...
首页> 外文期刊>Population, Space and Place >Individual residential mobility, immobility, and political attitudes: The case of Brexit voting intentions in the 2016 UK EU Referendum
【24h】

Individual residential mobility, immobility, and political attitudes: The case of Brexit voting intentions in the 2016 UK EU Referendum

机译:个人住宅流动,不动,政治态度:2016年英国欧盟公投中Brexit投票意图的情况

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

One explanation of the results of the UK EU Referendum and the US Presidential Election in 2016 has been as a triumph of citizens of 'somewhere'-localised and rooted-over the cosmopolitan and spatially mobile citizens of 'anywhere', placing residential mobility and its effects on political attitudes at the heart of debates about the causes of populist voting. This paper contributes to these debates by using Understanding Society l to examine how residential mobility shaped Referendum voting intentions with a particular focus on the differential impacts of short- and long-distance moves. It also explores how the effects of migration vary by age. It finds that for an all-age sample, those respondents who made at least one address change of 50 km or more were less likely plan to vote 'Leave' relative to those who did not move at all. Restricting the analysis to those aged 25 or older, residential mobility became statistically insignificant; Brexit voting could be explained without reference to residential mobility. However, analysing only 16-24 year olds, long-distance residential mobility was again statistically significant even in the fully specified model. It is concluded that residential mobility is most important and formative for the attitudes of younger people but has little or no impact on older sections of the population.
机译:对英国欧盟公投和2016年美国总统大选结果的一次解释一直是“某个地方”和扎根于国际化的“任何地方”和“任何地方”和“任何地方”的公民的胜利,放置住宅流动性及其论民粹主义投票原因辩论核心政治态度的影响。本文通过了解社会L来探讨这些辩论,以检查住宅流动性如何投票意图,特别关注短路和长距离移动的差异影响。它还探讨了迁移的影响如何逐年所不同。它发现,对于一个全年样本,那些至少有一个地址变动50公里或更大的受访者的呼吁不太可能计划投票,相对于根本没有移动的人投票。将分析限制在25岁或以上,住宅流动性变得统计学微不足道;可以在不参考住宅移动性的情况下解释Brexit投票。然而,即使在完全指定的模型中,只分析了16-24岁的人,长途住宅移动性再次统计学意义。得出结论,住宅流动性对年轻人的态度来说是最重要的,形成的态度,但对人口的老年人几乎没有影响或没有影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号