UNIVERSITY OF COPENH AGEN
Master’s Thesis Sara Hillbom Guizani
Migration in an intra-urban context A case study of the migration of families with children from small towns in the periphery of the Greater Copenhagen region
Supervisor: Lars Winther
Submitted on: 5 November 2018
1
University: University of Copenhagen
Faculty: Faculty of Science
Name of department: Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management
Section: Geography and Geoinformatics
Author(s): Sara Hillbom Guizani
Title and subtitle: Migration in an intra-urban context: A case study of the migration of families with children from small towns in the periphery of the Greater Copenhagen region
Supervisor: Lars Winther
Submitted on: 5 November 2018
Number of characters: 189,009
2 Abstract
Families with children are an attractive population group, particularly for peripheral places, as they provide adults in the working age, while also providing children for local schools and institutions. Although the migration of families from the city center towards the urban periphery has been a recurring pattern in the region of Greater Copenhagen, there are indications that changes have occurred which concentrate families closer to the city center than previously. To identify challenges in maintaining and attracting population in small, peripheral towns, this thesis examines intra-urban migration of families with children in the city-region of Greater Copenhagen, by connecting contemporary centralization processes to motives for migration. This has been done through an analysis of population and employment data and 13 qualitative interviews conducted with families with children who have decided to move out of the small town of Frederiksværk. This thesis finds that the out-migration is impacted by the availability of jobs, educational opportunities, welfare services and well-connected infrastructure in the city center. The challenges faced by small peripheral towns in maintaining and attracting population are closely related to processes of centralization which contribute to a growing inequality in the region. Based on these observations two migration types are identified, which give certain insights into the opportunities for small towns in the urban periphery, and to processes of spatial sorting taking place in the region.
3 Table of Contents
List of tables and figures ...... 6
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ...... 7
CHAPTER 2: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ...... 11
The foundations of the theoretical framework ...... 11 The link between migration and urban development ...... 12 Understanding human agency in migration: A critical realist perspective ...... 12 Not just about jobs: multiple reasons for migration ...... 14
Agglomeration economies and migration ...... 15 A relational perspective on size and periphery ...... 18
Agents and the migration decision ...... 21 The biographical approach: making migration decisions ...... 22 Everyday life strategies ...... 25 Life course theory: the principle of linked lives ...... 26
An outline of the framework ...... 27
CHAPTER 3: METHODS ...... 29
A mixed methods approach ...... 29
Data on population and employment growth ...... 30
The semi-structured interviews ...... 32 Choice of case: Why Frederiksværk? ...... 33 Criteria for interviewees ...... 35 Sampling ...... 37 Interview questions and process ...... 37 Enquiring “around” the migration decision ...... 38
Analysis strategy ...... 39
CHAPTER 4: CONTEXTUAL CHAPTER...... 41
Greater Copenhagen as a city region ...... 41 Recent developments in population, house prices and employment ...... 42
4 The Finger Plan ...... 44
Frederiksværk ...... 49 History ...... 49 Attracting and maintaining families with children ...... 51
Frederiksværk in a centralizing region ...... 54
CHAPTER 5: ANALYSIS ...... 55
Developments in population and employment ...... 55
An analysis of moving motives ...... 63 Theme 1: The linked lives of families with children ...... 64 Theme 2: Away from Frederiksværk - towards better opportunities ...... 68 Theme 3: Moving closer to jobs ...... 76 Theme 4: Finding the ‘right’ home ...... 81 Theme 5: The limitations of house prices ...... 85
Two types of migration ...... 88
Chapter conclusion ...... 92
CHAPTER 6: DISCUSSION ...... 93
A discussion on opportunities and challenges: What options are there really? ...... 93 Affordable housing, the quality of schools and the commute ...... 94 A resource dilemma ...... 96 Spatial sorting of families with children ...... 96
Frederiksværk as a case ...... 97
CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION ...... 100
REFERENCE LIST ...... 103
Appendix A – Method of Quantitative Data Analysis Appendix B – Answer from Danish Business Authority on data discrepancies Appendix C – Additional Tables and Figures Appendix D – Interview Guide and list of Interviewees and attributes Appendix E-Q – Transcriptions of Interviews
5 List of tables and figures
Tables Table 1: The benefits of agglomeration economies 16 Table 2: Socio-spatial processes of centralization and peripheralization 20 Table 3: Population growth in Greater Copenhagen 43 Table 4: 17 municipal centers by municipality and total population in 2018 48 Table 5: Percentage change in above 67-year-olds out of total population 56 Table 6: Percentage in below 15-year-olds of total population 57 Table 7: Percentage change in individuals with higher education 58 Table 8: Percentage change in total employment 2008-2016 60 Table 9: Percentage change in employment within sector between 2008-2016 62 Table 10: The two migration types 90
Figures Figure 1: Circular causality in spatial agglomeration of firms and workers 17 Figure 2: The effect of agglomerations on migration 18 Figure 3: The three levels of consciousness and their relationship 23 Figure 4: The stratification model of the agent 23 Figure 5: Theoretical framework of how migration decisions are made 27 Figure 6: Map of the Finger Plan structure 31 Figure 7: Total change in number of 0-15 year-olds between 2010-2017 34 Figure 8: Map of the finger and palm structure in the Greater Copenhagen region 46 Figure 9: Map of the ‘municipal centers’ in the Greater Copenhagen region 47 Figure 10: Map of Frederiksværk in the Greater Copenhagen region 50 Figure 11: Screenshot of article featured on vielskerhalsnaes.dk 53 Figure 12: Visualization of the mechanisms producing migration of type A and B in the context of the Greater Copenhagen region 91
6 Chapter 1: Introduction
The aim of this thesis is to examine intra-urban migration in city-regions by connecting contemporary centralization processes to motives for migration. This is done to identify challenges in maintaining and attracting population in small towns in the urban periphery. The question of migration is closely tied to uneven geographical development. Where people decide to live has consequences for urban growth and decline and in peripheral areas, attracting and maintaining population can be crucial to development. Particularly families with children are relevant in this regard, as they provide individuals in the working age, who are likely to stay and contribute to the tax base for many years. In the Greater Copenhagen region, there is a growing inequality between the periphery and center and small and large cities, where population growth is a key element. This thesis examines migration to and from small towns in the periphery of the Greater Copenhagen region using quantitative data on population and employment, and qualitative interviews with families with children, who have migrated or intend to migrate, from the town of Frederiksværk.
Attracting and maintaining population is identified in the literature as relevant for peripheral areas for three main reasons. Firstly, self-sufficient families with children can be important for the tax and population-base (Aner and Hansen 2014). Population affects the budgets of municipalities directly, meaning that population decline can take a heavy toll on the municipal budgets, while population growth can bring many resources (Andersen and Andersen 2017). Secondly, families with children also provide stability, as they are less likely to move once the children have started in school (Aner and Hansen 2014). Lastly, these families contribute with children for the local schools and institutions, who in many cases provide the physical meeting places for several local associations (Lolle 2014), as well as themselves being active participants in local activities.
In the Greater Copenhagen region, the general trend has been that young people without children move towards the center of the city, often to study or work, while families with children move out of the city to the suburbs (Sehested 2017). Migration to the inner city and surrounding areas has followed the economic cycle, meaning that there is immigration in times of financial crisis,
7 while there is net migration in growth periods (Sehested 2017). However, since the financial crisis in 2008, there has been a tendency for families with children to stay in the center of the city (Sehested 2017). Fertner (2013, 333) found that in the period 2006-2011, out-migration of families from the city center has been focused more on areas close to the center and densely populated areas, than in the previous periods, where there has also been migration to medium and long distances from the center, indicating a process of “re-urbanization” within Greater Copenhagen. Thereby, although the out-migration of families from the inner city has been a recurring pattern, there are some indications that changes have occurred which concentrate the families closer to the city center than previously. The peripheral areas of the region may therefore no longer be able to expect immigration of families from the city center.
Examining factors which motivate families with children to move as well as their preferences for location provides an understanding of the challenges faced in maintaining and attracting population in the urban periphery in the context of these processes of centralization. This knowledge on what motivates families to move and stay helps us understand the development trajectories available for small towns in the urban periphery. The research question is therefore as follows:
What do families with children’s motivations for moving reveal about the challenges in maintaining and attracting population faced by small towns in the periphery of the Greater Copenhagen region?
By focusing on towns in the edge of a city region, this thesis attempts to fill a gap in knowledge on urban peripheries and small towns. Some scholars have suggested that theory related to the specific socio-spatial dynamics of economic development of small cities is underdeveloped (Bell and Jayne 2009, van Heur 2013). While research has been conducted on the urban-rural divide, less is known about the peripheries of urban agglomerations that have resulted from recent urban developments (Fertner 2013, Haase and Tötzer 2012). Thus, the focus of this thesis is an analysis of urban development of small towns in the periphery of Greater Copenhagen. For the purpose of this thesis these small towns are defined as the 17 ‘municipal centers’ appointed in the regional
8 Finger Plan (See Danish Business Authority1 2017a), which have a status as places of local urban development in the region.
Furthermore, this thesis aims to fill a gap in the literature by gaining insight into the connections between the motivations for moving and socio-economic structures in the city region, through a mixed methods approach. While there are known reasons for why families with children move to smaller peripheral areas from the city center, which can be found in the counter urbanization literature (see for example, Aner 2009; de Neergaard 2012), less is known about why they may choose to move away from these places. Furthermore, there has been a tendency in the literature to deduce motivations for migration on a regional scale from statistical data on migration patterns and economic indicators (see for example, Mitze and Schmidt 2015), while the study of moving out of cities (counter urbanization) has been tackled with qualitative methods. I have chosen to investigate migration of families from the periphery in the direction of the city center, through a mixed methods approach, to capture macro-level trends of urban development as well as uncover motivations for migration which cannot easily be disconcerted by statistical data.
Examining migration in an intra-urban context using a mixed methods approach, requires a holistic theoretical framework which considers the mechanisms causing migration at several scales of analysis, with a specific focus on the interpretations of migrants. This thesis therefore draws on a theoretical framework which considers both the structural forces of agglomerations and how these structures are interpreted by families with children to create the migration decision. This thesis takes a relational perspective in which city-size is produced through its position in the urban hierarchy and relations to other places at several scales. This allows for a contextual analysis which takes into consideration the dynamic ways that size and periphery are produced. To understand the interpretation of structures by agents, I draw on the biographical approach, which considers the migration decision in relation to the life of the migrant and their practical and discursive consciousness. Additionally, I draw on the concept of everyday life strategies, which considers the migration in relation to the migrant’s strategies for everyday life. The concept of linked lives, is used to further inform an understanding of the migrant’s social
1 Erhvervsstyrelsen
9 networks and how the geographical distribution of social relationships influences the migration decision.
To answer the research question, I have gathered data on population and employment growth in the 17 municipal centers. Additionally, I have conducted 13 qualitative interviews with families with children who have decided to move away from the town of Frederiksværk. Frederiksværk has a population of 9866 (Danish Business Authority 2018a) and is located north-west of the city center in Halsnæs municipality, which is one of four municipalities included in the Finger Plan who do not have an S-train station. By car it takes 1-1½ hours to reach inner city Copenhagen, which makes Frederiksværk a relatively peripheral town. Frederiksværk has experienced total population growth, but this is due to a growing elderly population, while individuals of working age and children have declined in the town. Accordingly, Frederiksværk is representative of the pattern of population growth experienced in most of the small towns since 2008. Frederiksværk also has an industrial history and is still dealing with the effects of de-industrialization. Thereby Frederiksværk provides an interesting case for an analysis of population growth in a small town in the context of the knowledge economy.
I argue that there is a growing inequality between the small towns in the periphery and the city center in the Greater Copenhagen region. Factors related to the advantages of agglomeration economies, such as the concentration of jobs, educational opportunities, welfare services and well-connected infrastructure, encourage migration of families with children towards the city center. Small towns are thereby challenged by their inaccessibility, lack of agglomeration economies and resources, and prevailing centralization processes in the region. I identify two migration types based on the underlying motivations for migration, the migration outcome and the structural context of the migration. These two migration types demonstrate that the following are important local factors for maintaining and attracting families with children in small peripheral towns: 1) welfare services such as the quality of schools, 2) infrastructure that supports commuting and 3) affordable housing. However, these factors present dilemmas, as investments in these areas require resources that may not be available to small towns in the periphery.
10 Chapter 2: Theoretical framework
As peripheral areas of the region are challenged by a loss of young children as well as population of working age, it is relevant to investigate how migration contributes to this depopulation in the context of the region. We can come closer to understanding the challenges of maintaining population by investigating the motivations behind moving of families with children. Based on their similar life stage, we assume that families with children as a group, have similar wants and needs. Thus, the reasons given for out-migration may also indicate reasons that discourage in- migration. Similarly, those reasons given for moving that are tied to the new place of living, may be representative of general qualities in a place of living, desired by families with children. This can help us understand the challenges faced in attracting population. Understanding the migration motivations of families with children, will thereby give insight into the challenges faced by small towns in the urban periphery in both maintaining and attracting population.
The foundations of the theoretical framework
In answering the research question, I aim to uncover some of the underlying mechanisms contributing to migration in the city region. This is based on a critical realist approach to the study of social phenomena. To achieve this aim, I have formulated three conditions which the theoretical framework must fulfil. The first condition is to consider the impact of agglomeration processes on migration. This is to understand the structural processes which contribute to producing migration within the context of the city region. Answering the research question also requires an understanding of the motives, needs and lived experiences of a population group at a specific stage in their life course. Therefore, the second is to consider the migration within the specific life situation of families with children. Third is to consider the migrant’s interpretation of structures. This is to understand how structural processes are interpreted by the migrant to produce the migration outcome. The theoretical framework will thereby allow us to understand how the migrant’s interpretations are embedded in structural urban processes and how the migrant contributes to reproducing or transforming these structures. This is to be able to point to some causal mechanisms of migration within the city region that can indicate certain development trajectories for small towns in the periphery. The purpose of this chapter is to build a theoretical framework which fulfils these three conditions.
11 The link between migration and urban development
In building this theoretical framework, I begin by establishing the link between migration and urban development, by looking briefly at the concept of the city. Cities can be understood “[...] as clusters of productivity and human life” (Storper and Scott 2015, 10). Underlying cities are processes of agglomeration (Storper and Scott 2015). The clustering of firms, people and information are the main outcomes of these agglomeration processes (Storper and Scott 2015). These processes form the foundation for economic growth, that further encourage processes of agglomeration (Scott and Storper 2015). At the same time, agglomeration processes promote migration to cities. For this reason, considerations of the processes of agglomeration are included in the theoretical framework.
While agglomeration theory can help us understand what urban structures impact migration, and how migration vice versa impacts urban structures, it builds on an inadequate understanding of human agency. Although migration is not explicitly the focus of theories of agglomeration, their understanding of migration builds on the neoclassical model of rational choice. Agglomeration theories differ from neoclassical theory in the macro-level understanding of migration as a process contributing to agglomeration in the region with the best initial conditions, rather than as an equalizing mechanism. However, agglomeration theories rest on the same theoretical microeconomic foundations as neoclassical theory. The migrant is understood as a utility- optimizer, who moves because there are jobs and higher income available in the city.
Understanding human agency in migration: A critical realist perspective
In the following, I will elaborate on the most important critiques of the model of rational choice and argue why an approach which considers both structural factors and the agent’s role in interpreting and acting on these structures, is needed for a comprehensive understanding of the migration phenomenon. In the model of rational choice, the subjectivity of the agent is not considered, as agents are understood to act only in response to external environmental stimulus (Halfacree and Boyle 1993). The model thereby ignores the way in which individuals deal with environmental change and impact back on their environment. Additionally, the model builds on the idealized assumption that individuals can gather and compute information leading to reasoned conclusions (Halfacree and Boyle 1993). The model of rational choice, can thereby be criticized for its assumptions on humans as rational economic agents as well as the idea that
12 migrants have complete access to information on which to base their migration decision (Morawska 2009).
Recognizing the above critique and the need for a theoretical framework which considers both the specific life stage of the migrants and their interpretations of their migration decisions and motivations, for the purpose of this thesis, I have found it more useful to look elsewhere for a conceptualization of human agency. Such a useful conceptualization moves beyond seeing migrants as either completely autonomous or entirely subject to structural forces (Findlay and Li 1999). A conceptualization of human agency which helps fulfil the three conditions for the theoretical framework requires a consideration of the role of structure and agency in migration processes.
A critical realist perspective offers such a useful conceptualization of both human agency and structure for three reasons. First, critical realism argues that the agent can make choices in relation to reproducing or transforming structures (Bhaskar 1979). The agent is thereby not entirely subject to structural forces. Second, society does not exist independently of how humans interpret it, thus interpretations of the agent are important for understanding the social world (Bhaskar 1979). Third, people are more likely to reproduce structures than transform them and so we can expect a larger influence of structures in determining outcomes (Bhaskar 1979).
Critical realism attributes the agent the ability to either transform or reproduce social structures (Couper 2015). Thus, the agent through their choices can have an impact on their environment. Critical realism also supposes that structure and agency (society and the individual) are analytical distinct (Bhaskar 1979). Society cannot exist without the actions of the individuals producing it and therefore society does not exist independently of how individuals interpret it (Bhaskar 1979). Hence studying structural processes comprehensively also encompasses a study of individuals interpretations. However, this does not mean that society should be understood as the combined actions of individuals. Bhaskar (1979) explains that “society pre-exists the individual”, meaning that social structures form the ‘building blocks’ of any human action. Humans cannot create society, they can only either reproduce it or transform it. Hence society exists independently of the individual. For this reason, while it is possible that humans can act consciously and intentionally, in a way which may or may not work to transform structures, as
13 society forms the pre-conditions for all human action, people for the most part reproduce structures, rather than transform them (Bhaskar 1979). Thus, structures are afforded relatively more power in determining outcomes (such as migration) than is the individual. Having found a useful conceptualization of human agency which helps us consider the migrant’s interpretation of structures, we now move on to build a more useful understanding of the process of migration itself.
Not just about jobs: multiple reasons for migration
The inadequate understanding of human agency found in the model of rational choice, leads to a narrow understanding of migration, tied to strictly economic factors. Considering the variety of factors which can be observed at work producing migration processes, this explanation is inadequate, and a critique can therefore be mounted on the focus on a single factor as explanatory for migration as a whole (Morawska 2009). Similarly, a critique has been mounted on the focus on only economic factors (Halfacree 2004). Many studies of migration have demonstrated that traditional economic models of migration are not adequate for understanding the migration process (Corbett 2005, Clark and Mass 2015). These studies suggest that researchers must incorporate into their analysis complex nuances of culture, human agency and subjectivity (Corbett 2005) and that economic factors alone are not sufficient to understand the processes (Halfacree 2004).
I have demonstrated how a theoretical framework which considers processes of agglomeration is necessary to answer the research question, but also that we need more sophisticated and holistic models of explanation to understand how the migrant interprets structures and the variety of economic and non-economic factors that influence migration. While the model of rational choice characterizes much of literature on migration (Mitze & Reikowski 2010), we can look to counter urbanization literature and life course theory to offer more nuanced perspectives on migration from the point of view of the agent. These fields of research offer theoretical perspectives which focus on how factors such as age, family status and the timing of life events come together in a complex interplay to produce migration (Stockdale and Catney 2012). Importantly, these theoretical perspectives consider a multitude of also non-economic factors which influence migration in addition to having a specific focus on how interpretations, meanings and discourses inform the migration decision.
14
I have laid out the foundations of the theoretical framework and argued for the value of the framework in understanding migration. I have demonstrated the ways in which the chosen theories overlap theoretically to accomplish the three conditions for the theoretical framework outlined at the beginning of this chapter. I now intend to go into more detail for each element so that these theories can be operationalized in the forthcoming analysis. I begin with agglomeration economies and how they impact migration. Following this I consider how size and periphery can be understood as processes produced relationally. I then turn to the agent and their interpretations of these urban processes. I begin with the biographical approach, which gives insights into how migration decisions are made in relation to the migrant’s own intentions, their habitus, structural context and life trajectory. I expand this perspective with a consideration of the concept of everyday life strategies, which places the migration decision in relation to the everyday life of families with children. I then consider the concept of linked lives, which allows us to understand the migration decision in relation to the social network of the migrant. Together, the chosen theories combine to create a theoretical framework which allows me to understand how the migrant’s interpretations are embedded in structural urban processes and how the migrant contributes to reproducing or transforming these structures.
Agglomeration economies and migration
Having established that agglomerations and migration are fundamentally linked, I now turn to describe this relationship in more depth. The theoretical foundations of agglomeration theory build on how agglomeration benefits firms. The benefits of agglomeration to firms can be broken down to the benefits that arise from localization economies and urbanization economies (see table 1). Localization economies pertain to benefits arising by locating near other firms in the same industry (Hansen and Winther 2012). Urbanization economies pertain to the benefits arising from increased density and scale, which are external to industries but internal to cities (Hansen and Winther 2012). The benefits of each can be seen summarized in table 1. Table 1 demonstrates the ways in which firms benefit from clustering together in cities.
