4.6 Article

Neighbourhood deprivation, life satisfaction and earnings: Comparative analyses of neighbourhood effects at bespoke scales

期刊

URBAN STUDIES
卷 58, 期 13, 页码 2640-2659

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0042098020956930

关键词

demographics; employment; labour; life satisfaction; longitudinal analysis; neighbourhood; poverty; exclusion

资金

  1. Nuffield Foundation [DLW/42989]
  2. ESRC-funded Understanding Society project at the University of Essex [ES/K005146/1]
  3. ESRC [ES/K005146/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that neighborhood deprivation has a negative impact on individuals' life satisfaction and wages, mainly explained by strong residential sorting. Additionally, the results overall do not vary by neighborhood scale.
Neighbourhood socioeconomic disadvantage has a profound impact on individuals' earnings and life satisfaction. Since definitions of the neighbourhood and research designs vary greatly across studies, it is difficult to ascertain which neighbourhoods and outcomes matter the most. By conducting parallel analyses of the impact of neighbourhood deprivation on life satisfaction and earnings at multiple scales, we provide a direct empirical test of which scale matters the most and whether the effects vary between outcomes. Our identification strategy combines rich longitudinal information on individual characteristics, family background and initial job conditions for England and Wales with econometric estimators that address residential sorting bias, and we compare results for individuals living in choice-restricted social housing with results for those living in self-selected privately rented housing. We find that the effect of neighbourhood deprivation on life satisfaction and wages is negative for both outcomes and largely explained by strong residential sorting on both individual and neighbourhood characteristics rather than a genuine causal effect. We also find that the results overall do not vary by neighbourhood scale.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据