, 4, 307–12.Google Scholar
Rowles, G. D. 1978. Prisoners of Space? Exploring the Geographical Experience of Older People. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.Google Scholar
Scharf, T., Phillipson, C., Kingston, P. and Smith, A. E. 2001. Social exclusion and older people: exploring the connections. Education and Ageing, 16, 3, 303–20.Google Scholar
Scharf, T., Phillipson, C. and Smith, A. E. 2004. Poverty and social exclusion: growing older in deprived urban neighbourhoods. In Walker, A. and Hennessy, C. H. (eds), Growing Older: Quality of Life in Old Age. Open University Press, Maidenhead, UK, 81–06.Google Scholar
Scharf, T., Phillipson, C. and Smith, A. E. 2005 a. Multiple Exclusion and Quality of Life Amongst Excluded Older People in Disadvantaged Neighbourhoods. Report Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London.Google Scholar
Scharf, T., Phillipson, C. and Smith, A. E. 2005 b. Social exclusion of older people in deprived urban communities of England. European Journal of Ageing, 2, 2, 7687.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scharf, T., Phillipson, C., Smith, A. E. and Kingston, P. 2002. Growing Older in Socially Deprived Areas: Social Exclusion in Later Life. Centre for Social Gerontology, Keele University/Help the Aged, London.Google Scholar
Schellingerhout, R. (ed.) 2004. Gezondheid en welzijn van allochtone ouderen [Health and Well-being of Older Migrants]. Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau, Den Haag, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Smith, A. E. 2009. Ageing in Urban Neighbourhoods: Place Attachment and Social Exclusion. Policy Press, Bristol, UK.Google Scholar
Statistics Netherlands 2014. Data retrieved from Statline. Population: sex, age, origin and generation, 1 January. Available online at http://statline.cbs.nl/StatWeb/publication/?DM=SLEN&PA=37325eng. Authors' selection for 2011 [Accessed August 2014].Google Scholar
Subramanian, S. V., Kubzansky, L., Berkman, L., Fay, M. and Kawachi, I. 2006. Neighborhood effects on the self-rated health of elders: uncovering the relative importance of structural and service-related neighborhood environments. Journals of Gerontology: Psychological Science and Social Science, 61B, 3, 153–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teune, W., Jeurissen, I., Dignum, K. and Vermazen, I. 2006. Wonen in Amsterdam 2005: Stand van Zaken [Living in Amsterdam 2005: State of Affairs]. Dienst Wonen, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Teune, W., Uittenbogaard, L. and Jeurissen, I. 2002. Wonen in Amsterdam 2001: Stand van Zaken, Ontwikkelingen en Trends [Living in Amsterdam 2001: State of Affairs, Developments and Trends]. Stedelijke Woningdienst Amsterdam, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
United Nations 2008. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2007 Revision. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, United Nations, New York.Google Scholar
Van der Klaauw, B. and Van Ours, J. 2003. From welfare to work: does the neighborhood matter? Journal of Public Economics, 87, 5, 957–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Kloor, R. 2007. Amsterdam wil halal-hypotheek snel invoeren [Amsterdam Wants to Introduce Halal (Interest-free) Mortgage Soon]. Elsevier, 24 September. Available online at http://www.elsevier.nl/Nederland/nieuws/2007/9/Amsterdam-wil-halal-hypotheek-snel-invoeren-ELSEVIER140020W [Accessed 15 July 2014].Google Scholar
Van der Laan Bouma-Doff, W. 2007. Confined contact: residential segregation and ethnic bridges in the Netherlands. Urban Studies, 44, 5/6, 997–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Meer, M., Droogleever Fortuijn, J. and Thissen, F. 2008. Vulnerability and environmental stress of older adults in deprived neighbourhoods in the Netherlands. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 99, 1, 5364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Huis, M., Nicolaas, H. and Croes, M. 1997. Migration of the Four Largest Cities in the Netherlands. Statistics Netherlands, Department of Population, Voorburg, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Van Tilburg, T. 2005. Gesloten uitbreiding: Sociaal kapitaal in de derde en vierde levensfase [Closed Expansion: Social Capital in the Third and Fourth Phase of Life]. Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Van Vliet, K. and Oudenampsen, D. 2004. Integrated Care in the Netherlands. Verwey-Jonker Instituut, Utrecht, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Verhoeven, I. and Tonkens, E. 2013. Talking active citizenship: framing welfare state reform in England and the Netherlands. Social Policy and Society, 12, 3, 415–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WiA 2009. Wonen in Amsterdam (Housing in Amsterdam). Survey data, Municipality of Amsterdam and Amsterdam Federation for Housing Associations. Authors' calculations.Google Scholar
Warnes, A. M. 1990. Geographical questions in gerontology: needed directions for research. Progress in Human Geography, 14, 1, 2456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warnes, A. M., Friedrich, L., Kellaher, L. and Torres, S. 2004. The diversity and welfare of older migrants in Europe. Ageing & Society, 24, 3, 307–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Health Organization (WHO) 2007 a. Global Age-friendly Cities: A Guide. WHO, Geneva.Google Scholar
World Health Organization (WHO) 2007 b. Checklist of Essential Features of Age-friendly Cities. WHO, Geneva.Google Scholar
Yerden, I. 2013. Tradities in de knel: Zorgverwachtingen en zorgpraktijk bij Turkse ouderen en hun kinderen in Nederland [Traditions under pressure: care expectations and care practices among Turkish older people and their children in the Netherlands]. PhD thesis, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.Google Scholar