15
Table 1: The benefits of agglomeration economies. Benefits of localization economies Benefits of urbanization economies Access to similarly skilled labor pools Reduced transaction costs between inputs and markets Face-to face interactions which builds Diversity which encourages innovation innovation and trust Knowledge spill overs Density which leads to increased exposure to random events which furthers innovation Access to social institutions which Products can be produced and consumed facilitates knowledge spill overs simultaneously (ex. business services)
Made by author. Sources: Hansen and Winther (2012), Marshall (1925), Weber (1929), Krugman (1991), Jacobs (1969), Glücker (2007).
The next theoretical step is relating the benefits of agglomeration economies to the movement of people. New Economic Geography (NEG) provides this link. NEG argues that when transport costs are low, individuals spend a higher share of their money on manufactured products, and economies of scale are strong, there will be a circular causation, which will lead to a concentration of manufacturing in the region with the best initial conditions (Krugman 1991). Concentration of manufacturing attracts labor, who are also attracted by the availability of goods and services, which in turn feeds into demand (Krugman 1991). Figure 1 depicts this circular causation and how it encourages the concentration of people in the same place.
16 Figure 1: Circular causality in spatial agglomeration of firms and workers. Source: Fujita and Krugman (1995).
The forward linkages depicted in figure 1 relate to how the availability of a greater variety of goods for consumption, increases the real income of workers there (Krugman 1991; Fujita and Krugman 1995). The backward linkage relates to how a greater number of consumers supports a greater number of specialized firms (Krugman 1991; Fujita and Krugman 1995). Figure 1 thereby provides us with an understanding of how agglomeration economies influence migration.
Having considered the link between the benefits to firms arising from agglomerations and how this attracts people (causing migration), we can now consider how determinants of migration are linked to innovation. Mitze and Schmidt’s (2015) model of regional migration flows gives insight to the intersection of the knowledge economy and agglomeration economies and their impact on the spatial distribution of people. Mitze and Schmidt (2015) build on NEG in their study of internal migration flows across Danish municipalities and find evidence that cumulative causations motivate migration flows and lead to large differences between regions. However, Mitze and Schmidt (2015) also focus more specifically on the role of innovation and knowledge in attracting mobile skilled labor. They argue that agglomeration economies foster innovation and higher income from the gain of human capital through migration, due to knowledge spill overs (Mitze and Schmidt 2015). Hence, there is also a cumulative causation process regarding innovation, as skilled mobile labor is attracted to innovative regions and these regions are thereby able to remain innovative, because of the net inflow of human capital (Mitze and
17 Schmidt 2015). They find that the relative regional endowment with human capital, the share of knowledge-intensive services and patent intensities all contribute to population growth (Mitze and Schmidt 2015). Innovation is thereby seen as a “crucial driver” (Mitze and Schmidt 2015, 97) of migration as well as economic development. For the purpose of this study, Mitze and Schmidt (2015) give valuable insight into the “dual role” of agglomerations in attracting migration which feeds back into income levels and unemployment rates. For the Greater Copenhagen region, an economic model considering agglomeration factors reinforcing the knowledge economy is applicable considering the spread of population and the industrial structure.
The theoretical explanations for the circular causality within agglomeration economies offered by NEG, combined with an understanding of the role of innovation in attracting human capital and contributing to the growth of agglomeration economies offered by Mitze and Schmidt (2015), yields the following framework of the effect of agglomeration economies on migration (see Figure 2).
Figure 2: The effect of agglomerations on migration. Made by author.
A relational perspective on size and periphery
Considering the processes of agglomeration outlined above, it seems that “Small cities [...] can only lose” (Lorentzen and van Heur 2013, 5). To a large extent, empirical evidence supports this theory. Overall urban development trends have shown that small cities struggle with population
18 loss, a growing elderly population, and a loss of service functions, while population and jobs are centralizing in larger agglomerations (Fertner et al. 2015). In a review of the literature about small towns in Europe, Hansen and Winther (2018) found that the regions with large agglomerations do better economically than peripheral or rural regions which lack these agglomeration economies. Urban agglomerations are characterized by industries related to the knowledge economy, while towns in rural and peripheral regions are characterized by more traditional industries, such as agriculture, manufacturing and services (Hansen and Winther 2018). Due to this industrial structure, small towns have suffered from de-industrialization (Hansen and Winther 2018). Thus, small towns are generally characterized by processes of decline.
However, several scholars highlight a bias towards large agglomerations in the literature, that lead small cities to be treated only according to this general narrative of decline (Bell and Jayne 2009, van Heur 2013, Fertner 2015). Bell and Jayne (2009) critique urban theory for ignoring small cities as well as for making large global metropolises the standard by which all cities must be measured. Fertner (2015) similarly argues that the general trends of decline in small towns overshadows examples that do not follow this trend. Small towns may have potential for development related to processes of urban restructuring that affect small town development beyond size and position between the center and periphery (Fertner 2015). Hansen and Winther (2018) similarly found that despite general tendencies of decline, the development of small towns is relational. They argue that proximity and relationships to other cities in the regional context is important in understanding the development trajectories of small towns, which indicates that the placement within the regional context “has a significant impact on local processes of growth and decline” (Hansen and Winther 2018, 247).
So, while small towns generally can be characterized by processes of decline, the development of small towns can best be understood by also considering their relations to other places at several scales. Therefore, to avoid the overgeneralization of small towns that has characterized much of the literature, this thesis employs a relational understanding of places. A relational understanding of places entails that space cannot be theorized separately from economic and social structures and relations (Bathelt and Glückler 2003, 127; Massey 1985). This is not to say that space is unimportant, but rather that it should be used as a lens through which to examine
19 the context and consequences of local economic processes (Bathelt and Glückler 2001). Space from this perspective, is not seen as a deterministic separate entity, which governs economic and social processes, but rather as a plane in which these processes play out (Massey 1985). City regions from a relational perspective are viewed as “… a social and political product that cannot be understood without reference to its relations with other scales” (McCann and Ward 2010, 177) A city is thereby ‘situated’ through its relations, rather than its physical territory.
Approaching place as relative and dynamic is also particularly useful in the study of peripheries. Traditionally peripheries have been defined by their distance to the ‘core’, which is understood as a clustering of firms, people, and growth. This conceptualization implies that space pre- determines development and that the condition of the periphery is static (Kühn 2015). However, the static conceptualization of the periphery has been increasingly challenged by a process- centered conceptualization, which focuses on the processes through which peripheries emerge (Kühn 2015). Table 2 shows the processes of peripheralization that can be identified in the theoretical literature (Kühn 2015). Kühn (2015) notes that the processes of producing the periphery through discourse is left out of table 2, although these processes are also relevant.
Table 2: Socio-spatial processes of centralization and peripheralization.
Source: Kühn (2015, table 2, 375)
Based on these processes of centralization and peripheralization, Kühn (2015) argues that “the relation of center and periphery is less a spatial fact than a social configuration resting on unequal power relations which lead to uneven spatial development.” A relational perspective
20 thereby provides a dynamic understanding of space, which encourages a focus on the processes producing peripheries.
Recent urban developments have shown large agglomerations extend increasingly further to incorporate large hinterlands drawing small cities and towns into functionally integrated urban regions (Fertner 2013, Haase and Tötzer 2012). To understand urban regions, it thus becomes necessary to consider the interdependence between urban regions and their hinterlands, “rather than applying a dichotomy between rural and urban” as with the static center-periphery conceptualization (Haase and Tötzer 2012, 194). Hansen and Winther (2007, 46) argue that the outer city of Greater Copenhagen is such a new periphery, which they define as “a transition space”. Winther and Hansen (2006) suggest that three related processes have characterized the development of the outer city of Greater Copenhagen. The first is a changing industrial structure where traditional industries such as agriculture and manufacturing have been switched out with a more service-oriented economy (Winther and Hansen 2006). The second is that the outer city has increasingly become a residential space for the urban population working in the center (Winther and Hansen 2006). The third is that various new forms of land use have arisen in the outer city, that are related to the rise of the leisure economy, which is consumed by the urban population (Winther and Hansen 2006). Winther and Hansen (2006, 54) therefore argue that “analysis of the economic geographies of the outer city [...] should think of the outer city as a relational place”. These processes are interrelated with the city center; therefore, the outer city must be understood in the context of the whole city region.
Being small or peripheral matters in relation to processes of decline. However, this is contingent on the towns’ linkages to other places and scales and processes of centralization and peripheralization. Specifically, in relation to the outer city, relationships with the core must be taken into account, and the outer city must be considered in relation to the whole region. Applying a relational understanding of place in this thesis thereby allows for a more accurate and contextual analysis of challenges faced by small towns in the urban periphery.
Agents and the migration decision
Having covered the structural processes affecting migration from a city region perspective, I now move on to lay out the theoretical understanding of how the individual makes migration
21 decisions in this context. The following theories have the individual life of the migrant as their point of departure and can thereby provide an understanding of how structures are interpreted in relation to the specific life situation of the migrant. In the following I will present the biographical approach, the concept of everyday life strategies and the concept of linked lives, which together create a theoretical framework of how migration decisions are made (see figure 5).
The biographical approach: making migration decisions The biographical approach, proposed by Halfacree and Boyle (1993) has by several scholars been highlighted as one of the few approaches which attempts to offer a comprehensive theoretical and methodological frame of reference for the study of migration with consideration to both structure and agency (Bakewell 2010, Findlay and Li 1999, Ni Laiore 2000). Halfacree and Boyle (1993) take their point of departure in a critique of the rational choice conceptualization of human agency, as was presented earlier in this chapter. The authors argue that the neoclassical understanding of human agency is deficient and instead incorporate Gidden’s (1984) stratification model of the agent into their approach. There is an emphasis on the context of the migration decision, and on the migration decision regarding the migrant’s long-term life trajectory. The approach also upholds that there are many reasons for migrating and thus a comprehensive analysis of migration should involve the examination of multiple factors that influence migration decisions.
Giddens (1984) suggests that there are three levels of consciousness: the discursive, the practical and the unconscious (see figure 3). The practical consciousness represents our ‘common sense’, and ‘taken-for-granted’ knowledge, which allows us to continue the flow of our everyday lives. The discursive consciousness can be understood as a level of consciousness where the individual can understand their reason for making a decision, rationalize it and communicate it. There is not a sharp distinction between these two levels of consciousness as this will depend on the context of the agent.
22
Figure 3: The three levels of consciousness and their relationship. Source: Giddens 1984, 7
In this framework Giddens (1984) argues that the agent continuously monitors their actions and those of others’ (reflexivity) (see figure 4). In this process the agent also maintains an understanding of their action (rationalization), although this does not mean that the agent is able to discursively articulate the reason for this action (Giddens 1984).
Figure 4: The stratification model of the agent. Source: Figure 1, Giddens 1984, 5
Halfacree and Boyle (1993) suggest that migration literature tends to overestimate the discursive consciousness relative to the practical consciousness (Halfacree and Boyle 1993). They argue that migration decisions take place primarily in the practical consciousness and therefore the migrant will not always be able to express their reasons for moving discursively. For this reason, the biographical approach encourages the researcher to engage with the migrant and ask “around” the subject of the migration, so the researcher will get the full picture of the migration (Halfacree and Boyle 1993, 338).
Halfacree and Boyle (1993) draw on Bourdieu’s concept of habitus as the ‘source’ of the practical consciousness. The concept of habitus explains how our experiences throughout our everyday lives, are transformed into an unconscious structure, which forms the point of departure for decision-making. As such, migration can be understood as a cultural construct, where culture socializes the migrant into certain behaviours as a response to outside structures.
23 Thus “the biographical approach should not be seen in highly humanist terms but as stressing the actions of contextualised individuals…” (Boyle et al. 1998, 81). By modifying Gidden’s conceptualization of the practical consciousness, Halfacree and Boyle (1993) argue that structure affects the migration decision in two ways, firstly as the overall context of the migrant, and secondly through habitus.
In developing their understanding of human agency, Halfacree and Boyle (1993) draw on Giddens’ (1984) model of the agent and Shotter (1984). Halfacree and Boyle (1993) suggest that a migration event is an outcome of an agent’s intention. Thereby human agency is attributed influence in the migration decision. However, intentions can lead to a variety of outcomes, as they can only be said to ‘point towards’ certain outcomes, while the outcome itself is shaped in its interaction with its circumstances (Shotter 1984). Thereby moving from one place to another is a response to an intention, but the circumstances of the migration - when, where and how, “is related to the precise conditions experienced by the migrant [...]” (Halfacree and Boyle 1993). This is because intentions exist in a mediation between the agent and society that happens progressively in time (Shotter 1984).
Furthermore, Halfacree and Boyle (1993) argue that migration is not a discrete event, but an action that must be understood in relation the individual’s biography. The migration-decision is related to the individual’s past, present and predicted future (Halfacree and Boyle 1993). The migration may be a part of a long-term strategy which leads the migrant closer to achieving their goals and thus the researcher must make an effort to understand how the migration “fits into a person’s life” (Boyle et al. 1998). A consequence of arguing that migration decision must be seen as relative to the individual's biography, is recognizing that there may be many interwoven reasons that contribute to the migration-decision. “The rootedness of the migration in everyday life means that a large number of issues will be entangled in and expressed through the migration”, and thus we can expect to find several reasons for migration (Halfacree and Boyle 1993, 339). These reasons are formed between the agent’s original intentions, habitus and the structure/context. Therefore, all the reasons may not be equally important to the migration decision nor will they be equally clear (Halfacree and Boyle 1993).
24 The biographical approach has several implications for this thesis. Firstly, the biographical approach suggests the we cannot see the migration of families with children as a result of a rational comparison of the utility of two different places. This does not mean however, that the migration is free from the influence of outside structures. The individual can have its own intentions, but these intentions will be mediated by certain societal norms. Therefore, the context within which migration takes place is relevant. Additionally, the migration-decision of families with children, must be seen not just as a reaction to their immediate needs, but as a part of their entire life story. The migration must therefore be understood in the broader context of the biography of the families with children under study. Thus, another important point, is that we are most likely to find many reasons for migration, even if some may be more diffuse than others.
Everyday life strategies
When we acknowledge that migration-decisions are made in relation to an individual’s biography (past, present and future), we must also acknowledge that the biography is made up of everyday life practices that repeat over time. In this way, Aner (2009) argues that one also plans for the everyday. The everyday writes itself into the biography (Aner 2009) and thus there is a link between the two. Aner (2009) argues in her study of Danish families with children relocating to the countryside, that everyday life strategies play an important role in locational choice. According to Aner (2009) everyday life practices are grounded in both reflective and considered strategies as well as in motives that exist on a more unconsciousness level. Aner (2009) thereby acknowledges that the everyday life is a produced by actions that are both grounded in the unconscious and practical consciousness, but also the discursive consciousness. Reflexively planning the everyday life, is what Aner (2009) terms everyday life strategies and this type of planning takes place in the discursive consciousness. These strategies can have a profound impact on locational choice in that they inform the prioritization between such everyday life practices as getting to and from work, picking up children, shopping, cooking dinner and so on (Aner 2009). “Everyday life strategies are therefore about those ways in which one orients oneself towards different aspects of the everyday life - to which elements one attaches value and prioritize highly - and which elements one identifies with”. Adding the concept of everyday life strategies to the theoretical framework, helps us to understand the locational choices of families in regard to their overall life trajectory, as well as their everyday
25 life. Therefore, when analyzing families with children’s motives for moving, we must understand them in relation to strategies made for both the long-term and everyday life.
Life course theory: the principle of linked lives
While the biographical approach has provided us with an understanding of migration decision in relation to the life course, it lacks reflections on the way in which social networks influence the migrant and their migration decision. I therefore turn to life course theory, which is a multidisciplinary approach to the study of people’s lives in certain structural contexts with a focus on variation during the life-span. It is theorized that these contexts are closely linked to the formation of the life course, and therefore an individual life course can vary depending on the place and time period in which this life is lived out.
Particularly relevant to the current study is the principle of linked lives, which is one of five principles in life course theory (Elder et al. 2003). According to Elder (1994, 6): “the principle of linked lives refers to the interaction between the individual's social worlds over the life span— family, friends, and coworkers”. The networks of connections held by households’ influence “how households reach decisions about geographic organisation and migration” (Bailey et al. 2004, 1618). Lives are embedded in social relationships and are thus interdependent. They are therefore likely to influence migration decisions.
Elder et al.’s (2003) conceptualization of linked lives focused on how we are linked through our relationships. Applying the concept to the topic of migration however, Findlay et al. (2015) expand on this conceptualization by considering lives as linked also to markets, institutions and networks and embedded in regional, national and global space-time transformations. Thereby the concept of linked lives considers individuals as linked to others’ lives and socio-economic structures, which all come together in different ways across the life-time (Findlay et al. 2015). In this way, apart from the migrant’s life being linked to various socio-economic structures, their social relations are also linked to these structures, and are again linked back to the migrant.
A consequence of this perspective for the current study, is that we cannot understand the migration only in terms of how it ‘fits into’ the migrant’s life but must also understand how it fits into the lives to which that migrant is linked. As migration decisions are negotiated between
26 linked lives of household members (Findlay et al. 2015), it is relevant for the purpose of this study, to consider the migration-decision within the specific context of families with children, while accounting for their social relationships and links to socio-economic structures.
Drawing on the biographical approach, the concepts of linked lives and everyday life strategies, the following framework can be derived (Figure 5):
Figure 5: Theoretical framework of how migration decisions are made. Made by author.
An outline of the framework
The lack of migration theories, which consider both the urban processes that influence migration and how these processes are interpreted by agents leading to a migration decision, has led me to look at elements of several theories. While theories on agglomeration processes provide a good understanding of migration processes observable at the macro-level, they fail to account accurately for how these processes are produced by agents at the micro-level. Migration theories which deal in particular with how the agent makes migration decisions, likewise fail to consider specifically the processes that take place in urban regions which impact these decisions. I argue that the above theories combined contribute to the overall aim of understanding the causal mechanisms that produce the migration events which can be observed empirically. I began the
27 chapter with the argument that the theoretical framework employed in this thesis must live up to three conditions. This has resulted in the two theoretical models (figure 2 and figure 5) which will inform the analysis in chapter five. The first model describes how firms theoretically benefit from agglomerations and the link between these benefits and migration. This is put further in the context of the city region, by employing a relational understanding of place in considering size and distance to the city center. This gives us an understanding that agglomerations in a regional context encourage migration to the city center. It also provides the theoretical context within which to understand the motivations for migration. The second model demonstrates the theoretical understanding of what produces the migration decision. It demonstrates a conception of human agency with a focus on how the agent’s interpretation of structures leads to certain events. It also takes its point of departure in the specific life situation of the migrant, in considering their strategies for the long-term, everyday life and their social relationships. Combined, the two models form the theoretical framework which allows us to examine how the migrant’s interpretations are embedded in structural urban processes as well as how the migrant contributes to reproducing or transforming these structures, through their migration decisions.
28 Chapter 3: Methods
A mixed methods approach
In the previous chapter we established an aim of understanding underlying mechanisms producing migration in city regions. We also established the importance of understanding the meanings and interpretations of migration by migrants. Thereby, the nature of the topic and the theoretical framework set certain requirements for the methodology used to gather and analyze the data. The chosen methods must allow for an analysis of centralization processes in the Greater Copenhagen region, and tying these processes to motivations for migration. To this aim, I have taken a mixed methods approach, in choosing to analyze quantitative data on population and employment, as well as conducting semi-structured interviews with families with children.
As the neoclassical model of rational choice has featured in much migration research within economic geography, so have empiricist-positivist approaches and their associated quantitative methods (Isofides 2011). Nevertheless, it is not strictly necessary to couple the use of quantitative methods with deterministic ontological assumptions. Quantitative methods can be useful in establishing patterns observable at the macro-level which “are manifestations of specific generative causal mechanisms at the empirical level that need explanation” (Isofides 2011, 131). In this way, quantitative methods are complementary to qualitative methods in uncovering causal mechanisms producing migration. Therefore, with the purpose of abstracting the accounts of the interviewed families to the regional scale, I have gathered quantitative data on population and employment.
The focus on quantitative methods as a means for studying internal migration has left a gap in the literature studying subjective understandings and their impact on migration at regional scales. This thesis attempts to fill this gap in knowledge by using a qualitative method of data gathering and analysis to answer the research question. Understanding the ways in which migration is embedded in the wider life course of the migrant, as proposed by the biographical approach, also requires the use of intensive research methods (Findlay and Li 1999, Halfacree and Boyle 1993). Similarly, qualitative methods are most appropriate for gaining insight into the geographical placement of the migrants’ social networks and the nature of their social relationships. An
29 approach of engaging directly with the subjects through interviews is thereby highly appropriate for understanding the ways in which migrants mediate between wants, needs, opportunities and limits in making their decisions to move.
A qualitative approach also overcomes two methodological problems when studying migration motivations. In the theoretical chapter, we established that there are multiple factors that may influence the migration process. A qualitative approach, allows for the subject themselves to offer motivations behind their migration decision, allowing for possible other motivations to arise that were not theorized at the beginning of the research process. Secondly, recent studies (Boyle et al. 2009; Morrison and Clark 2011; Coulter and Scott 2015) have shown significant differences between what people report are their motivations for moving and what can be assumed strictly based on their moving behavior. Thereby a qualitative approach can overcome the pitfall of equating correlation with causality when it comes to migration motivations.
I have found a mixed methods approach most appropriate in answering the research question. The quantitative data provides insight into the socio-economic structures within which the experiences of the families with children have been formed and the migration decision contributes to reinforce or transform. Vice versa, the qualitative data provides nuance and depth to this statistical analysis.
Data on population and employment growth
To gain an overview and identify possible processes of centralization, I have utilized data on population and employment on the Greater Copenhagen region. The quantitative data employed in the analysis stems from the statistics by the Danish Business Authority, who have compiled data in accordance with the areas in the Finger Plan (see figure 6 for a map of Finger Plan structure). The geographical categories chosen for analysis are the inner city (palm), the fingers (city) and the municipal centers (see figure 6). This comparison is based on the common denominator of ‘built-up’ area in the Greater Copenhagen region. Therefore, the analysis does not consider the fingers (countryside), the green wedges or the rest of Outer Greater Copenhagen.
30
Figure 6: Map of the Finger Plan structure. Made by author. Source: Danish Business Authority 2017b
31
Young families with children are an important population-group for municipalities, as they provide adults in the working age while also providing pupils for schools and local institutions. I have therefore analyzed data on below 15-year-olds as a proxy for families with children. As has been established, population growth is a key factor in agglomeration economies. However, not all population contributes equally to economic growth. Retired individuals require pensions and may require extra health care services, which impacts municipal budgets and they neither contribute to innovation nor entrepreneurship. I have therefore analyzed total population growth and population growth of above 67-year-olds in the inner city, the fingers and the municipal centers. According to the theory presented earlier, high education levels are closely linked to innovation and growth in the knowledge economy (Mitze and Schmidt 2015). For this reason, I have also analyzed population growth of individuals with a higher education2.
Concentration of employment is the second key factor in agglomeration economies. I have therefore analyzed the total employment growth for the inner city, fingers and municipal centers. Furthermore, knowledge intensive industries have been tied to growth, while small and peripheral areas have been found to be particularly affected by de-industrialization. Therefore, growth in employment has also been analyzed on a sector level.
The purpose of this thesis has been to address contemporary centralization processes and therefore the data for population has been analyzed for the time period of 2008-2018, where the data for employment was available for the time period of 2008-2016. See appendix A for a detailed description of the data sets and parameters used in the analysis.
The semi-structured interviews
To examine the moving motivations of families with children, I conducted 13 semi-structured interviews with families who had moved or had decided to move away from Frederiksværk.
2 Higher education is understood as the combined categories of: short-cycle higher education, medium-cycle higher education, Bachelor’s programme, long-cycle higher education and Ph. D programme. The Danish Ministry Higher Education an Science’s online translator was used to translate different Danish levels of education: https://ufm.dk/uddannelse/anerkendelse-og-dokumentation/dokumentation/termbase
32 Choice of case: Why Frederiksværk?
The 13 families were sampled from Frederiksværk. To choose a town to sample from, the following criteria were considered:
● peripherality ● size ● data availability ● likelihood of gaining interview participants ● representativeness
To investigate these criteria, data from Statistics Denmark was used, as data specifically from the Danish Business Authority on the Greater Copenhagen region was not available at this stage in the thesis process.3 The ‘municipal centers’ defined in the Finger Plan are all peripheral in the sense that they have no S-train connection and are not located on any major highways. All the ‘municipal centers’ are below 15,000 in population and thus by relative standards small. In this way the criteria of peripheral and small were fulfilled for all the municipal centers, although both size and the distance from the center of Copenhagen varies between the cities.
Data on moving is not available at the city scale, only at municipal level. This meant that choosing a small city in a municipality, where one or several of the other cities in the same municipality had an S-train connection, would mean that the data may not accurately reflect the moving dynamics of peripheral towns. For example, if the city of Jyllinge with a population of 10,148 (Statistics Denmark 2018b) had been chosen, the data on the municipal level would also reflect the much larger city of Roskilde with a population of 50,781 (Statistics Denmark 2018b), which has both regional and S-train connections. For this reason, the choice of case was narrowed down to the four municipalities located in the Finger Plan which do not have an S-train line: Gribskov Municipality, Halsnæs Municipality, Lejre Municipality and Stevns Municipality.
3 There is some discrepancy in data on total population between the data available in Statistics Denmark and the Danish Business Authority, particularly on total population for the city of Frederiksværk. This discrepancy can be explained by different geographical conceptions of city boundaries of Frederiksværk. See Appendix (B) for further details.
33 These municipalities are also those located in furthest driving distance from the city center.
Another consideration when choosing a case for sampling the families with children, was to choose a city with a relatively high population, in order to make it more likely to find interview participants. This was particularly important as the task of finding families who have moved away from a small town rather than to a small town is challenging. The choice between the four most peripheral municipalities was therefore narrowed down to Gribskov and Halsnæs municipalities who have the cities with highest population (see appendix C, table 1). In addition to total population it was necessary to consider that actual decrease in the population of families with children. Therefore, the decrease in 0-15 year-olds for the municipal centers in Gribskov and Halsnæs were examined (see figure 7)
Figure 7: Total change in number of 0-15 year-olds between 2010-2017. Source: Statistics Denmark 2018a
This analysis showed that the municipal centers with the largest total decrease in families with children were located in Hundested and Frederiksværk. Keeping the likelihood of finding interview participants in mind, this narrowed the choice to Halsnæs municipality.
34 Frederiksværk exhibited a similar population growth trend to the other municipal centers, in that there has a been a general increase in population between 2010-2017, although there has been decline in certain age groups, where Hundested as one of the only municipal centers has experienced total population decline between 2010-2017 (Statistics Denmark 2018a, see Appendix C, table 2). Of the two, Frederiksværk was thereby most representative of recent trends. Thus, Frederiksværk was chosen as the city from which to sample families with children based on considerations of size, peripherality, data availability, likelihood of finding interview participants and some degree of representativeness of the other municipal centers.
Criteria for interviewees
In selecting the specific interviewees, several criteria were considered:
Age: One criteria was that the interviewees should all be parents of young children. This was in order to select interviewees from a similar life-stage. Looking at families with children around school-age (age six in Denmark) and younger, at the time of moving, left open the possibility of a locational choice related to available schools as well as being the time-period in which families have been shown to be most mobile (Aner and Hansen 2014). It became evident that the age of the parents, was very variable and thus a decision was made to select interviewees based on the age of the children. The interviewees all had a child between the ages of 0-13 when moving, while the age of the parents ranged from 23 to 56.
Family-type and number of children: An effort was made to encompass several family-types in the study, including couples with children and singles with children. Similarly, broad, the criteria for total number of children in the family was minimum one child. Two interviewed families were a single-parent family, while the other 11 were couples with children. The number of children in the families ranged from one to four.
Moving or planning to move: Initially I intended to interview families that had already moved. This is because research has shown that reasons for wanting to move and the reasons for actually moving may differ (Coulter and Scott 2015). Research has also shown that wanting to move will not necessarily result in a move (Coulter and Scott 2015). Additionally, interviewing families who had moved would provide the point of reference of the specific place they had moved to.
35 This would perhaps reveal more clearly what compromises had been made in the decision to move by allowing a direct comparing and contrasting of the two places, rather than comparing Frederiksværk to the ‘dream’-scenario. However, as these families could move anywhere within Greater Copenhagen, it was very difficult to physically seek them out. Therefore, this criterion was changed so as to include families with children who were planning to move within a year. This resulted in seven interviews with families that had moved, and six interviews with families that were planning to move. In some cases, the families had looked at specific houses to move to, some of which they had wished to buy. In these cases, I tried to make these specific places the point of reference for comparison. While some reflections may have been lost when interviewing those who were planning to move, most families were able to differentiate between what they wished for, and what compromises they were likely to make when making the move. Some had already made a compromise in terms of the area they had decided to move to, or look for houses in, for example in terms of price or size. This made it less of a methodological issue than first anticipated.
Time-period of moving: The criteria for moving out of Frederiksværk was within the last five years, in order to capture contemporary processes. All the interviewees who had moved, had moved within the last three years. For those who were planning on moving, the criterion was that they must plan to move within the next year or as soon as possible, for example when they had sold their house. All the interviewees who were planning to move lived up to these criteria.
Distance and direction of move: As this thesis takes it point of departure in a regional perspective, the criteria for direction of the move was to somewhere within the area of Greater Copenhagen. This meant either away from the center of Copenhagen: north or directly north- west of the center, as well as towards the center. However, towards the end of the data-collection period I made an effort to include more families who were moving towards the city center over greater distances, as this type of move seemed to be a move which involved more varied considerations, than moving over short distances or within the same municipality as Frederiksværk. This was also the type of move, which made centralization tendencies more apparent. This resulted in four interviews with families moving more north, or an equal distance from the center to either within the municipality of Halsnæs or to the neighbouring municipality of Gribskov and nine interviews with families who had moved towards the center of
36 Copenhagen, although one of these families wished to move back to Frederiksværk within a year.
See appendix D for a list of interviewees and their attributes. In the analysis and transcripts of the interviews (Appendix E-Q) the interviewees’ names have been anonymized.
Sampling
I posted in several Facebook groups for cities and municipalities in the Greater Copenhagen area, describing the thesis shortly and asking for interview participants. Seven interviewee families were sampled through this method. I also contacted parents outside day-care institutions in Frederiksværk. Five interviewee families were sampled through this method. One interviewee family was found through the snowball method. Apart from these sampling methods I also posted physical flyers in Frederiksværk, stood in front of day-care institutions in other cities near Frederiksværk, and contacted people who had a house for sale in Frederiksværk, although none of these methods lead to an interview.
Interview questions and process
The interview guide was constructed based on a literature review of factors relevant to the migration of families with children. The literature pointed the following factors as relevant: amenities (Lorentzen 2009; Chen and Rosenthal 2008; Halfacree 2008; Asheim and Hansen 2009), social ties (Hansen and Nieodomsyl 2008; Petterson and Malmberg 2009; Kolk 2017, Lundholm and Malmberg 2009; Dawkins 2006), quality of schools (Ball et al. 1995; Bailey et al. 2004; Butler et al 2013; Holme 2002), and level of education of the migrant (Hansen and Niedomsyl 2008; Lundholm 2007; Mitze and Schmidt 2015). The literature review together with the theoretical framework, lead to the interview guide (see appendix D) based on the following themes:
• biography/background • social ties/networks, both in Frederiksværk and in the new place o family, specifically grandparents and siblings o friends • the geographical location of the participants job opportunities • housing • schools
37 • preferences towards place o such as atmosphere, nature, city functions (ex. cultural offers)
At the beginning of the interviews, I started by explaining the purpose of the interview, who would read it and where it would be publicly available, as well as asking if I could record the interview. When presenting the thesis, I tried to be informative but brief in order to gain the trust and interest of the interviewees while trying not to create a bias towards talking about specific subjects. I then asked the interviewees to go through their ‘moving-history’. This was often a good starting point which allowed me to place the migration within the biography of the migrant and learn something about their place attachments and where their social networks were placed geographically. During the interview I asked follow-up questions and conferred with my interview-guide if the conversation stopped. The interviews lasted between 30 minutes - 2 hours, with the majority lasting around 45 minutes. In total 13 interviews were conducted with 21 individuals. Three interviews were conducted over the phone. Seven interviews were conducted with both adults in the family present and two interviews were conducted with single parents. The remaining four were conducted with only one adult from the family.
Enquiring “around” the migration decision
According to Halfacree and Boyle (1993) it can be a challenge to derive all the relevant factors influencing a migration decision by asking the interviewee directly about this. Because the migration decision is partly located in the practical consciousness, the migrant may not have consciously reflected on all their reasons for migrating and are therefore not able to articulate these reflections (Halfacree and Boyle 1993). According to Halfacree and Boyle (1993, 338):
“If the migration decision is partly located within practical consciousness then a further challenge for the researcher is to raise this consciousness to the discursive realm through a deliberate ‘act of reflection’. This is unlikely to be achieved comprehensively through direct interrogation of the migration decision alone. Instead, we need to enquire ‘around’ the subject, building up a picture of the migration decision from a variety of angles.”
Some of the interview questions were designed to allow me to place the migration decision in a larger context, keeping in mind that they may not have this level of reflection. These were
38 questions about the interviewees’ age, the age of their children, the geographical location of their workplace and social relations, and where they were planning on living in the future (see Appendix D). Thereby these questions were designed to gather information on the interviewee in general in order to ‘build up a picture of the migration decision from a variety of angles’.
In many cases I also experienced that the interviewees had a fixed understanding of where it was possible for them to live or move to. This was a challenge, as it masked some of the underlying reasons contributing to the migration decision. Again, this demonstrates how the migration decision is partly located in the practical consciousness. These factors were often:
● distance from family and friends ● distance from job/job opportunities ● feeling at home/comfortable in a place
To tackle this challenge and uncover the motivations that were ‘hidden’ I would sometimes ask if they could have moved to for example Jutland or southern Zealand. This can be considered a method of raising the practical consciousness to the discursive realm through a deliberate ‘act of reflection’. This type of question would often lead to a confused expression followed by a discussion. For example, one interviewee answered “No, what on earth would we do there?” Thereby this type of question revealed more clearly those factors thought of as default and allowed the interviewee to articulate and discuss them during the interview.
Analysis strategy
The analysis has been informed by the theoretical framework presented in chapter two. This framework also informed the interviews through the interview guide, which revolved around certain themes. Themes for analysis were thereby identified theoretically before the coding of the interviews. All the interviews were transcribed and during this process there was an initial round of coding. All interviews were then read through systematically and initial codes were developed and refined, and new codes were added. During the coding process, there was a focus on what motives the families gave for having moved or wanting to move and on what factors tied to the processes of agglomeration influenced the families’ migration decision, such as the location of their current jobs.
39
In the analysis it has been central that I as a researcher do not remain neutral in relation to the families’ narratives of their migration. Instead in the analysis, it was necessary to assess the extent to which the migrations’ explanations of their actions is adequate and attempt to place their subjective understanding within wider structural contexts. In the analysis I therefore ‘took a step back’ from the accounts of the interviewed families in order to place them within the contemporary processes of centralization identified through the analysis of the quantitative data. This is informed by the critical realist understanding that subjective understandings contribute to the production of reality, but reality does not consist of only subjective understandings.
40 Chapter 4: Contextual Chapter
Having outlined the research problem, the theoretical considerations and the methodological process, I now turn to a description of the Greater Copenhagen region, the Finger Plan and Frederiksværk, before moving on to the analysis. The purpose of this following chapter is to place Frederiksværk and the other municipal centers in the context of centralization of people and jobs within the region of Greater Copenhagen, which is supported by the underlying principles in the Finger Plan. I begin with a brief historical account of Copenhagen’s developments into an innovative and growing city region. I then provide an overview of recent developments in industrial structure, population and house prices. This is in order to describe the functional ties that make up Greater Copenhagen as a city region and understand the migration of families within the context of centralization of jobs and population in the region. The Finger Plan and its planning principles is then presented to provide a planning context for the developments that affect migration and settlement in the region, such as industry, housing, infrastructure and land management. Lastly, I present the case of Frederiksværk and discuss the planning strategy of Halsnæs municipality in terms of attracting families with children. This allows for a deeper understanding of the specific city-level context of the migration of the interviewed families before moving on to the analysis.
Greater Copenhagen as a city region
Today, the Copenhagen city region appears as “a national center for the rise of the knowledge and service economy” and firms, population and economic growth are concentrated in Copenhagen (Hansen and Winther 2012, 52). This is, among other things, a result of the significant effort to overcome several economic and social problems, resulting from de- industrialization processes and changes in demographic composition, that plagued the city in the 1980’s and early 1990’s. In the early 1990’s the government decided to invest heavily in Copenhagen through four large projects (Knowles 2012). The city of Copenhagen was forced to sell off municipality-owned land and dwellings to reduce their debt, while the government invested heavily in upgrading housing in inner city areas (Andersen et al. 2002). The 1990’s were thereby marked by a period of state intervention to stimulate the growth of Copenhagen (Andersen et al. 2002, 50). As a result of these efforts towards revitalization, a continued
41 emphasis from local government on the growth of Copenhagen as a creative city, and the rise of the knowledge economy, the capital region has become the national ‘growth engine’, competing on a European scale with other growth regions.
Similarly, to elsewhere in Europe, the ongoing process of urbanization has led to the expansion of the inner city into the surrounding hinterland - reorganizing population, land use and industry (Fertner 2013). The expansion of the city of Copenhagen into its hinterland started with suburbanization in the 1960’s, due to the availability of public transport and affordable private cars (Fertner 2013). This combined with the urban sprawl resulting from the building of low- density housing, worked to expand the city of Copenhagen into the surrounding areas (Fertner 2013). Particularly in the last decade the population of Copenhagen has increased at a much higher rate than the rest of the country, including the three other largest Danish cities and the direct causes of this are birth surplus and net immigration (Ministry of Interior 2017).
Recent developments in population, house prices and employment
From 1980 to 2000 there was population decline in the inner city of Copenhagen and its surrounding municipalities, while municipalities in northern Zealand and eastern Zealand had population growth (Ministry of the Interior 2017). From 2000-2016 on the other hand, the inner city of Copenhagen becomes the municipality with the highest population growth rate, while the growth rate in the surrounding municipalities also becomes positive (Ministry of the Interior 2017). Northern Zealand and eastern Zealand continue to have positive population growth, but not as high as in the period 1980-2000 (see table 3).
42 Table 3: Population growth in Greater Copenhagen4
1980-2000 2000-2016 Copenhagen municipality -1 % 18%
Closest surrounding -3% 7% municipalities Northern Zealand 11% 7% Eastern Zealand 15% 11%
Source: Ministry of the Interior 2017, figure 5, 4
In the last decade, population growth has taken place particularly in the most central parts of the region in the municipalities of Copenhagen and Frederiksberg (Torres et al. 2015). Population also concentrates around the five ‘fingers’ designated in the Finger Plan, although to a higher degree than jobs and more around the ‘second-order centers’, such as Roskilde, Køge and Helsingør (Torres et al. 2015). As more people live in the outer areas of the region, than there are jobs, we can deduce that there is high level of commuting towards jobs in the center (Torres et al. 2015). Nielsen and Hovgesen (2005) similarly found a commuting shadow that extends to the whole island of Zealand suggesting a functionally integrated labor and housing market in the region.
In Copenhagen the demand for housing has been higher than the availability for the last decade (Næss-Schmidt and Heebøll 2018). Due to the limited supply of housing in the center prices are pushed up, which also affects the municipalities in the rest of the region (Næss-Schmidt and Heebøll 2018). House prices have increased dramatically in the center since the financial crisis; the rest of the region has also experienced price increases, although not to the same degree as the center (Næss-Schmidt and Heebøøl 2018). The increase in house prices is specific to the Greater Copenhagen region, as the rest of the country has remained relatively stable (Næss-Schmidt and Heebøll 2018).
4 This calculation does not include Stevns municipality which is a municipality also included in the Finger Plan
43 Copenhagen is specialized in knowledge-intensive business services, which includes the media, telecommunications, IT and information services, finance and insurance, consulting, research and development and advertising (Winther 2017). Innovation, highly educated labor, private research and development funding and foreign investments concentrate in Copenhagen (Winther 2017). There exists a clear gradient of center-periphery in terms of jobs, where the center (palm) displays the highest densities of jobs and outer Greater Copenhagen the lowest (Torres et al. 2015). This gradient is evident although jobs also concentrate around the five ‘fingers’ designated in the Finger Plan (Torres et al. 2015).
However, the region is highly diverse and there exists a division of labour and a specialization of industries between and within the ‘palm’ and ‘finger’ structure (Hansen and Winther 2007). Outer Greater Copenhagen differs from the center (palm and fingers) in being dominated increasingly by manufacturing while the service sector, especially business service, has also expanded into this area (Hansen and Winther 2017). High-tech manufacturing, as well as medium and low-tech manufacturing has concentrated in the fingers and the outer city to a higher extent than in the palm, which is characterized by more knowledge-intensive industries and services (Winther 2017). Despite the industrial diversity, the economic sectors in the region exemplify a “spatial division of labour in the metropolitan region” and thus suggest an interdependent and interconnected city region (Hansen and Winther 2012, 102).
In sum, recent developments in the Greater Copenhagen region consist of a centralization of jobs, people and consequently high house prices in the city center. The center and outer area of Greater Copenhagen are connected through their functional ties in terms of the distribution of industry and population. Additionally, the region acts as one labor and housing market. Thus, an analysis of the regional scale is appropriate for understanding the development of the municipal centers.
The Finger Plan
In the context of the Greater Copenhagen region, it is relevant to consider its regional planning policy, the Finger Plan. The principles of the Finger Plan continue to have significant impact on the development of the region. The concept of the Finger Plan goes back to the 1930’s in which the Regional Plan Committee (Egnsplanudvalget) was tasked to come up with a regional plan as
44 a response to the issues arising from a massive increase in population, such as diminishing accessibility to green recreational areas and the question of where to place future urban expansion (Jørgensen et al. 2017; Rørbech 2011). In 1947 the ‘Finger Plan’ was presented and has since formed the “spatial logic of the city region” (Olesen 2017, 983). The main idea behind the plan - the ‘hand’-structure, has stuck and is still evident today, despite modifications and changes in those planning authorities responsible for its implementation (Knowles 2012; Rørbech 2011).
The Finger Plan is based on several principles meant to contain urban sprawl, limit road traffic congestion, and preserve green recreational areas and their accessibility (Danish Business Authority 2017a). For this purpose, there is a strong emphasis in the Finger Plan on the separation between the ‘countryside’ and the city (Danish Business Authority 2017a). Housing and commercial properties must be concentrated in the ‘palm’ and the ‘fingers’ while there should be no expansion into the ‘wedges’ present between the fingers (Danish Business Authority 2017a). The green areas in the ‘wedges’ must generally be publicly accessible (Danish Business Authority 2017a). To underpin the focus on development with the main ‘hand’- structure is the principle of proximity to stations, in which housing and commercial buildings should principally be located within 1km of a station, where priority should be given to a proximity of maximum 600m (Danish Business Authority 2017a). This principle has created growth particularly along the S-train routes. Figure 8 depicts the finger and palm structure in the Greater Copenhagen region. Figure 9 depicts the location of the municipal centers in the region.
45
Figure 8: Map of the finger and palm structure in the Greater Copenhagen region. Made by Author. Source: Danish Business Authority 2018b
46
Figure 9: Map of the ‘municipal centers’ in the Greater Copenhagen region. Made by Author. Source: Danish Business Authority 2017b.
47 The Finger Plan identifies 4 categories within Greater Copenhagen: 1) The inner main city 2) The outer main city 3) The green wedges 4) Outer Greater Copenhagen (see Danish Business Authority 2017, 14 for geographical representation). Furthermore, the Finger Plan designates 17 ‘municipal centers’ in 9 municipalities (see table 4).
Table 4: 17 municipal centers by municipality and total population in 2018
Municipal center Municipality Total population 2018
Fredensborg Fredensborg 8449
Jægerspris Frederikssund 3906
Slangerup Frederikssund 6863
Skibby Frederikssund 3182
Gilleleje Gribskov 5981
Græsted Gribskov 3617
Helsinge Gribskov 7867
Frederiksværk Halsnæs 9866
Hundested Halsnæs 8198
Skævinge Hillerød 2625
Borup Køge 4963
Kirke Hvalsø Lejre 4327
Kirke Hyllinge Lejre 2139
Lejre Lejre 2290
Jyllinge Roskilde 10701
Viby Roskilde 4617
Hårlev Stevns 2610 Store Heddinge Stevns 3361 Made by author. Source: Danish Business Authority 2018a
48 The municipal centers are located in outer Greater Copenhagen. For outer Greater Copenhagen the Finger Plan emphasises that:
“.... municipal planning in Outer Greater Copenhagen should ensure that city development is of a local nature and related to ‘municipal centers’ or as the rounding off of other communities. This is based on the wish to avoid urban sprawl, protect qualities of the landscape and to maintain and further develop the ‘finger’ structure and its close link between urban development and infrastructure, and the development of a traffic-efficient metropolitan area with limited congestion on the roads in the inner parts of the region.” (Danish Business Authority 2017a, 43)
According to the Finger Plan “Rounding off entails aiming for a final demarcation of the urban area and that urban growth is modest in relation to the existing buildings and considers the landscape” (Danish Business Authority 2017a, 56). The Finger Plan has “the hand structure as the fundamental principle of city development in Greater Copenhagen” (Danish Business Authority 2017a, 57). Thus, the Finger Plan encourages and underpins the processes of centralization noted in the previous section.
Frederiksværk
History
Frederiksværk is a small town located in the periphery of the Greater Copenhagen region, north- west of the inner city (see figure 10). It has a long industrial history starting in the 1700s, with the earlier period characterized by iron casting and gunpowder production, and the later period up until today, by steel production (Stålsat By 2012). In the 1940s the steelwork was established due to the favorable location of Frederiksværk and national interests in steel production, which created high population growth in the city for many decades following (Stålsat By 2012). The economic crisis in the 1970’s hit the steelworks and created large unemployment in the city (Dansk Center for Byhistorie n. d.). However, manufacturing continued to be the most dominating industry, even as it declined in the rest of Denmark, while unemployment dropped partially because the population found employment outside the city through the 1980s and 1990s
49 (Dansk Center for Byhistorie n. d.). In 2002 the steelworks went bankrupt, and it was then split into three parts and sold to different foreign owners, which lead to a large cut in employees (Industrimuseet Frederiks Værk n. d.). Since then, the steelworks have experienced varying financial turmoil (de Vries 2017, Sørensen 2017, Halsnæs Avis 2015, Rosendal 2009).
Figure 10: Map of Frederiksværk in the Greater Copenhagen region. Made by author. Source: Danish Business Authority 2017b.
50 Frederiksværk continues to experience challenges as a consequence of this de-industrialization (Halsnæs Municipality and The Frederiks Værk Museum of Industry 2011). In particular, Frederiksværk has issues with businesses and younger population moving out of the city (Halsnæs Municipality and The Frederiks Værk Museum of Industry 2011). Halsnæs has several social challenges. Halsnæs was the municipality with the second-highest share of ‘vulnerable children’ (15%) compared to the total population of children in the municipality, in 2017 (Kloppenborg and Wittrup 2017). Halsnæs places more children in foster care than the country average, and particularly the placement of children in foster care impacts the municipal budget (Jensen 2018). Frederiksværk also has issues with organized crime. Among other things Frederiksværk has been used as a meeting place for gang members (Ren 2017, Halsnæs Avis 2017).
However, the municipality of Halsnæs has had some successes in overcoming its industrial heritage. Frederiksværk High School has been ranked as the 4th best in the Greater Copenhagen region in improving grades of students based on grades from elementary school and socio- economic factors such as the level of education and employment of the students’ parents (Danish Chamber of Commerce 2018a, 2018b). In 2008 Halsnæs Municipality became a ‘cultural heritage municipality’ and has since used its industrial heritage as a planning tool with the purpose of developing identity, attracting population and supporting the leisure economy (Halsnæs Municipality 2013). The municipality has also recently carried out a urban regeneration of Hundested Havn and Frederiksværk city (Halsnæs Municipality 2015). The regeneration in Frederiksværk has been centered around its industrial heritage (Halsnæs Municipality 2015).
Attracting and maintaining families with children
As many peripheral municipalities, Halsnæs Municipality has had a focus on maintaining and attracting families with children. As stated in their growth strategy 2013-2015:
“To support a sustainable composition of population there must be a focus on maintaining and attracting families with children, who can positively contribute to the development of the municipality. This refers
51 to families with children within 1) the middle-income group and 2) the high-income group. ● To support the increase of children and young people there must be a focus on young families with children and couples, that are considering starting a family, typically middle income and typically with vocational training. This group is traditionally the largest group of newcomers. ● To support the municipality’s tax base and improve the general level of education, there must be a focus on attracting families with children where both or one of the parents is in a high-income group, typically with long cycle higher education.” (Halsnæs Municipality 2012, 3-4, author’s translation)
An overall marketing plan for Halsnæs Municipality was initiated in 2015 (Committee on Business and Employment 2018). This strategy included marketing Halsnæs to families with children through several initiatives, among others: stories in the media, events where families with children are contacted directly, the platform oplevhalsnaes.dk (experience Halsnæs), and the platform vielskerhalsnaes.dk (we love Halsnæs) (Committee on Business and Employment 2018). Oplevhalsnaes.dk is an online guide to experiences in Halsnæs and vielskerhalsnaes.dk is a platform that covers living in Halsnæs, working in Halsnæs and also experiences in Halsnæs (Committee on Business and Employment 2018). Vielskerhalsnaes.dk features stories from families with children who have moved to Halsnæs, often from Copenhagen (Vi elsker Halsnæs and Halsnæs Municipality 2018). See figure 11, for an example.
52
Figure 11: Screenshot of article featured on vielskerhalsnaes.dk. The title reads: Thomas and Anne Kristine took the plunge - House in Halsnæs: The dream of a house and a garden became a reality in the summer of 2015, when Thomas and Anne Kirstine traded in an apartment in Copenhagen with a townhouse with the thatched roof near Asserbo, Frederiksværk.
According to the Committee on Business and Employment (2018) in Halsnæs Municipality vielskerhalsnaes.dk has been the most successful initiative with the largest reach, particularly the articles about newcomers have been popular. Most of the traffic to the website is from the Copenhagen area (Committee on Business and Employment 2018).
53 Frederiksværk in a centralizing region
We can note a trend of “re-urbanization and density increase” of jobs and population in the center of the Greater Copenhagen, in the last decade (Torres et al. 2015, 55). Copenhagen appears as a national center of growth with a specialization in knowledge-intensive industries, where both jobs and population are concentrated around the center, and to some degree around the ‘fingers’. The Finger Plan through its principles encourages this centralized growth. This leaves the question of the outer city and how it can have “city development of local nature” while jobs and people continue to concentrate in the hand-structure. In this context, the periphery is disadvantaged, which is evident in the case of Frederiksværk. Therefore, we see Halsnæs municipality attempting to cope with both de-industrialization and the out-migration of population through various strategies such as regeneration of their two main cities, Hundested and Frederiksværk, and branding towards families with children living in the city center. In the following chapter, this relative centralization will be analyzed in more depth by looking at population growth, and employment growth in the ‘municipal centers’, ‘fingers’ and ‘palm’ in more detail. Additionally, it will be examined to what extent these centralizations trends can be noted within the accounts of the interviewed families with children.
54 Chapter 5: Analysis
This chapter presents the analysis of the data gathered on population and employment, and the data gathered through the 13 semi-structured interviews. Firstly, I analyze quantitative data on population growth and employment growth. This is in order to identify key processes of urban development in the Greater Copenhagen region. This analysis provides an understanding of the spatial outcomes of agglomeration processes in the Greater Copenhagen region and thereby also a context in which to understand the following analysis of families with children’s motivations for migration. Secondly the qualitative data is analyzed in relation to what motives can be identified as having influenced the migration decision of families with children, moving away from Frederiksværk. The analysis reveals certain challenges faced by small peripheral towns in the region. On the basis of these motives and an analysis of the socio-economic characteristics of the migrants, I identify two ideal types of migrating families. These migrant types synthesize the analysis and are operationalized in the following discussion.
Developments in population and employment
The following section will present the analysis of data on population and employment growth within the Greater Copenhagen region. The following data are analyzed:
Percentage change in: 1) above 67 year-olds out of total population 2) below 15 year-olds of total population 3) individuals with higher education of total population 4) total employment 2008-2016 5) employment within sectors between 2008-2016
These data have been chosen as key indicators of urban development. The chosen data is meant to indicate some outcomes of agglomeration processes, in accordance with figure 2. The chosen statistics have been analyzed with the purpose of understanding the specific geographical articulations of these agglomeration processes in the Greater Copenhagen region. The analysis shows a centralization of families with children, those of working age with a higher education,
55 employment in general and employment in knowledge-based sectors. This provides a context for understanding the migration decision of families with children, analyzed in the following section.
Table 5: Percentage in above 67-year-olds out of total population
Area in the Finger Plan 2008 2018 Difference 2008-2018 Inner city (palm) 11.6 11.6 -0.1 Average change for fingers (city) 4.3 Outer Frederikssund Finger (city) 12.0 18.8 6.9 Inner Amager Finger (city) 16.4 22.7 6.3 Inner Frederikssund Finger (city) 12.0 18.1 6.1 Inner Roskilde Finger (city) 14.7 20.4 5.7 Outer Hillerød Finger (city) 13.6 18.1 4.5 Outer Helsingør Finger (city) 9.6 14.0 4.4 Inner Helsingør Finger (city) 12.7 16.5 3.8 Inner Hillerød Finger (city) 13.9 17.5 3.7 Outer Roskilde Finger (city) 14.5 17.7 3.2 Outer Køge Finger (city) 13.2 16.5 3.2 Inner Farum Finger (city) 15.5 17.6 2.1 Inner Køge Finger (city) 17.3 19.1 1.8 Average change for municipal centers 5.9 Skibby (municipal center) 11.5 21.8 10.4 Kirke Hyllinge (municipal center) 17.6 27.7 10.0 Jægerspris (municipal center) 15.2 24.0 8.8 Lejre (municipal center) 11.9 20.3 8.4 St. Heddinge (municipal center) 14.8 22.9 8.1 Fredensborg (municipal center) 15.8 23.7 7.9 Frederiksværk (municipal center) 14.2 21.7 7.6 Græsted (municipal center) 11.3 17.8 6.6 Jyllinge (municipal center) 12.8 18.9 6.1 Hårlev (municipal center) 10.9 16.4 5.5 Hundested (municipal center) 11.3 16.8 5.5 Kirke Hvalsø (municipal center) 16.6 21.5 5.0 Borup (municipal center) 14.5 18.3 3.8 Slangerup (municipal center) 19.7 23.0 3.3 Helsinge (municipal center) 14.8 17.9 3.1 Skævinge (municipal center) 14.5 17.2 2.8 Gilleleje (municipal center) 19.6 22.1 2.5 Made by author. Source: Danish Business Authority (2018a)
56
Table 5 demonstrates that the population of both the municipal centers and the fingers are aging, while the age composition of the inner city is remaining relatively stagnant. Change in above 67 year-olds of total population from 2008 to 2018 ranges from 2,5% in Gilleleje to 10,4% in Skibby, where the average for municipal centers is 5,9%. Change in above 67 year-olds of total population within the fingers ranges from 1,8% in the inner Køge Finger to 6,9% in the outer Frederikssund Finger, where the average for the fingers is 4,3%. The inner city (palm) has a decrease of above 67 year-olds of total population of -0,1%. This should be seen in relation to the national 3,6% change of above 67 year-olds (Statistics Denmark 2018b, see appendix C).
Table 6: Percentage in below 15-year-olds of total population
Area in Finger Plan 2008 2018 Difference 2008-2018 Inner city (palm) 16.8 16.8 0.1 Average change for fingers (city) -1.5 Inner Amager Finger (city) 21.5 22.1 0.6 Inner Køge Finger (city) 21.8 21.1 -0.8 Inner Hillerød Finger (city) 21.5 20.7 -0.8 Inner Farum Finger (city) 20.5 19.6 -0.9 Inner Frederikssund Finger (city) 20.7 19.7 -1.0 Inner Roskilde Finger (city) 20.1 18.9 -1.2 Outer Roskilde Finger (city) 19.2 17.8 -1.4 Inner Helsingør Finger (city) 21.4 19.2 -2.1 Outer Hillerød Finger (city) 22.3 20.0 -2.3 Outer Køge Finger (city) 21.8 19.2 -2.6 Outer Frederikssund Finger (city) 23.0 20.3 -2.7 Outer Helsingør Finger (city) 20.5 17.6 -2.8 Average change for municipal centers -3.2 Skævinge (municipal center) 23.4 19.7 -1.1 Frederiksværk (municipal center) 18.4 16.6 -1.5 St. Heddinge (municipal center) 25.2 20.7 -1.8 Borup (municipal center) 26.8 25.7 -2.0 Kirke Hvalsø (municipal center) 20.1 17.5 -2.3 Skibby (municipal center) 26.1 21.7 -2.6 Helsinge (municipal center) 26.0 22.4 -2.7 Gilleleje (municipal center) 25.4 20.3 -3.5 Kirke Hyllinge (municipal center) 19.5 16.7 -3.5 Viby (municipal center) 18.7 14.5 -3.7
57 Jægerspris (municipal center) 22.2 19.4 -3.9 Hundested (municipal center) 23.2 20.3 -4.2 Lejre (municipal center) 18.3 14.8 -4.5 Slangerup (municipal center) 19.5 18.0 -4.5 Fredensborg (municipal center) 23.2 18.2 -4.9 Jyllinge (municipal center) 23.6 21.6 -5.1 Made by author. Source: Danish Business Authority (2018a)
In table 6, considering below 15 year-olds as proxies for families with children, there is a relative depopulation of families with children in the municipal centers, although there is some depopulation in the fingers and stagnation in the palm. Change of below 15-year-olds of total population in the municipal centers ranges from -5,5% in Jyllinge to -1,1% in Skævinge with an average of -3,2% for all the municipal centers. Change in below 15 year-olds within the fingers ranges from -2,8% in the outer Helsingør Finger to 0,6% in the inner Amager finger with an average of -1,5%. There is a minimal change of 0,1% in the inner city (palm). This should be seen in relation to the -2,0% national change in percentage population of 15 year-olds (Statistics Denmark 2018b, see appendix C).
Table 7: Percentage in individuals with higher education of total population
Area in Finger Plan 2008 2018 Difference 2008-2018 Inner city (palm) 34.5 46.9 12.3 Average change for fingers (city) 7.5 Inner Amager Finger (city) 22.7 32.2 9.5 Inner Køge Finger (city) 16.3 24.9 8.7 Inner Farum Finger (city) 36.7 45.3 8.6 Inner Frederikssund Finger (city) 23.2 30.3 7.1 Outer Køge Finger (city) 21.4 28.1 6.8 Inner Hillerød Finger (city) 46.7 53.4 6.7 Outer Roskilde Finger (city) 29.0 35.4 6.4 Inner Roskilde Finger (city) 20.4 26.7 6.3 Outer Hillerød Finger (city) 35.8 41.4 5.7 Outer Frederikssund Finger (city) 24.8 30.1 5.3 Outer Helsingør Finger (city) 28.0 33.1 5.1 Inner Helsingør Finger (city) 40.3 45.0 4.6 Average change for municipal centers 4.0
58 Kirke Hvalsø (municipal center) 29.8 36.5 6.7 Borup (municipal center) 22.0 28.4 6.3 Helsinge (municipal center) 19.2 25.3 6.0 Lejre (municipal center) 49.1 54.5 5.4 Fredensborg (municipal center) 32.0 36.9 5.0 Jyllinge (municipal center) 27.7 32.6 4.9 Skævinge (municipal center) 23.2 28.0 4.9 Gilleleje (municipal center) 23.8 28.2 4.4 Viby (municipal center) 23.6 27.9 4.3 St. Heddinge (municipal center) 13.3 17.2 3.9 Hundested (municipal center) 20.9 24.7 3.9 Slangerup (municipal center) 23.1 26.4 3.3 Frederiksværk (municipal center) 16.0 19.1 3.2 Kirke Hyllinge (municipal center) 19.1 22.0 2.9 Græsted (municipal center) 17.9 20.3 2.4 Hårlev (municipal center) 17.0 19.3 2.3 Skibby (municipal center) 16.1 17.8 1.7 Jægerspris (municipal center) 26.8 27.9 1.2 Made by author. Source: Danish Business Authority (2018b)
Table 7 suggests a relative centralization of individuals with higher education. As argued in chapter two, individuals with a higher education are important for innovation and thus growth. Change in individuals in the working age with a higher education between 2008-2018 for municipal centers ranges from an increase of 1,2% in Jægerspris to 6,7% in Kirke Hvalsø, where the average is 4,0% for all municipal centers. While the percentage of individuals in the working age with a higher education is on the lower end in comparison to the fingers and palm, there are certain towns with a relatively high portion of individuals with higher education, such as Lejre, Kirke Hvalsø and Jyllinge. This may be related to their shorter distance from Roskilde University and DTU campus Risø. For the fingers the percentage change in individuals of working age with a higher education ranges from 4,0 % in the inner Helsingør finger to 9,5% in the inner Amager finger with an average of 7,5% for all the fingers. For the inner city (palm) the change is 12,3%.
59 Table 8: Percentage change in total employment 2008-2016
Percentage change Area in Finger Plan 2008 2016 2008-2016 Inner city (palm) 464762 512365 10.2 Average percentage change for fingers (city) 2.9 Inner Amager Finger (city) 13453 14772 9.8 Inner Køge Finger (city) 21869 23918 9.4 Inner Farum Finger (city) 48513 51571 6.3 Inner Frederikssund Finger (city) 69098 72630 5.1 Inner Roskilde Finger (city) 76067 79749 4.8 Outer Hillerød Finger (city) 31604 33113 4.8 Outer Køge Finger (city) 36194 37660 4.1 Outer Frederikssund Finger (city) 13273 13795 3.9 Outer Roskilde Finger (city) 35881 36603 2.0 Inner Helsingør Finger (city) 19042 18523 -2.7 Outer Helsingør Finger (city) 23355 22520 -3.6 Inner Hillerød Finger (city) 24419 22201 -9.1 Average percentage change for municipal centers -7.4 Lejre (municipal center) 500 639 27.8 Hårlev (municipal center) 867 977 12.7 Borup (municipal center) 1292 1360 5.3 Frederiksværk (municipal center) 4103 4160 1.4 Kirke Hvalsø (municipal center) 1228 1194 -2.8 Helsinge (municipal center) 3830 3620 -5.5 Jyllinge (municipal center) 2143 2009 -6.3 Skævinge (municipal center) 688 627 -8.9 Fredensborg (municipal center) 3178 2816 -11.4 Skibby (municipal center) 1358 1196 -11.9 Viby (municipal center) 1144 999 -12.7 Kirke Hyllinge (municipal center) 634 540 -14.8 Slangerup (municipal center) 2615 2219 -15.1 Græsted (municipal center) 1023 868 -15.2 Gilleleje (municipal center) 2521 2115 -16.1 Hundested (municipal center) 2007 1635 -18.5 St. Heddinge (municipal center) 1677 1363 -18.7 Jægerspris (municipal center) 945 731 -22.6 Made by author. Source: Danish Business Authority (2018c)
60 Table 8 demonstrates a concentration of employment in the inner city and the fingers. Employment growth in the municipal centers ranges from -22,6 in Jægerspris to 27,8% in Lejre, with an average employment growth of -7,4%. Employment growth in the finger ranges from - 9,1% in the outer Hillerød Finger to 9,8% in the inner Amager Finger, with an average of 2,9% employment growth. The inner city (palm) shows the highest employment growth with 10,2%.
Table 9: Percentage change in employment within sectors between 2008-2016
Inner Fingers Municipal centers city (city) (palm) Agriculture, forestry and fishing -9.4 3.9 -26.5 Industry, raw material extraction and -13.7 -4.6 -34.2 utilities Construction -4.5 1.2 -11.0 Trade and transport etc. 7.7 4.6 -8.4 Information and communications 18.6 -16.9 7.6 Finance and insurance -4.5 -6.6 -60.9 Real estate and renting -3.6 39.7 8.8 Business services 27.7 7.7 0.5 Public administration, education and 11.9 8.9 0.2 health Culture, leisure and other services 9.5 5.4 0.5
Made by author. Source: Danish Business Authority (2018c)
Table 9 shows a more detailed picture of the centralization of employment, illustrating trends in accordance with the developments predicted by agglomeration theory in a knowledge economy context (Mitze and Schmidt 2015). The inner city (palm) shows decline in primary sectors and finance and insurance. The inner city (palm) shows growth in knowledge intensive sectors such as business services and information and communications. A less clear trend is present in the fingers (city) and there is high variation (Appendix C, table 5). We see a large increase in
61 employment in the real estate and renting sector, which corresponds to trends of increased centralization of population in the fingers. The largest decline in employment is found in the information and communications sector, while this sector has grown considerably in the inner city, suggesting a centralization of employment in this sector. This sector also grew in the municipal centers, but while the percentage change in total employment in this sector is high, it is less significant in absolute numbers (Appendix C, table 5). The municipal centers, similarly to the fingers show high variation in employment growth between sectors (Appendix C, table 5). Particularly there has been a high percentage decline in finance and insurance, industry, raw material extraction and utilities, and agriculture forestry and fishing. While finance and insurance and agriculture, forestry and fishing represent a relatively low percentage of total jobs in the municipal centers, industry, raw material extraction and utilities represents one of the largest sectors (Appendix C, table 5). Thus, we see de-industrialization in the region as a whole, but percentage wise this is most significant in the municipal centers. Frederiksværk has lost the most employment in absolute values out of the municipal centers with a decline in employment in industry, raw material extraction and utilities of 351 jobs (Appendix C, table 5).
Similarly, construction and trade and transport, represents one of the largest sectors in the municipal centers and thus the decline in employment is significant in terms of the number of absolute jobs lost (Appendix C, table 5). For the municipal centers we also see a growth in real estate and renting, which may be related to both residential housing and holiday homes. What can also be noted is a relative centralization of jobs in the public administration, education and health, suggesting a distribution of public resources favoring the city center and fingers. Frederiksværk however, is the municipal center with the highest growth in employment within the public sector, with a growth in employment of 399 between 2008-2016 (Appendix C, table 5).
In conclusion, the trends identified in the above analysis correspond to the processes outlined in figure 2, where we see agglomeration and centralization in the inner city and a gradient of center-periphery in terms of jobs and population. However, when analyzing both municipal centers and the fingers individually, we also see high geographical variability. In sum, these data are indicative of processes of cumulative causation inherent in agglomeration economies. The municipal centers are undergoing processes of peripheralization such as depopulation and
62 industrial decline. There is a relative centralization of one key factor of growth, namely population of the working age with a higher education. Thus, we can observe a growing inequality within the Greater Copenhagen region. Although by no means an exhaustive review of the indicators of agglomeration processes, the analyzed data demonstrates some outcomes (depopulation of individuals of working age) as well as some of the factors influencing migration (concentration of jobs in the city center) that are related to these agglomeration processes. This serves to inform us of the context within which we can understand the migration motivations analyzed in the following section. Likewise, we can understand what overall trends the interviewed families with children’s migration decisions contribute to reproducing.
An analysis of moving motives
The following analysis of the qualitative data is structured around five themes:
● Theme 1: social ties ● Theme 2: opportunities and resources of Frederiksværk and the moving destination ● Theme 3: moving closer to jobs ● Theme 4: finding the right home ● Theme 5: house prices
These themes have been identified on the basis of the literature review and theoretical framework presented in chapter two, which also structured the data gathering process and the following coding process. As discussed in chapter two, we understand that the migration decision is made in the context of an everyday life strategy and the migrants’ life biography as well as their interpretations of structures. The interview data has therefore been analyzed with the purpose of understanding how these families make reflexive choices on where to live based on their everyday life strategies and life biographies. Individuals are also understood to be linked to others through their social relationships. The accounts of the interviewed families have therefore been analyzed with an emphasis on understanding how their links to family and friends have influenced the migration decision. Furthermore, we understand the that the migration decision is made in an interaction between agency and structure. The qualitative data has therefore been analyzed with the aim of tying the motivations to processes of agglomeration in the Greater Copenhagen region.
63
I begin this section with an analysis of the theme of social relations and argue that families are motivated to either move closer to their friends and families or stay near them, depending on where their social network is located, which can have an important influence on both where the families move to and when they move. I then argue that the lack of opportunities (particularly educational) and resources (for schools and to lower crime) in Frederiksværk act as motivators for families to move away to places perceived to have more opportunities and resources. Being close to jobs and job opportunities is also identified as a factor motivating families to move. Furthermore, I argue that for some families, housing has had an important influence on the migration outcome and for all families, house prices have limited their migration outcomes, but the extent varies. Based on these themes and an analysis of the socio-economic characteristics of the migrants I have identified two ideal types of migrant family, which are categorized based on migration motives, the migration ‘outcome’ and the structural context surrounding the migration. These ideal types are presented in table 10.
Theme 1: The linked lives of families with children
A recurrent theme regarding the migration decision has been social relations. For several of the interviewed families, the migration decision is influenced by an everyday life strategy that prioritizes proximity to family and close contact on an everyday basis. This prioritization is situated within the biography of the interviewed families as it is formed by past experiences as well as plans for the future. The everyday life strategy informs the migration decisions such that social relations act as motivators to move to an area or stay in an area, depending on the geographical location of the friends and family.
Moving closer to or staying near family and friends is a consequence of an everyday life strategy where the family prioritizes certain social relationships and organizes their lives around this prioritization (Aner 2009). For several of the interviewed families an emphasis is placed on seeing family and friends more frequently and without having to plan ahead of time. For example, Rikke highlights the importance she and her boyfriend place on being able to visit family spontaneously and having interactions with them on an everyday basis. This is related to their past experiences of having family around on an everyday basis, as well as their wishes for these interactions to continue in the future.
64
“Rikke: [...] We probably don’t want it to take more than half an hour [to visit family] because if we have to pick [our daughter] up it’s nice not to have to drive too long. [...] that we spontaneously can visit them and that we don’t have to plan too much. Interviewer: So you would like them to be a part of your everyday life? Rikke: Yes [...] they have been until now and we really enjoy spending time with our family and we enjoy that [our daughter] gets to spend time with her grandparents. And we want that to continue“ (Appendix Q, p. 4, author’s translation).
Another of the interviewed families also emphasize the importance of spontaneity and seeing family on an everyday basis. Anne and Christopher have been living out of the country with their children, prior to moving back to their home in Frederiksværk and have therefore not been able to see their family on an everyday basis. They have bought a piece of land and are building a house close to the area where both their sets of parents live but made the decision to move their children to schools in the area two years ago.
“Anne: Yes and you can just show up for an hour and say hi and its very nice, now that my parents live three minutes from [our sons’ school] and they also have a few after school activities in the city. The youngest is a boy scout and the 14- year-old roller skates and that’s also in Hørsholm and we’ve sort of made a routine that [my parents] pick them up from school and take them to their activities and our 17-year-old, she can find her way around herself and she has a volunteer job at the Red Cross so they see them almost every week and that’s very nice” (Appendix E, p. 14, author’s translation).
The recent migration decision is built on Anne and Christopher’s past choice to live outside of Denmark. We can see that the lives of Anne and Christopher are linked to their parents’ and that the transition of their parents into an elderly stage of life, has prompted Anne and Christopher to move back to the country, as well as closer to where their parents live. Thereby the decision to move away from Frederiksværk is related to their biography.
65
“Christopher: [...] One of the reasons we have moved back [to Denmark], is because we would rather have a relationship with [our parents] while they can still walk somehow. Anne: While they are still alive. Christopher: And while they are still alive, because it’s not the same to come back to parents who are very old, as to parents who are old but still can move around [...] So it had to be now, and not in 10 years that we moved back to senile grandparents” (Appendix E, p. 14, author’s translation).
The concept of linked lives also becomes apparent in Anne and Christopher’s relationship with their siblings. They have two siblings each and all four live in inner city Copenhagen. Christopher describes how the family situation makes it difficult for his siblings to move, due to the interdependency between ex-spouses, children and new spouses. This has led Anne and Christopher to the conclusion that they must be the ones to move if they wish to maintain those social relationships.
“Christopher: But they are stuck where they live. [My siblings] have all kinds of combined families and exes and… Anne: Children. Christopher: And so on. They can never, they can’t... Anne: They can’t really move. Christopher: They have no choice, they just have to be… Interviewer: So you have to be more mobile? Christopher: Yes a little. Anne: Yes if we want to see them“ (Appendix E, p. 15, author’s translation).
This demonstrates how several social relationships that are not necessarily immediate to the migrant, still come together over space and time and affect the migration decision.
Another theme in the accounts of the interviewed families is how Frederiksværk is inaccessible, to their friends and family, particularly if they do not have a car. This encourages families to
66 move closer, or to areas that are more accessible than Frederiksværk. Kristine describes that the options of reaching Frederiksværk through public transport are limited and that both her parents and her parents-in-law do not have a car, making it complicated to see each other in Frederiksværk. Moving to Hillerød is seen as a solution to this issue for Kristine and her family, among other things this due to the S-train line. Thus, we see how the inaccessibility of Frederiksværk complicate families’ everyday lives in terms of maintaining social relationships, and how places with higher accessibility become relatively more attractive.
“Kristine: And it has definitely had a large influence both for us but also for others who would like to visit. It is incredibly difficult to get to Frederiksværk from Helsingør or from Hillerød or from Copenhagen or something. [...] The trains don’t go often and they stop early so it requires sleeping over, either one way or the other” (Appendix J, p. 5, author’s translation).
“Kristine: And my parents they live in Helsingør, and so we would also move a lot closer to them by moving to Hillerød. And it would be easier. There are, none of our parents have a car for example. [...] So that alone would mean a lot. At least for my parents with public transportation, because right now they have to take a bus and minimum 2 trains to get to Frederiksværk“ (Appendix J, p. 7, author’s translation).
For many of the interviewed families social relations act as a pull factor motivating them to move, but in the cases where the social network is located close to Frederiksværk, they instead act as an influence to stay in the area of north-west Zealand. For example, in the case of Laura and Emil, who have decided to by a small farm estate in Gribskov Municipality. Laura describes a geographical “boundary” that the family has determined based on their social relationships. This has contributed to their choice of geographical location “in the middle” of the relationships which they have prioritized.
“Laura: [...] We knew in relation to the geography if we should talk about that, is that we didn’t want to, we didn’t want to go south of Slangerup. That was the boundary, we didn’t want to go to Roskilde or down that way. Because it felt too
67 far away. Because our family lives primarily in Slangerup and Gilleleje. So it was in this area that we were looking and where we wanted to live [...]” (Appendix O, p. 4, author’s translation).
“Emil: So we have my dad in Gilleleje so that was what pulled us to live close to him and my mom still lives in Frederiksværk. Laura: So we are in the middle. Emil: So we have 20 minutes to Frederiksværk and 15 minutes to Gilleleje. So we are in between everything. Then we have half an hour to Slangerup” (Appendix O, p. 5, author’s translation).
By considering social relations as something which factors into the migration decision the analysis revealed one aspect of agglomerations, which is less evident in the agglomeration literature. The accounts of the families with children demonstrate that social relationships are embedded in space and point to the ways in which biographically linked lives shape migration behaviour. We can see that social relationships are not just something which plays out at a micro-level between individuals. The friends and family of the migrating families are also influenced by social and economic structures in terms of where they decide to live. In the case group, social relationships act as either a motivator to move or a constraining factor, depending on where they are placed geographically in relation to the migrants. Simply put, the families express that they either want to move closer to or stay near their family and friends to be able to see them spontaneously and on an everyday basis. In light of the increased centralization of population noted in the beginning of the chapter, this presents a challenge for the small towns under study. For those with family and friends who live closer to the center of Copenhagen, Frederiksværk is relatively inaccessible, both in terms of distance and the possibility of reaching it through public transport. This encourages them to move away from Frederiksværk, to cities that are more accessible, such as those with S-trains. Thus, we see how inaccessibility is a challenge for small towns such as Frederiksværk.
Theme 2: Away from Frederiksværk - towards better opportunities
For those who have decided to move away from Frederiksværk and out of the area of north-west Zealand, Frederiksværk is perceived to be a place with few opportunities and few resources. The quality of the schools is perceived to be low and the lack of opportunities is expressed
68 particularly regarding children and educational offers, both for primary school and higher education. Also, crime is highlighted as a symptom of the lack of resources in Frederiksværk and several of the families were motivated to move from Frederiksværk, out of fear for their children to end up in a criminal environment. Conversely the migration destination is seen as offering more opportunities in general and particularly regarding education.
Several of the families stated that the lack of good schools in the area of Frederiksværk were one of the main reasons for moving. This was the case for families who already had their children at school in Frederiksværk, as well as families where their children were about to reach school age. The interviewed families point to issues with the schools in Frederiksværk in regards to their capacity to deal with the specific needs of their children. Mette and Anders experienced that the quality of education their children were receiving in Frederiksværk was not adequate. They identified the schools as the main reason for moving away from Frederiksværk. Mette and Anders eventually moved both their children to schools in Rudersdal after being recommended a good private school in Rudersdal by a friend. They then moved the family to Rudersdal when they were able to sell their house in Frederiksværk.
“Mette: When the oldest was in 4th grade, he was in a very small class, I think they were 15 and there were many girls and not many boys he could play with and teachers who didn’t really work out and an environment that just… And the class was in some way split and we felt there had to be a change because it wasn’t good enough, and we couldn’t really find any local alternatives” (Appendix L, p. 4, author’s translation).
“Anders: Specifically, with our son, we went to a parent-teacher conference where they told us not to worry. Because he was not under average yet. And you can see, if the goal is that he should just follow the average and the others should reach him at the average, then they are not caring for the development that our son could achieve” (Appendix L, p. 6, author’s translation).
Annette experienced when moving to Frederiksværk from Værløse, that the teachers did not take care of her son, when he was bullied for being ‘the new kid’. Annette’s main reason for moving
69 back to Værløse was her former husband’s suicide and her wish to be near her family in Værløse, but she also mentions that her and her husband had considered moving back before the suicide, mainly due to their son’s problems at school. Annette moved back to Værløse with her two children after six months.
Annette: They, I don’t think [the teachers] reacted properly, they didn’t take care of the different things and [my son] had to stop a lot of the problems himself and run to the teachers and ask for help. There was not really anyone who was attentive to that fact that he was the new kid in the class [...]” (Appendix M, p. 8, author’s translation).
Apart from concerns about the quality of the education, some families also have concerns about the social circle their children will end up in if they go to school in Frederiksværk. This is tied to the social issues that Frederiksværk has experienced for decades. Kristine is concerned with the fact that the children in Frederiksværk do not have the same social status as her child.
“Kristine: So all in all it will be easier for everyone [to move] and [our daughter] will probably have a better education and better opportunities to meet equal children [...] Because we can see the way it is now, [she] just had a birthday party for example and then they talk about what she has and they don’t have [...] and she goes on vacation several times a year compared to her friends at kindergarten. It starts at an early age those kinds of things” (Appendix J, p. 7, author’s translation).
Other families are concerned about protecting their children from other children that they perceive to be a bad influence. Mia expresses concerns about her children ending up in a bad social circle, which uses drugs.
“Mia: [...] some years ago there was an article about the school that’s close to here. [...] Which also, and I know it can happen everywhere and I sound very snobby but, I just don’t think my children should go there. [...] It was something with some 6th and 7th graders that had been smoking weed behind the school.
70 And I know it can happen everywhere and it can also happen at the private school. But it just gives this reputation, it’s the power of the media. It just seems like a bad school” (Appendix H, p. 9, author’s translation).
“Mia: Again, not to sound like a snob, but you know who they are, and you can try to protect your children from a bad social circle” (Appendix H, p. 4, author’s translation).
We can see that also those families who have not had personal experience with the schools in Frederiksværk, perceive the schools to be of bad quality. This is also why in many cases. the families have decided to move before their children start in school, when their children are around the age of five. Julie had previously lived in Hundested and then moved to Frederiksværk as there was an affordable place to live for her there. Now she has found a boyfriend with a place in Hundested and this is one of the reasons she is now moving back. However, she also wishes to move back so that her son can go to school at Hundested School. She perceives the schools in Frederiksværk to be of bad quality.
“Julie: I want my child to go to Hundested School. So I will 100% move before he starts school. Interviewer: [...] And why Hundested School? Julie: Because I think it’s one of the best schools in the municipality. Interviewer: And you don’t think the schools in Frederiksværk are very good? Julie: No. But I would say it’s not that I really know the other schools, its more what people talk about” (Appendix N, p. 5, author’s translation).
Also, crime was brought up by many families as a factor motivating them to move away from Frederiksværk. Particularly the fear of their children ending up in a gang was a motivator to move away from Frederiksværk. Sidsel herself grew up in Frederiksværk and based on this experience did not wish that her own children to grow up in the same environment because of the fear that they may end up in crime.
71 “Sidsel: [...] it’s a hard environment in my eyes to live in Frederiksværk and go to school in Frederiksværk. [...] Also again because there are not the same resources as there are in this city [Birkerød]. It can also be hard to go to school here, all children tease one another, it doesn’t matter where you go to school, but you will quickly get into some bad stuff [in Frederiksværk]. I had some friends who ended up in the gang environment in 5 minutes. Because they were just downtown. Everyone knew. [The gang is] still there. [...] They are everywhere. It’s a hard city to live in as a young person [...]” (Appendix K, p. 21, author’s translation).
Similarly, Jakob and Astrid describe how their feared for their son to end up in a gang. They relate this to the lack of opportunities for young boys in the area. Jakob and Astrid moved to Bagsværd, when their son was 12 and their daughter was 20.
Astrid: [The gang] had their hands on a lot of things up there. Jakob: [...] Drugs at the schools. Astrid: They would go around handing out [drugs] up there at those schools that were up there [...] Jakob: And we had a boy. With our daughter nothing happened luckily. And it was also a thing I thought OK, I would kind of like him to get away from that area before he becomes a teenager and ends up in something. Astrid: And of course there are also some things here but we also thought, yes because I can remember that we talked about it, because here there are maybe more things he can do. There aren’t things up there to do for young people. At least not for the young men, the girls maybe have an easier time sitting and, hanging out or something but not boys, for boys something needs to happen in one way or another. [...] There was nothing up there. [...] It was maybe just hanging out on the street corner. [...] And then they come by on a moped and give them something” (Appendix I, p. 13-14, author’s translation).
Many of the families connect the quality of schools and the issues with crime are to the social issues and lack of resources in the municipality.
72
“Carsten: It’s a municipality where there are a lot of children placed in foster care for example. [...] And that’s a sign that there is a lot of disharmony in families and then the children become more challenged and those are the social circles our kids also have to be in. And it can be fine. I mean I grew up here [...] But a lot has happened and it hasn’t been positive. [...] You can also end up in a bad social circle another place, but you think a lot about making it as good for your children as possible [...] It’s not because we look down on, it shouldn’t been seen negatively, it’s not because we look down at people at all. Because we’re just as plain and normal as everyone else. But we still think about our children and there are a lot of challenged families up here unfortunately” (Appendix G, p. 15, author’s translation).
“Sofia: I can say that there are decisions that are made politically that surprise me a lot. Because where other municipalities invest in children and health [...]They chose to cut back on that here. And again, not necessarily because they have made bad decisions but because suddenly it costs 30 million to place children in foster care and they didn’t expect that in the budget. So the money is taken from other places. That’s why I don’t mind that there are some disadvantaged people who need help. It just affects everyone else. Carsten: The best is if you can find a place where there are a lot of resources and then… Sofia: Then we help each other. Carsten: Right? But here there are just not that many people with resources” (Appendix G, p. 15-16, author’s translation).
Sofia and Carsten describe a dilemma that several of the interviewed families brought up, where they wish to contribute, while also having to consider the well-being of their children. Sofia and Carsten, similarly to many of the interviewed families feel that the lack of resources affects their children negatively and this is a motivation to move away from Frederiksværk. Conversely, the destination the families have chosen to move to, are perceived to have both more resources and opportunities, which is expressed particularly in terms of education and schooling. Sidsel
73 describes how the lack of resources in Frederiksværk, meant that it was not discovered that her son was autistic until moving to Birkerød, where she experienced that her son’s teachers were better educated, and the school system was better equipped to handle his challenges.
“Sidsel: So all that stuff with saving and saving and restructuring and stuff, they do that a lot in Halsnæs municipality and I don’t think, and yes they do that to some extent in Birkerød, but it just made us feel more like we wanted to move to this city. [...] It’s maybe in hindsight but at least specifically in terms of children and schools, we have a son and we found out that he is autistic. And we had no idea about this when we were living in Frederiksværk. Our son he was in kindergarten and they had no idea that this was challenging him. [...] But as soon as, it was very clear, when we put him in kindergarten here, they were able to place a finger on the fact that he was different than the other kids and it couldn’t just be fixed. So already the whole system was set to work and it was even more obvious how far behind everything is [in Halsnæs], so we thought it was very positive to come here where all the resources are and there was a lot more drive and everything happened faster and it was as if, if you shouted for help, then the help would be there right away [...]” (Appendix K, p. 4, author’s translation).
Several families also refer to the educational opportunities their children have or will have after moving towards the center of Copenhagen. These are both related to the near present, such as elementary school, but also future opportunities such as post-primary and post-secondary education. For Jakob and Astrid, considerations about their son’s future was one of the things that factored into the migration decision.
“Jakob: [...] We thought about the opportunities of course. There are just more opportunities here. Astrid: There are a lot more opportunities here also. Jakob: For our son growing up here. Both with school and education and everything right?” (Appendix I, p. 21, author’s translation).
74 Kristine relates the decision to move towards more educational opportunities for her daughter. As Frederiksværk only has a high school, she describes how moving to Hillerød will mean that her daughter will be able to take her whole education in the same place.
“Kristine: And in Hillerød, the reason we really want to move there is because there are better school opportunities and when [our daughter] is done in primary school she can chose exactly what she wants, if she wants a technical school or a high school or HHX or economics, or whatever you like, you can find it in Hillerød. Interviewer: And you don’t think there are enough opportunities in Frederiksværk? Kristine: No. There is a high school in Frederiksværk, and then you kind of have to move on from there or if you are not going to high school you have to go to Hillerød or Frederikssund or something. And to make as few moves as possible, both because [my husband] and I have grown up moving many times. [...] We both have divorced parents you don’t really want your child to go through the same, so we think the fewer moves the better and it’s better to move her when she is done with kindergarten and then she can take her whole education in Hillerød because it has everything” (Appendix J, p. 3, author’s translation).
This is tied to how some families believe that their children will eventually move near the center of Copenhagen and stay there because of better educational opportunities and job opportunities. This has led some parents to want to move closer to the center so that they will be near their children in the future. “Jakob: But after we had lived here a while we started thinking, should we live here [in Frederiksværk] the rest of our lives? Astrid: Yes. Jakob: Or what? Astrid: Yes. Jakob: Because you know that the children will probably move away. Astrid: Yes yes, definitely yes.
75 Jakob: And then you’re sitting up there alone. Astrid: Then you just sit up there” (Appendix I, p. 32, author’s translation).
This indicates a migration strategy closely related to the migrants’ biographies, where future location of their children is taken into account when deciding where to move.
The analysis demonstrates how the agglomeration of educational opportunities and resources closer to the city center, motivates families to move in this direction, presenting a challenge to small towns at the edge of the region. For those families moving towards the city center, we can identify a discourse about Frederiksværk, which describes it as a place with few resources, which is ‘behind’ other places, specifically in the areas of schools and crime. This discourse, reflects the historical context of Frederiksværk, as a place with social problems and fewer resources. This also features in another narrative, where families are regretful that Frederiksværk is struggling, but do not believe that their children should be disadvantaged by Frederiksværk’s lack of resources. However, there are different meanings associated with the places the families have decided to move to. These places are depicted as having more resources and better opportunities. Because of these perceived opportunities, the families are motivated to move closer to the center, so that they in the future will be closer to their children. Apart from the material difference between the periphery and center we also see narratives form that manifest these differences discursively. This motivates some families to move, even before they have first-hand experience with the issues they describe. The families with children draw from these discourses and reproduce them, both through their narratives and decision to move.
Theme 3: Moving closer to jobs
Many of the families expressed a wish to move to be closer to their current jobs to cut down on commuting time. Some also expressed a wish to be closer to job opportunities that the city center has to offer. In this regard Frederiksværk is highlighted as being badly connected both in terms of car transportation and public transportation. In these interviewed families the adults typically either had vocational upper secondary education or long cycle higher education and had specialized jobs that were geographically bounded.
76 Many of the interviewed families mentioned that one of the reasons for moving, was to be closer to their place of work and save time of commuting. Typically, their commuting time was over 1 hour. For example, Sidsel:
“Sidsel: It was a really big factor for me because I had a really long way home. [...] The travel time was far. An hour and a half sometimes [...] It’s the traffic because there is a really stupid bottleneck in what is called Kregme, which is just on the other side of Frederiksværk [...] And you can’t just get around that and it’s also again the municipality doesn’t have money to change the road situation. So you can say again, well they’re also behind in that. [...] Instead of saying, we need to put down that money because we have so many people who commute who have a need to have it cut down by those 15-20 minutes, that you can cut down when you just drive through [...] So another reason to say ok we need to be closer, we need to move towards the city” (Appendix K, p. 8, author’s translation).
Sidsel highlights the infrastructure situation in Frederiksværk, where the roads are not equipped to handle the amount of traffic. Many of the interviewed families described how congestion near Frederiksværk adds 20 minutes to their travel time. To avoid congestion many have to get up very early, thus also limiting flexibility and freedom in their everyday lives.
“Mia: But the question of what could make us stay in Frederiksværk. If they extended the highway, so it wasn’t such a hell and you were in stuck in traffic the whole way home. And it moved a bit and you could drive on the highway a little longer. Then I think it would be an attractive city to live in. Because you could get to and from easier. Because, it takes me 40, it takes me according to Rejseplanen and all those things, Krak, Google Maps, 40 minutes to go to work, but then I am in a traffic jam the whole way those extra 20 minutes and if I don’t leave the house at the right time then it takes an hour and a half in the morning right” (Appendix H, p. 12 author’s translation).
77 Similarly, using public transport is seen as difficult, particularly because the trains do not run often. The interviewed families describe how long commuting times take away from time spent at home and time spent with their children. For the interviewed families these long commuting times combined with logistics of dropping off and picking up children complicates their everyday life. The complicated logistics require the families to be highly organized in order to make their everyday lives function. These families are looking to make a change so that their everyday life can become easier. Mia describes how her family considered moving to Ølsted, which is 10 km from Frederiksværk, in an attempt to solve some of the logistical problems, highlighting both the unfavorable position of Frederiksværk in the case of transportation options and how much logistical problems can place a strain on the everyday life of a family with children.
“Mia: And not all trains drive to Hanehoved station. So if I drove that way in the morning and my bike is up there, and I take the wrong train from Hillerød home, then I am stranded at Frederiksværk station and I have to take a bus to then go to Hanehoved station, or [my bike] has to be parked at the station until the next day and how do I get there the next day then right? [...] It’s very complicated. So we actually just looked at Ølsted, even though it’s in the municipality, because there is that 15 minutes shorter to go to work with public transport, and that matters. Plus schools and institutions are right next to the station. So you didn’t have to do that whole around and back. It would just be easy. It has to be easy where you live” (Appendix H, author’s translation).
The chosen everyday life strategy for these families is thus to prioritize shorter transport time over for example a larger house in the Frederiksværk area. This has led some families to choose their locational destination based on the presence of an S-train station. This is also reflected in the quantitative data (see appendix C, table 2) where we see many families moving to municipalities in which there is an S-train station.
“Sofia: [...] I can’t cope with taking the car to Copenhagen. [...] But I would be willing to take the S-train. [...] And that’s in relation to the time I have to spend on transport. At least I can sit down and do something in the train.
78 Interviewer: So that’s why you are looking at, I think you mentioned Frederikssund… Sofia: Frederikssund yes we are. And we also have the consideration with Hillerød [...]”(Appendix G, p. 5, author’s translation).
“Mia: Allerød or Fredensborg [...] And Allerød is probably top-priority because there is an S-train” (Appendix H, p. 5, author’s translation).
Apart from moving closer to current jobs, some families expressed a wish to move closer to job opportunities in general. The center is seen as providing more job opportunities in terms of the number of jobs, but also in terms of more interesting and secure jobs. Sofia highlights how there are few job opportunities for academics in the Frederiksværk area.
“Sofia: [...] Of course I also have some ambitions right, that I don’t get where I am now. I’m doing something I like doing but at some point, I will lack a challenge and it’s not the best paid position. So, you have to apply for something else and as I said there is no academic work in this area. I mean 0. If it’s not in the municipality then it’s not there. They only, I think the nearest unless you are in the health sector, I mean the hospital right, but otherwise there is the hospital in Hillerød but the rest is in Copenhagen within this line of work right.”(Appendix G, p. 4, author’s translation).
This is in line with the data in table 9, showing relatively fewer jobs in knowledge economy sectors for the municipal centers, something exemplifying the processes of agglomeration occurring in the region. Specifically, public sector jobs, of which Sofia is referring to, have decreased over the last 10 years in these areas. Mia also refers to the limited job market in Frederiksværk as one of the reasons for moving towards the center. Mia regularly keeps an eye on job positions in the Frederiksværk area but is does not feel the postings match watch she is looking for in a job and that many of the jobs are in small firms. Mia is sceptical at the prospect of working in a small firm, because she fears they may close down and leave her without a job or would give her less flexibility in terms of managing her work-home balance.
79 “Mia: [...] what I have looked at, it is, well it is in Copenhagen. It is in Glostrup, it is in Hørsholm, yes that’s a little outside, but it’s in [the city]. You have to go to the city for there to be something, otherwise its very small firms that don’t, I don’t feel they can offer the same. You shouldn’t be picky but you become picky because you want, you want the best opportunities to move forward right. Interviewer: So what do you believe the small firms don’t have? Mia: Well they don’t hire as often [...] Some smaller firms I feel it’s a bit unsure if they will continue. How is their economy? Is there time for you to have a family when you work in a small firm? [...] Can you take a child’s sick day? In a larger firm you are covered by collective wage agreements, all those things. It just appeals to me more to get to work in something larger where maybe [...] they are more on top of things” (Appendix H, p. 7, author’s translation).
Some of the families who decided to move closer to the center of Copenhagen, did not mention jobs as a motivating factor. Nonetheless, those families typically have jobs that are specialized and only available in certain geographical locations. These are jobs within sectors such as, communications, insurance, banking, sales, and high-tech manufacturing (see appendix D; J; K; L). This indicates that even when moving closer to a job is not identified discursively by the families with children as a main reason for moving, the job acts as a factor limiting the migration to certain areas.
However, there was also a group of the interviewed families where the location of their workplace was mobile or their line of work less specialized, so that job opportunities are more widely spread. For example, Theis and Rikke. These families moved within the area of north- west Zealand rather than towards the city center.
“Theis: I work in a firm [...] located on Funen and I install big kitchens. Put up kitchens and repair kitchen equipment, washing machines, ovens, that you sell in an industrial kitchen. [...] For example we also worked for the Queen and install their kitchens. [...] So I drive through all of Denmark.
80 Interviewer: So it’s relatively mobile, because it could be anywhere? Theis: Yes exactly my office is my car” (Appendix Q, p. 7, author’s translation).
“Rikke: My contract ran out just before my maternity leave, so officially I am unemployed. But I worked in Ølsted before. And I have an education as a child care worker [...] So I need to find a job. For me it’s relatively flexible. I just need to apply for a job near where we find a house” (Appendix Q, p. 7-8, author’s translation).
The above highlights how Frederiksværk is challenged by its peripheral location, resulting in long commuting times, that are further increased through inadequate infrastructure for car travel and limited opportunities for public transportation. This complicates the everyday lives of families with children by requiring planning and coordination to avoid sitting in traffic and in terms of dropping off and picking up children, while still making it to work. These families are thereby motivated to move closer to their place of work and better opportunities for public transport. These issues affect the families with children where the adults have specialized jobs that are located near the city. This suggests that while Frederiksværk has the potential to fulfil the role of a residential city, in relation to working and commuting in the center, there are some obstacles standing in the way, causing Frederiksværk to lose out to other cities with higher accessibility and connection to the center. In this way we can see that the processes of agglomeration concentrating jobs in the city center contribute to out-migration from the urban periphery.
Theme 4: Finding the ‘right’ home
One motivational theme present for some of the interviewed families, is the theme of finding the ‘right’ home. Within this theme the migration decision is motivated by specific needs and wants for housing. These wants and needs are related to the transition in life stage, where families need space for their expanding family. Some families are motivated by their specific preferences towards housing, while some are also pressured by the inadequacies of their current/past living situation. For families who have the ‘right’ home as a motivation for migration, the locational choice is less contingent on the geographical location (i.e. the town or city) and more on the
81 specific housing available. For some of the interviewed families, this means that they may have stayed in Frederiksværk, had there been adequate affordable housing available. These interviewed families typically had either mobile jobs, or less specialized jobs in the area of north-west Zealand and their social network was also located in the area.
Some families describe how they have put considerable time and effort into finding the “right” home, demonstrating how important fulfilling their housing needs are for their migration decision.
“Lukas: We took a long time, it took us almost 6 months before we found something just right. We looked at many houses and had looked through the first 100 [before deciding on this one]“ (Appendix P, p. 6, author’s translation).
These housing needs may be related to personal preferences for certain types of housing. Other needs are more practical in nature, as families enter a new life phase stage and need space for their expanding family. For Laura and Emil, it was the dream of owning a countryside farm estate, where they could have horses, which motivated them to move. For Lukas on the other hand, it was related to a need for more space.
“Laura: It’s because we have a hobby, well, mostly me, and then my daughter we had some horses in stables and we just wanted them home. And it’s probably always been a dream” (Appendix O, p. 3, author’s translation).
“Lukas: [My girlfriend] and I lived together in an apartment in Frederiksværk, [...] on a first-floor apartment of around 81 square meters, but since we have a son and just had a daughter, we’ve chosen to find something with more space” (Appendix P, p. 2, author’s translation).
The outcome of migration motivated by finding the “right” home is more a result of local housing market conditions, than the deliberate intention to move to a different city. For Rikke
82 and Theis, the emphasis is on the “right” house and local environment, rather than a specific city in the north-west Zealand area.
“Rikke: So it’s both in this area but it’s also in Vejby for example, or Helsinge. Theis: We are looking many places [...] It’s probably more about finding the right thing rather than where it is located [...] “ (Appendix Q, p. 2, author’s translation).
In fact, under certain conditions, some of the families that are motivated by housing needs may have considered staying in Frederiksværk. Thereby for some, moving away from Frederiksværk was an unintended consequence of their intention to find suitable housing.
“Lukas: Well if we had found an equally nice house, just in Frederiksværk. Then we had probably stayed there” (Appendix P, p. 6, author’s translation).
However, some families were also pressured to move by the inadequacies of their current/past housing in Frederiksværk, such as lack of central heating or limited access to a washing machine:
“Kasper: [...] It’s funny because in Frederiksværk the summer house which we lived in, during the summer it was the perfect place to live, but in the winter it was the most awful place to live, because in the winter you came home and it was very cold and the walls were this thin [shows with fingers]. It was very very thin and badly isolated and when we came home with [our son] and he had blue lips and chattering his teeth and we couldn’t offer him that. It would take 2 hours before it was warm because we had to turn on the wood burning stove” (Appendix F, p. 15, author’s translation).
“Carsten: No we’re not happy to live here [...] Sofia: There are many things, it’s not so much its location, that’s very nice [...] but it’s a really old building and we have access to a washing machine once a
83 week. So every Saturday I have to stand and wait. It was very hard for us to get used to because there are some things you can’t wait to wash [...] Carsten: You can hear through the walls and there is not a lot of space [...] There are 64 square meters for 4 people” (Appendix G, p. 11, author’s translation).
Some of the families looking to rent also encountered difficulty finding housing in Frederiksværk. The lack of affordable and adequate housing has thereby prevented some of the interviewed families from staying in Frederiksværk and motivated others to move. Kasper and Line have moved to Slangerup, towards the center of Copenhagen, to live for less rent in a house owned by their family, but ultimately wished to return to Frederiksværk or the surrounding area, after saving up money. Before moving to Slangerup, as described above, they were renting a summerhouse that was inadequate in terms of heating in the wintertime, and therefore had to move. Similarly, Sofia and Carsten had been forced to move from their previous rented house, because its owners had decided to get a divorce and therefore sell the house. This meant that Sofia and Carsten had to find something quickly, which ended up not suiting their housing needs entirely.
“Interviewer: You could say, if there isn’t enough rental housing in Frederiksværk, then it could be an issue. Kasper: And there isn’t. Line: No. Kasper: There are not enough good places. [...] There is a ghetto block that Lejerbo owns. Where probably a lot of people can’t see themselves [...] Line: And the problem is probably like in many cities, you are on a waiting-list for 20 years to get an apartment in those kinds of areas right” (Appendix F, p. 20, author’s translation).
“Interviewer: [...] Would a better rental apartment or more rental apartments meant that you could stay longer in [Frederiksværk]? Sofia: Yes, Frederiksværk lacks places for rent. [...] Either it’s houses for elderly, or they haven’t had anything, I don’t want to say ghetto but it hasn’t been a very attractive place to live around McDonalds and when we were
84 getting this apartment, I can remember we were offered 3 times from Lejerbo but at that time the municipality was very pressured by refugees and they were given priority. So even though we said yes and were high on the list we never got it. We also said yes to something smaller than this [...] But it’s not easy, I feel like there is almost nothing available in terms of social housing. [...] Carsten: There is a waiting time of 15-20 years” (Appendix G, p. 12, author’s translation).
For some families, finding the right home which fulfils their housing needs, is the main reason for moving away from Frederiksværk. For these families, the migration is a result of discrepancies in local housing markets and this sometimes results in a move away from Frederiksværk, although these families would not have minded staying in the city. The lack of affordable and adequate rental housing was highlighted as a factor pressuring some of the families to find housing elsewhere. Thereby there is some potential for maintaining and attracting families with children by focusing on creating affordable housing for families.
Theme 5: The limitations of house prices
An important factor in the interviewed families’ migration decisions were house prices. As the Frederiksværk area offers houses at a relatively low price in the Greater Copenhagen region the interviewed families were limited rather than encouraged by high house prices to move out of the area. However, some families did not believe that buying housing in the area would be a good investment, and therefore were motivated to invest in housing closer to the center. All families described being limited to some degree by housing prices relative to their housing needs, but the geographical limitation varied.
For some families, the cheaper house prices in the north-west Zealand area relative to closer to the city center acted as a motivator to stay in the area. For example, for Theis and Rikke, who feel that their housing needs could not be met with their budget, if they bought housing nearer to the city center.
85 “Theis: When you’ve gotten used to what a house costs out here compared to what an apartment costs in Copenhagen, then you know where you don’t want to move at least” (Appendix Q, p. 2, author’s translation).
“Theis: I mean you think, compared to [...] if we move to Hillerød, then we can get [...] almost nothing for our money right. If it’s out here in Frederiksværk or somewhere near Vejby or something then we can get something much bigger, in a much better condition for half of what it costs in Hillerød” (Appendix Q, p. 2, author’s translation).
Similarly, high house prices towards the city center act as a limitation for some families, who could otherwise also see themselves living closer to the center. For example, for Kasper and Line, who are also interested in buying a house in Slangerup but find it too expensive. Instead they are looking for a house in the Frederiksværk area.
“Kasper: [...] It’s also about price. What you can get for two million in Frederiksværk and the surrounding area, you can get for three million in Slangerup and south of there. So it separates just by the Frederikssund area and then you can take a line across then it just gets more and more expensive the more south you get and we would like to be able to go on vacations and buy some things instead of having a very tight day-to-day budget” (Appendix F, p. 2, author’s translation).
Some families have decided to move towards the center, even though the prices are relatively higher than in Frederiksværk. These families are however also limited by house prices.
“Kristine: I mean, we can get a lot more for our money in the Hillerød region than if we move to Rungsted, Charlottenlund, Hellerup [...] We earn enough money, but if we were going to live there, we could, but then we would have to compromise on a lot of things, we wouldn’t just be able to go on vacation, let’s say when we feel like it or x times a year or something. Then we would have to plan better. If we were going to move that close to the center then we wouldn’t
86 be able to afford the summerhouse. Then we would have to cut down a lot [...] because there is a big difference between buying a large plot of land with an older farmhouse in Hillerød than if you were looking in Rungsted” (Appendix J, p. 14, author’s translation).
Although the families have different budgets, they have similar considerations in terms of their everyday life strategies, and what aspects of the everyday life that would change if choosing to live closer to the center.
Some of the families were motivated to buy housing closer to the center, rather than in Frederiksværk, because they believed this would be a better investment. They were concerned with buying housing in Frederiksværk, and not being able to sell it again as they perceived the market in Frederiksværk to be relatively stagnant. Christopher and Anne describe how they considered renovating their current house in Frederiksværk but decided against it due to the fear of the investment not being reflected in the house price. Instead they decided to buy a lot closer to the city center and build a new house there.
“Christopher: But we also had, it was also around the time where we had looked at how it would be to renovate this house. Could we really make this place a base, could we modernize it? Then we looked at what it would cost, talked to an architect and it turned out that to get a house in this area up to scratch… Anne: It’s not money you get back. It’s not. Christopher: Simply, you’ll lose them all. Interviewer: Because of the area or how so? Anne: Yes, that’s simply it. Christopher: It’s not worth it to invest [...]” (Appendix E, p. 6, author’s translation).
House prices are a limiting factor for the interviewed families. Frederiksværk offers low house prices compared to the rest of the region and some families are motivated to stay in the area for this reason. Those who have decided to move towards the center also feel limited by house
87 prices, but to a lesser extent and prioritize getting closer to the center, over a cheaper house. Some of these families are also concerned about investing in housing in Frederiksværk, as the housing market has had a hard time recovering from the financial crisis and they worry that an investment in Frederiksværk would hurt them financially if they are to sell in the future. Frederiksværk has an advantage in terms of cheaper house prices, which acts as an attractor and motivator to stay in the area for lower and middle-income families. However, for some families, less constrained by financials, this is not a strong enough motivator to stay and they fear not getting their investment back, if choosing to buy a house in the area. Thus, we see Frederiksværk challenged in terms of attracting higher-income families, who have a larger margin of agency in terms of choosing where to live in the region. Attempting to attract higher income families thereby puts Frederiksværk in competition with more places in the region.
Two types of migration
Based on the analysis of motives for migration, coupled with an analysis of the socio-economic characteristics of the migrating families, I have identified two types of migrant family (see table 10). The types should be seen as ideal types, meaning that not all the accounts from the families fit perfectly into either category. The types are characterized by the type of migration, the motivation for the migration, the location of the migrants’ social network, and the location and level of specialization of their jobs. The ideal types are grounded empirically in the accounts of the interviewed families reviewed in this chapter. These interviews were conducted with the purpose of uncovering the factors that influence migration decisions, with a point of departure in processes of agglomeration, as outlined in chapter three. Thereby the ideal types are also grounded theoretically through the focus on motivations, structural factors, and the migration ‘outcome’ in both the data collection and analysis-process. I have organized the types around the central motivations for their migration. Observations have been made about the distance and direction of the migration, as well as the structural context surrounding the migration, such as location of jobs, friends and family and perception of house prices, relative to these central motivations.
88
Table 10: The two migration types
Type A Type B
Migration Finding the ‘right’ home Moving closer to places with more motivation resources (better educational Staying near family and opportunities for children and less friends crime)
Moving closer to family and friends
Moving closer to jobs and/or job opportunities
Migration 10-20 km from Frederiksværk Over 20 km from Frederiksværk and distance and in the direction of the city center direction
Location and Mobile jobs not tied to a Jobs located closer to the city center level of specific location specialization of More specialized jobs jobs Less specialized jobs
Perception of Limited to buying housing in Limited by house prices, but to a housing prices the north-west Zealand area larger area than north-west Zealand, including cities closer to the city center and transport lines such as S- trains
Concerned with future value of the home they buy
Location of social Friends and family located in Friends and family located closer to network the area the city center Made by author.
Type A is characterized by a migration of a shorter distance (10km-20km) from Frederiksværk to for example the nearest large city or neighboring municipality. Type A has friends and family located in the area and are therefore interested in staying in the area. Type A is motivated by
89 finding the ‘right’ home and local environment to live in. The geographical location of this home in the regional context is less important. Type A typically has a less specialized job and/or a more mobile job which does not tie them to a specific location. House prices are perceived to be a factor limiting these families to the north-west Zealand area.
Type B on the other hand, is characterized by a migration over a larger distance (more than 20 km) in the direction of the center of Copenhagen. Type B’s social network is typically located towards the center of Copenhagen which acts a motivator for them to move. Type B is to a higher degree concerned with the educational opportunities and resources available for their children both in the present and in the future. Type B also perceive house prices as a limitation, but the area they are limited to includes areas in higher price ranges than the in the north-west Zealand area, located closer to the city center. Type B is higher degree concerned with the future value of their investment when buying a home and are therefore looking to invest closer to the city center. Type B has a specialized job tied to specific geographic locations/places of work which is typically located closer to the center of Copenhagen.
Figure 12 demonstrates the mechanisms producing migration for type A and B in the context of the Greater Copenhagen region. Figure 12 depicts how agglomeration processes contribute to depopulation of small towns in the periphery of the Greater Copenhagen region.
90
Figure 12: Visualization of the mechanisms producing migration of type A and B in the context of the Greater Copenhagen region
91 Chapter conclusion
The analysis has demonstrated how structural factors related to the advantages of agglomeration economies, such as availability of jobs, educational opportunities, welfare services (understood as the quality of schools and lower crime) and infrastructure, work to encourage migration of families with children towards the city center, which present several challenges for Frederiksværk in maintaining and attracting population. In the analysis of the regional data, I identified processes of increased centralization of families with children, individuals of the working age with higher educations, and employment and processes of peripheralization such as loss of employment and population in the municipal centers. Based on these data we can conclude that there is growing inequality in the region. The analysis of the qualitative data demonstrated that families are motivated to live near their friends and family, to move towards places with more resources, better welfare services, and to move closer to their jobs to cut down on commuting time. This presents a challenge for small towns in the periphery, lacking in educational opportunities, resources and accessibility. Frederiksværk is competing with the city center, as well as cities closer to the center offering similar amenities, for population of working age. Frederiksværk is small in its lack of industrial diversity and possibilities of realizing agglomeration economies.
The analysis also characterized the families’ motivations into two migration types. These two migrating types reveal certain mechanisms producing migration within urban regions, as depicted in figure 2. What this means for the challenges and opportunities of small towns in the periphery will be a point of departure for the following discussion. In sum, the analysis supports theories of agglomeration suggesting cumulative causation further concentrating growth and development in the area with best initial conditions. The investigation of the interpretations however, has provided a nuanced picture of these processes pointing to the ways in which the concentration of people, jobs and resources are interpreted as motivations for migration by families with children.
92 Chapter 6: Discussion
In the previous chapter we concluded that agglomeration processes encouraging the centralization of jobs, people and resources affect the out-migration of families with children from small towns in the periphery of the Greater Copenhagen region. We also concluded with two ideal migration types. The migration types suggest that there are a number of factors relevant to the basic functioning of families with children’s everyday lives that are important in terms of motivating a move. There are also long-term factors that orient them towards certain migration decisions. These present certain challenges and opportunities in relation to maintaining and attracting population in the small towns in the Greater Copenhagen region, which I will discuss in the following. Additionally, the two migration types indicate a process of income- based segregation taking place in the Greater Copenhagen region, which will be discussed in the following.
A discussion on opportunities and challenges: What options are there really?
In the previous chapter I argued that certain structural factors at the regional scale present several challenges to small towns in the periphery in maintaining and attracting population. The processes of agglomeration, work to bias the location of jobs, the location of people (family and friends) and the location of resources towards the city center (see figure 12). Migrant type B in particular is motivated to move towards their existing jobs, future job opportunities, higher quality welfare services (better schools and lack of crime), and more accessible places. Frederiksværk faces significant challenges as those factors related to maintaining and attracting population are inherent to the agglomeration economy that makes up the city-region. These factors work at the regional scale, of which local planning has little influence on.
Much of the literature specifically on small cities, has asked for researchers to view city size relationally, so as not to make the mistake of generalizing small cities as places of employment and population loss (Bell and Jayne 2006, Lorentzen and van Heur 2013, Fertner et al. 2015). This literature emphasizes the potentials of small cities (Fertner et al. 2015, Lorentzen 2009) and how small city development must be viewed in relation to their place in the urban hierarchy and
93 linkages to other places at several scales (Hansen and Winther 2018, Bell and Jayne 2006). For example, cities located in growth regions can benefit from their proximity in the center through an access to markets and through finding a position in the local internal specialization of the region (Hansen and Winther 2013). These cities can also take advantage of the possibility of commuting and find a role as residential cities (Hansen and Winther 2013, Fertner et al. 2015). This is also evident in figure 12, where it is illustrated that the distance between the small towns and the periphery generates low house prices in the periphery, making them competitive as residential places. Halsnæs Municipality has recognized this potential and is attempting to attract families with children through the branding of Halsnæs as a great place to live, as presented in chapter four.
Affordable housing, the quality of schools and the commute
The two migration types demonstrate that despite the prevailing processes of centralization, Frederiksværk has some potential to take advantage of its position in the city region to maintain and attract families with children. This is regarding a potential of creating more affordable housing, improving the quality of schools and finding solutions to local infrastructure problems to create a better commute. Migrant type A is motivated to stay in the area. For type A, migration from Frederiksværk is a consequence of looking for new housing as response to a change in specific housing needs. Some of the families highlighted that the availability of affordable housing and long waiting lists for social housing in Frederiksværk had encouraged them to move out of the city. An analysis conducted by Halsnæs Municipality in 2017 similarly showed that Halsnæs municipality had a relatively high percentage of ‘holiday homes’ (10% of housing stock) and that there was a large demand for rental housing and townhouses, which cannot always be met, thus pushing prices up (Halsnæs Municipality 2017). Improving the availability of affordable housing may be an option for planners to maintain the families who are already interested in staying in the area.
For type B migrants the quality of school in terms of the learning environment and the social environment was highlighted as important. Perceived lack of educational opportunities was one of the key motivations for moving away from Frederiksværk. Additionally, the families wished to move their child as few times as possible, thus making them more likely to stay in the area once their child has started school. This is in line with evidence that suggests that families are
94 significantly less mobile after children reach school age (Aner and Hansen 2014). A conclusion can be made that good schools can act as a strong attractor as well as strong motivator to stay. For this reason, improving the quality and the perception of the quality of local schools may be a very worthy investment for municipalities interested in maintaining and attracting families with children.
Type B migrants are also motivated to move closer to their current jobs or future job opportunities. Their job is typically more specialized and located near the city-center. While the municipal centers are located in the region, and there is the possibility of commuting to jobs in the center, it seems that the relatively longer commuting time from the periphery of the region is not compatible with the everyday life strategy of type B, particularly when this is combined with various other motivating factors. In this sense, the municipal centers ‘lose out’ to those cities which are better connected and closer to the center but offer a similar ‘rural’ environment and relatively low house prices. In the case of Frederiksværk, these are cities such as Hillerød or Frederikssund. Improving connections to the center to create a better or faster commute is therefore an opportunity to increase competitiveness with these cities. Locally in Frederiksværk, there is a potential to improve the congestion issues that arise just as you drive into the city. Several of the families mentioned this infrastructure issue, as such a delay complicates their everyday lives.
The two migration types demonstrate that migration is a complex multi-factored process. Thus, focusing on any one or two factors may miss the mark in terms of maintaining and attracting population. What has been a popular strategy in many cities to overcome the challenges of peripherality, has been to improve the living environment to compensate for the longer commute. Halsnæs Municipality, has similarly been focused on branding their natural amenities and industrial heritage and have recently completed regeneration projects in both Hundested and Frederiksværk (see chapter four). While Frederiksværk may benefit from the branding of natural amenities, the analysis made it clear that amenities alone are not enough to overcome the structural forces working to centralize population. Small towns such as Frederiksværk must therefore also focus on areas such as affordable housing, the quality of local institutions and creating better connections to the city center, if they wish to maintain and attract families with children.
95 A resource dilemma
Although the above has highlighted opportunities, considering the structural context, these opportunities also present certain dilemmas for planners. Investing in the areas needed to take advantage of the present opportunities requires resources. For a city faced with de- industrialization and many social issues, these resources may be lacking. The scale of the structural forces both producing size and periphery and the resources required to invest in those areas which can reverse these trends, suggests that these issues cannot be remedied by planning at the local level. As suggested by Lorentzen (2013, 460): “The municipal scale is not adequate to change the economic and demographic fate of peripheral localities and enhancing the quality of place and image can be only part of the response to the serious challenges facing them.” Although perhaps less serious than those challenges faced by remote peripheries, to encourage equal development, it seems that a political decision must be made at least at the regional scale, considering the observed centralization processes. This could include recognizing the need for development also in the periphery in the planning principles in the Finger Plan and a focus on redistributing resources more equally, so that small peripheral town can invest in those areas that make them attractive places to live, allowing them to fulfil a role as a residential city. The current government’s policy of relocation of public sector jobs to the periphery and the successful lobbying by municipal politicians, has meant that Frederiksværk will be the home of the Danish Energy Utility Regulator which brings with it 78 jobs in 2018 (Thomsen 2018). This is a good example of such an equalizing policy, even though the exact impact remains to be seen.
Spatial sorting of families with children
The two migration types point to a process of spatial sorting taking place in the Greater Copenhagen region, leading to income-based segregation. The migration types are categorized among other things, according to the location and level of specialization of jobs of the migrant. This is closely tied to the migrant’s level of education, which can also be considered a proxy for income-level. Thereby migrant type A can be understood as representative of lower and middle- income families, while migrant type B may be representative of middle and higher-income families. We can observe that both the direction and distance of the migration differ between the two types. Migrant type A moves ‘horizontally’ in the region, while migrant type B is moving in the direction of the center. These different directions indicate a process of income-based polarization (see figure 12).
96
The two migrant types point to a process of segregation taking place in the Greater Copenhagen region. Segregation in the region has been increasing for the last four decades (Sehested 2017). Historically segregation has been evident in a north-south gradient, where higher-income households have concentrated in the north of the region, and lower-income households have concentrated in the south (Sehested 2017). The two migrant types however also point to segregation along the center-periphery gradient. Sehested (2017) argues that housing type is the primary explanation for the segregation present in the region. Similarly, Aner (2009) in her study of out-migration of families with children, found that the same few municipalities received the highest income families, while the same few municipalities received the lowest income families over a period of 10 years, indicating a trend of income-based segregation in the region. Likewise, migrant type A is motivated to stay in the area due to the low house prices. Migrant type B on the other hand, is not limited to the same extent by house prices, making it possible to move in the direction of the city center. Thereby the migration types point to processes of segregation in the region related to income and house prices.
However, apart from differences in income, the migration decisions are also tied to differences in motivations. Migrant type B was particularly concerned with educational opportunities for their children and their own job opportunities, while these topics did not feature in the narratives of type A. This suggests that certain underlying values differ between the two migration types and that the spatial sorting may be tied to these differences in values. Likewise, Aner (2009) suggests in her study that a form of “lifestyle-segregation” is taking place in the Greater Copenhagen region, were the chosen locational destination is tied to the chosen lifestyle. Aner (2009) found that some families choose to live further from the city center, because a cheaper house lets them have more family time, while some families choose to live closer to the city center because they are career-oriented. Although outside the scope of this thesis, a further investigation into the ways in which values and moving pattern are linked could be useful in understanding processes of segregation in the region.
Frederiksværk as a case
Certain structural processes have been identified which affect migration of families with children, to and from small and peripheral towns. However, the above migration types are based
97 on a sample of families with children who have decided to move away from the city of Frederiksværk. While the analysis of quantitative data showed that the municipal centers demonstrated similar patterns of growth, there are also specific conditions for the city of Frederiksværk which may have impacted the data.
There is considerable spread in the population size of the municipal centers of which Frederiksværk is one of the largest. However, absolute size may not be the most relevant indicator of differences in development between small towns. Hansen and Winther (2018) in their study on growth in small towns in Denmark following the financial crisis, that for towns with less than 5,000 employed, city size did not matter for growth. Rather industrial diversity and distance to the nearest larger city was important (Hansen and Winther 2018). Specifically, towns dominated by construction, manufacturing and service industries were disadvantaged (Hansen and Winther 2018). Frederiksværk is a previously industrialized city, which has suffered the effects of de-industrialization, losing ¾ of its population over the last 70 years. This impacts the employment loss and the social composition of the city which among other things, has affected the negative perception of the quality of schools. Most of the analyzed municipal centers were not industrialized to the same extent as Frederiksværk and may therefore not have been as impacted by the effects of de-industrialization. Thus, de-industrialization processes may not be tied to out-migration to the same extent as evident in Frederiksværk. In regards to distance from the center and other larger cities, there is some variation within the municipal centers. Frederiksværk has one of the most peripheral locations and is also located in one of the four municipalities in the sample without an S-train station. Thus, the impacts of the processes of peripheralization which influence migration may be more evident in the case of Frederiksværk.
Additionally, being one of the most peripheral municipalities and due to the social problems, Halsnæs has relatively less resources than may have been available for some of the other municipal centers. This has an impact on many areas identified as relating to the migration of families with children, such as quality of schools and gang-related crime. This has an impact on many areas identified as relating to the migration of families with children and a relative availability of resources may therefore be a source of variation among the municipal centers in relation to attracting and maintaining population.
98 I have argued that small towns must be analyzed relationally, taking into consideration their specific context. At the same time, I have attempted to make some generalizations for small towns in the periphery of the Greater Copenhagen region. In the above I have discussed some limitations of these generalizations. To further explore the validity and usefulness of these generalizations, it could be relevant to test the identified migration types with samples from several small towns in the region.
99 Chapter 7: Conclusion
The objective of this thesis, has been to understand what families with children’s migration decision reveal the challenges facing small towns in the urban periphery in relation to maintaining and attracting population. Small towns are in this context defined as the 17 municipal centers in the Greater Copenhagen region pointed out in the Finger Plan (Danish Business Authority 2017a). This thesis argues that there is a growing inequality in the Greater Copenhagen region, where small peripheral towns are struggling with maintaining and attracting families with children and have few possibilities of reversing this trend. This is in line with theories on agglomeration economies that suggest that large cities will continue to centralize and agglomerate. I argue that families make migration decisions in relation to organizing their everyday life, their long-term life trajectory and ties to family and friends. Through an analysis of the migration accounts of the interviewed families, I argue that agglomeration processes encouraging the concentration of jobs, educational opportunities and welfare services play a determining role in the migration decision for the families who chose to move towards the city center. This presents a challenge to small towns in the periphery, who lack the size to realize agglomeration economies, are adversely affected by the processes of de-industrialization, lack in resources and accessibility. The migration motivations of families with children reveal that structures related to the advantages of agglomeration economies influence out-migration from small peripheral areas, thus contributing to the growing inequality in the region.
This has been investigated through an analysis of quantitative data on population and employment in the municipal centers, the fingers and the palm. Additionally, this has been investigated through an analysis of qualitative interviews with families with children that have decided to move away, or already have moved away from the municipal center of Frederiksværk. The analysis of the quantitative data showed there is a decrease of population of the working age in the municipal centers. Additionally, these towns have lost jobs in absolute terms and across industries. The converse is true for the city center, which has experienced slight population growth of families with children and high growth levels of employment in most sectors.
100 Based on the qualitative data, I distinguish two types of migrant families. One type (A) is representative of local redistribution of population, while the second migrant type (B) exemplifies the centralization tendencies already noted in the region. Migrant type B is motivated to move towards the city center for better job opportunities, better educational opportunities for their children, more resources and less crime. These migrants typically have a high level of education and more specialized jobs located closer to the center. The migrant types showcase how processes of centralization of jobs and people contribute to depopulation of small towns in the periphery. The migrant types demonstrate how there are multiple factors influencing migration decisions, which should be taken into consideration both when studying migration and in local strategies to attract and maintain population. The migrant types indicate certain potentials for Frederiksværk, which could benefit from an investment in affordable housing, the quality of schools and better infrastructure. However, such investments require resources and thus present a dilemma for small towns in the periphery who may be lacking resources and suffering the consequences of de-industrialization.
Frederiksværk can be defined as both small and peripheral with the disadvantages this brings in the context of agglomeration economies. Frederiksværk in particular is challenged by the effects of de-industrialization, which negatively impacts the quality of schools in the area. Additionally, it affects the level of resources in the municipality. This however may not be generalizable for all small towns, as they may not to the same extent have been affected by de-industrialization or may be located in municipalities with relatively more resources, such as municipalities that are connected by S-train. However, while the negative consequences of de-industrialization may not be the case for all small peripheral cities, we can still conclude that the quality of schools and the perceived level of resources is important in maintaining and attracting families with children.
Furthermore, this study has demonstrated how, when studying migration, it is necessary to consider an integrated approach to the question of agency and structure. This study has shown that migration cannot be reduced simply to one or two factors such as jobs or cultural amenities, particularly not in the case of families, in which all members of the household have needs that must be considered in the migration decision. An approach open to more than one possible migration motive, which considers both structure and agency and how the migration decision is made in an interplay between these, has proven useful for understanding how factors come
101 together in time and space to affect the migration decision. Such an approach brings us a step closer to understanding the complexity of the migration process in an intra-urban context. Additionally, further research is needed on the ways in which peripherality and smallness is constituted in the edge of city regions and what this means for urban and regional development. Furthermore, the intersection of subjective factors, such as values and discourses, and structural factors, such as income, offer an interesting avenue for further research into segregation processes in regional contexts.
102 Reference list
Andersen, Hans Stifter, and Andersen, Hans Thor. 2017. “Fra provinsen til forstæderne – vandring og bosætning i København.” In Har forstaden erobret byen?, edited by Hans Kristensen, Ole Christiansen, Poul Sverrild, Hans Stifter Andersen, Hans Thor Andersen, Marie Stender, Mette Mechlenborg, Claus Bech-Danielsen, Jens Blemmensen, and Søren Elle. Dansk Byplanlaboratorium.
Andersen, Hans Thor, Frank Hansen, and John Jørgensen. 2002. “The Fall and Rise of Metropolitan Government in Copenhagen.” GeoJournal 58 (1): 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:GEJO.0000006565.05206.90.
Aner, Louise Glerup. 2009. “Udflytninger Fra København Børnefamiliers Udflytninger Og Bostedsvalg i et Hverdagslivsperspektiv.” København: Københavns Universitet.
Aner, Louise Glerup, and Høgni Kalsø Hansen. 2014. Flytninger fra byer til land- og yderområder: højtuddannede og socialt udsatte gruppers flytninger fra bykommuner til land- og yderkommuner - mønstre og motiver. SFI - Det Nationale Forskningscenter for Velfærd. https://pure.sfi.dk/ws/files/201790/1403_Flytninger_fra_byer_til_land_og_yderomr_der.p df. Accessed 3. November 2018.
Asheim, Bjørn, and Høgni Kalsø Hansen. 2009. “Knowledge Bases, Talents, and Contexts: On the Usefulness of the Creative Class Approach in Sweden: ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY.” Economic Geography 85 (4): 425–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944- 8287.2009.01051.x.
Bailey, Adrian J, Megan K Blake, and Thomas J Cooke. 2004. “Migration, Care, and the Linked Lives of Dual-Earner Households.” Environment and Planning A 36 (9): 1617–32. https://doi.org/10.1068/a36198.
Bakewell, Oliver. 2010. “Some Reflections on Structure and Agency in Migration Theory.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 36 (10): 1689–1708. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2010.489382.
Ball, Stephen J., Richard Bowe, and Sharon Gewirtz. 1995. “Circuits of Schooling: A Sociological Exploration of Parental Choice of School in Social Class Contexts.” The Sociological Review 43 (1): 52–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1995.tb02478.x.
Bathelt, H., and J. Glückler. 2003. “Toward a Relational Economic Geography.” Journal of Economic Geography 3 (2): 117–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/3.2.117.
Bell, David, and Mark Jayne. 2006. Small Cities, Urban Experience beyond the Metropolis. Questioning Cities Series. Abingdon: Routledge.
103 ———. 2009. “Small Cities? Towards a Research Agenda.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 33 (3): 683–99. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2009.00886.x.
Bhaskar, Roy. 1979. The Possibility of Naturalism : A Philosophical Critique of the Contemporary Human Sciences. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315756332.
Boyle, Paul, Halfacree, Keith and Vaughan, Robinson. 1998. Exploring Contemporary Migration. Longman.
Boyle, Paul, Zhiqiang Feng, and Vernon Gayle. 2009. “A New Look at Family Migration and Women’s Employment Status.” Journal of Marriage and Family 71 (2): 417–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00608.x.
Butler, Tim, Chris Hamnett, and Mark J. Ramsden. 2013. “Gentrification, Education and Exclusionary Displacement in East London.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 37 (2): 556–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12001.
Chen, Yong, and Stuart S. Rosenthal. 2008. “Local Amenities and Life-Cycle Migration: Do People Move for Jobs or Fun?” Journal of Urban Economics 64 (3): 519–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2008.05.005.
Clark, William A. V., and Regan Maas. 2015. “Interpreting Migration Through the Prism of Reasons for Moves: Migration Through the Prism of Reasons for Moves.” Population, Space and Place 21 (1): 54–67. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.1844.
Committee on Business and Employment. 2018. “Referat 16.01.2018 Kl. 18:30.” 2018. https://www.halsnaes.dk/Politik/Dagsordener%20og%20referater/65/65- 404.aspx?agendaid=65-404-811&p=1. Accessed 25. October 2018.
Corbett, Michael. 2005. “Rural Education and Out-Migration: The Case of a Coastal Community.” Canadian Journal of Education / Revue Canadienne de l’éducation 28 (1/2): 52–72. https://doi.org/10.2307/1602153.
Coulter, Rory, and Jacqueline Scott. 2015. “What Motivates Residential Mobility? Re- Examining Self-Reported Reasons for Desiring and Making Residential Moves: Reasons for Desiring and Making Residential Moves.” Population, Space and Place 21 (4): 354– 71. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.1863.
Couper, Pauline. 2015. A student’s introduction to Geographical Thought: Theories, Philosophies, Methodologies. Sage. ISBN 978-1-4462-8295-3.
Danish Business Authority. 2017a. “Fingerplan 2017 - Landsplandirektiv for Hovedstadsområdets Planlægning.” https://planinfo.erhvervsstyrelsen.dk/sites/default/files/media/publikation/fingerplan_201 7_0.pdf. Accessed 4. May 2018.
104 ———. 2017b. GIS database of Finger Plan structure. http://kort.erst.dk/spatialmap?profile=fingerplan2017vedtaget&fbclid=IwAR04fT4EiRnI LUpAtnEDuQUmwAF-FhIf6Lo06pXT1egBL-A6TAKiObR1IgM. Accessed 1. October 2018
———. 2018a. HBE1A: Folketal efter hovedstadskommune, hovedstruktur, stationsnærhed, alder, køn og familietype (2008-2018). https://planinfo.statistikbank.dk/statbank5a/default.asp?w=1366. Accessed 1. September 2018.
———. 2018b. HBE3A: Befolkningens højeste fuldførte uddannelse (15-69 år) efter hovedstadskommune, hovedstruktur, stationsnærhed, højeste fuldførte uddannelse, alder og køn (2008-2018). https://planinfo.statistikbank.dk/statbank5a/default.asp?w=1366. Accessed 1. September 2018.
———. 2018c. HAP2A: Beskæftigede efter hovedstadskommune (arbejdssted), hovedstruktur, stationsnærhed, alder og branche (DB07) (2008-2016). https://planinfo.statistikbank.dk/statbank5a/default.asp?w=1366. Accessed 1. September 2018.
Dansk Center for Byhistorie, n. d. Frederiksværk https://danmarkshistorien.dk/leksikon-og- kilder/vis/materiale/frederiksvaerk/?fbclid=IwAR0pRuHgv2j8OMrV_vICSQhfycwnx3fa 5F72pMAjXcjXBlAzuVELx6L8RA0. Accessed 10. May 2018.
Danish Chamber of Commerce. 2018a. “Baggrundsnotat - Dansk Erhvervs Gymnasieanalyse 2018.” https://www.danskerhverv.dk/siteassets/mediafolder/downloads/fakta/baggrundsnotat--- dansk-erhvervs-gymnasieanalyse-2018.pdf. Accessed 20. September 2018.
———. 2018b. “Hvor Godt Er Dit Gymnasium?” 2018. http://analyse.detgodegymnasium.dk/loefteevne/. Accessed 20. September 2018.
Dawkins, Casey J. 2006. “Are Social Networks the Ties That Bind Families to Neighborhoods?” Housing Studies 21 (6): 867–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673030600917776.
Elder, Glen H. 1994. “Time, Human Agency, and Social Change: Perspectives on the Life Course.” Social Psychology Quarterly 57 (1): 4–15. https://doi.org/10.2307/2786971.
Elder, Glen H., Monica Kirkpatrick Johnson, and Robert Crosnoe. 2003. “The Emergence and Development of Life Course Theory.” In Handbook of the Life Course, edited by Jeylan T. Mortimer and Michael J. Shanahan, 3–19. Boston, MA: Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-48247-2_1.
Fertner, Christian. 2013. “The Emergence and Consolidation of the Urban-Rural Region: Migration Patterns around Copenhagen 1986-2011: Migration Patterns Around
105 Copenhagen 1986-2011.” Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie 104 (3): 322–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/tesg.12007.
Fertner, Christian, Niels Boje Groth, Lise Herslund, and Trine Agervig Carstensen. 2015. “Small Towns Resisting Urban Decay through Residential Attractiveness. Findings from Denmark.” Geografisk Tidsskrift-Danish Journal of Geography 115 (2): 119–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/00167223.2015.1060863.
Findlay, Allan M., and F. L. N. Li. 1999. “Methodological Issues in Researching Migration.” The Professional Geographer 51 (1): 50–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/0033-0124.00144.
Findlay, Allan, David McCollum, Rory Coulter, and Vernon Gayle. 2015. “New Mobilities Across the Life Course: A Framework for Analysing Demographically Linked Drivers of Migration: New Mobilities Across the Life Course.” Population, Space and Place 21 (4): 390–402. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.1956.
Fujita, Masahisa, and Paul Krugman. 1995. “When Is the Economy Monocentric?: Von Thünen and Chamberlin Unified.” Regional Science and Urban Economics, Recent Advances in Urban Economics and Land Use: A Special Issue in Honour of Hiroyuki Yamada, 25 (4): 505–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-0462(95)02098-F.
Giddens, Anthony. 1984. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Oxford, United Kingdom: Polity Press. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/kbdk/detail.action?docID=1221197.
Glaeser, Edward L., and Joshua D. Gottlieb. 2009. “The Wealth of Cities: Agglomeration Economies and Spatial Equilibrium in the United States.” Journal of Economic Literature 47 (4): 983–1028. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.47.4.983.
Glücker, Johannes. 2007. Geography of Reputation: The City as the Locus of Business Opportunity. Regional Studies, 41(7): 949-961.
Haase, Dagmar, and Tanja Tötzer. 2012. “Urban – Rural Linkages—Analysing, Modelling, and Understanding Drivers, Pressures, and Impacts of Land Use Changes along the Rural-to- Urban Gradient.” Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 39 (2): 194–97. https://doi.org/10.1068/b3902ge.
Halfacree, Keith. 2004. “A Utopian Imagination in Migration’sterra Incognita? Acknowledging the Non-Economic Worlds of Migration Decision-Making.” Population, Space and Place 10 (3): 239–53. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.326.
———. 2008. “To Revitalise Counterurbanisation Research? Recognising an International and Fuller Picture.” Population, Space and Place 14 (6): 479–95. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.501.
106 Halfacree, Keith H., and Paul J. Boyle. 1993. “The Challenge Facing Migration Research: The Case for a Biographical Approach.” Progress in Human Geography 17 (3): 333–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/030913259301700303.
Halsnæs Avis. 2015. “Stålværk Sætter Verdensrekord,” May 29, 2015. http://halsnaes.lokalavisen.dk/erhverv/2015-05-29/-St%C3%A5lv%C3%A6rk- s%C3%A6tter-verdensrekord-1252029.html. Accessed 25. October 2018
———. 2017. “Rockerborg: Konservative Ønsker Permanent Lukning.” Halsnæs Avis, July 11, 2017. http://halsnaes.lokalavisen.dk/2017-11-07/Rockerborg-Konservative- %C3%B8nsker-permanent-lukning-912636.html.
Halsnæs Municipality. 2012. “Vækststrategi 2013-15 – Midt i Naturen Og Masser Af Muligheder.” https://www.halsnaes.dk/~/media/ESDH/committees/c76df486-abfd-44ea- 930d-ad3ef766428a/Ukendt/2396735-2444897-1.ashx Accessed 20. October 2018.
——— 2013. “Kommuneplan 2013.” 2013. http://www.kommuneplan.halsnaes.dk/dk/byer/by- _og_boligudvikling/redegoerelse/index.htm. Accessed 20. October 2018.
———. 2015. “Plan- Og Agenda 21-Strategi 2015-2027.” https://www.halsnaes.dk/~/media/Miljoe/Master%20og%20helhedsplaner/plan%20og%2 0agenda%2021-strategi%202015%20-%20endelig.ashx?la=da. Accessed 20. October 2018.
———. 2017. ” Minianalyse: Boligmarkedet i Halsnæs Kommune (Sommer 2017).” https://www.halsnaes.dk/~/media/ESDH/committees/66/377/3730.ashx Accessed 22. October.
Halsnæs Municipality, and The Frederiks Værk Museum of Industry. 2011. “Frederiks Værk - En Stålsat Vision.” https://www.halsnaes.dk/~/media/Byraad_udvalg%202010/Okonomiudvalget/25_01_12/ Pkt%20567%20%20Bilag%202%20Realdania%20forprojekt%20%20Ansoegning.ashx. Accessed 20. October 2018
Hansen, H. K., and T. Niedomysl. 2008. “Migration of the Creative Class: Evidence from Sweden.” Journal of Economic Geography 9 (2): 191–206. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbn046.
Hansen, Høgni Kalsø, and Lars Winther. 2007. “The Spaces of Urban Economic Geographies: Industrial Transformation in the Outer City of Copenhagen.” Geografisk Tidsskrift- Danish Journal of Geography 107 (2): 45–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/00167223.2007.10649568.
———. 2012. The Urban Turn: Cities, Talents and Knowledge in Denmark. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.
107 ———. 2013. “On the Road to Nowhere.” In Cultural Political Economy of Small Cities, edited by Anne Lorentzen and Bas van Heur, 31-43. New York: Routledge.
Hansen, Kalle Emil Holst, and Lars Winther. 2018. “Employment Growth in Danish Towns and Regions since the Crisis: Industrial Structure, City Size and Location, 2008–2013.” Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography 100 (3): 244–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/04353684.2017.1405358.
Holme, Jennifer Jellison. 2002. “Buying Homes, Buying Schools: School Choice and the Social Construction of School Quality.” Harvard Educational Review 72 (2): 177–206. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.72.2.u6272x676823788r.
Industrimuseet Frederiks Værk, n.d. Stålvalseværket. https://indmus.dk/staalvalsevaerket?fbclid=IwAR3Mt6gpfhhnnk05XgijxgBJEPseGvJvu wS8Zvt5AsF-tiTuodHivXIXDxY. Accessed 12. August 2018.
Iosifides, Theodorus. 2011. Qualitative Methods in Migration Studies: A Critical Realist Perspective. Ashgate Publishing Ltd. https://www.dawsonera.com:443/abstract/9781409402237.
Jacobs, Jane. 1969. The Economy of Cities. Vintage International. Random House.
Jensen, Jakob. 2018. “Notat om økonomiske udfordringer på familieområdet”. https://www.halsnaes.dk/~/media/ESDH/committees/61/435/4589.ashx. Accessed 20. October 2018.
Jørgensen, Gertrud, Henrik Vejre, Ole Hjorth Caspersen, Karina Sehested, and Lars Winther. 2017. “Hovedstaden 2030.” Institut for Geovidenskab og Naturforvaltning (IGN) og Dansk Byplanlaboratorium (DB). https://planinfo.erhvervsstyrelsen.dk/sites/default/files/media/publikation/hovedstaden20 30_ign_db_2017.pdf.
Kloppenborg, Hans Skov, and Jesper Wittrup. 2015. “Sårbare børn: hvem er de, hvor bor de, og hvordan klarer de sig i skolen?” Socialstyrelsen : KORA. https://socialstyrelsen.dk/udgivelser/sarbare-born. Accessed 25. October 2018.
Knowles, Richard D. 2012. “Transit Oriented Development in Copenhagen, Denmark: From the Finger Plan to Ørestad.” Journal of Transport Geography 22 (May): 251–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2012.01.009.
Kolk, Martin. 2017. “A Life-Course Analysis of Geographical Distance to Siblings, Parents, and Grandparents in Sweden: A Life-Course Analysis of Geographical Distance to Kin.” Population, Space and Place 23 (3): e2020. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2020.
Krugmann, Paul. 1991. “Increasing Returns and Economic Geography.” The Journal of Political Economy 99 (3): 483–99.
108 Kühn, Manfred. 2015. “Peripheralization: Theoretical Concepts Explaining Socio-Spatial Inequalities.” European Planning Studies 23 (2): 367–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2013.862518.
Lolle, Anna Kristine E. L. 2014. “En undersøgelse af skolers betydning for den sociale kapital i lokalsamfund”. Aalborg University. http://vbn.aau.dk/files/208007098/En_unders_gelse_af_skolers_betydning_for_den_socia le_kapital_i_lokalsamfund.pdf.
Lorentzen, Anne. 2009. “Cities in the Experience Economy.” European Planning Studies 17 (6): 829–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310902793986.
———. 2013. “The Experience Turn of the Danish Periphery: The Downscaling of New Spatial Strategies.” European Urban and Regional Studies 20 (4): 460–472.
Lorentzen, Anne, and Bas van Heur. 2013. “Cultural Political Economy of Small Cities.” In Cultural Political Economy of Small Cities, edited by Bas van Heur and Anne Lorentzen. Regions and Cities 49. London: Routledge.
Lundholm, Emma. 2007. “Are movers still the same? Characteristics of interregional migrants in Sweden 1970-2001.” Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie 98 (3): 336–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9663.2007.00401.x.
Lundholm, Emma, and Gunnar Malmberg. 2009. “Between Elderly Parents and Grandchildren— Geographic Proximity and Trends in Four-Generation Families.” Journal of Population Ageing 2 (3–4): 121–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12062-010-9022-4.
Marshall, Alfred. 1925. Principles of Economics, an Introductory Volume. 8. ed., reprinted. London.
Massey, Doreen. 1985. “New Directions in Space.” In Social Relations and Spatial Structures, edited by Derek Gregory and John Urry, 9–19. Critical Human Geography. London: Macmillan Education UK. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-27935-7_2.
McCann, Eugene, and Kevin Ward. 2010. “Relationality/Territoriality: Toward a Conceptualization of Cities in the World.” Geoforum 41 (2): 175–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2009.06.006.
Ministry of Interior. 2017. “Befolkningsudvikling i Forskellige Landsdele.” https://oim.dk/media/18456/25-oekonomisk-analyse-befolkningsudvikling-i-forskellige- landsdele.pdf.
Mitze, Timo, and Janina Reikowski. 2010. “Testing the Neoclassical Migration Model: Overall and Age-Group Specific Results for German Regions.” SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1722642.
109 Mitze, Timo, and Torben Dall Schmidt. 2015. “Internal Migration, Regional Labor Markets and the Role of Agglomeration Economies.” The Annals of Regional Science 55 (1): 61–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-015-0683-z.
Morawska, Ewa. 2009. Sociology of Immigration. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Morrison, Philip S, and William A V Clark. 2011. “Internal Migration and Employment: Macro Flows and Micro Motives.” Environment and Planning A 43 (8): 1948–64. https://doi.org/10.1068/a43531.
Næss-Schmidt, Helge Sigurd, and Christian Heebøll. 2018. “Boligmarkedsanalyse for Hovedstadsområdet - Boligbehov, Udviklings-Potentialer Og Strategier.” https://planinfo.erhvervsstyrelsen.dk/sites/default/files/media/publikation/boligmarkedsan alyse_for_hovedstaden_transport-_bygnings-_og_boligministeriet_2018.pdf.
Neergaard, Maya de. 2014. Doing the Urban Countryside. Roskilde: Roskilde University.
Ní Laoire, Caitríona. 2000. “Conceptualising Irish Rural Youth Migration: A Biographical Approach.” International Journal of Population Geography 6 (3): 229–43. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-1220(200005/06)6:3<229::AID-IJPG185>3.0.CO;2-R.
Nielsen, Thomas Alexander Sick, and Henrik Harder Hovgesen. 2005. “Urban Fields in the Making: New Evidence from a Danish Context.” Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie 96 (5): 515–528.
Olesen, Kristian. 2017. “Talk to the Hand: Strategic Spatial Planning as Persuasive Storytelling of the Loop City.” European Planning Studies 25 (6): 978–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2017.1296936.
Pettersson, Anna, and Gunnar Malmberg. 2009. “Adult Children and Elderly Parents as Mobility Attractions in Sweden.” Population, Space and Place 15 (4): 343–57. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.558.
Ren, Adina Stroe. 2017. “500 Rockere Holder Fest i Frederiksværk.” TV 2 Lorry, June 14, 2017. https://www.tv2lorry.dk/artikel/500-rockere-holder-fest-i-frederiksvaerk. Accessed 3. November 2018.
Rørbech, Jens. 2011. “Fingerplanen Og Transportkorridorerne.” https://planinfo.erhvervsstyrelsen.dk/sites/default/files/media/publikation/fingerplanen_o g_transportkorridorerne_jens_roerbech_2011.pdf. Accessed 20. October 2018
Rosendal, Sara. 2009. “Slut Med at Smelte Stål i Frederiksværk | Ingeniøren.” Ingeniøren, August 17, 2009. https://ing.dk/artikel/slut-med-smelte-stal-i-frederiksvaerk-101568. Accessed 3. November 2018
110 Sehested, Karina. 2017. “Hvordan håndterer vi en stadigt voksende befolkning og ændret boligefterspørgsel?” In Hovedstaden 2030, edited by Gertrud Jørgensen, Henrik Vejre, Ole Hjorth Caspersen, Karina Sehested, and Lars Winther. Institut for Geovidenskab og Naturforvaltning (IGN) og Dansk Byplanlaboratorium (DB), 8-18. https://planinfo.erhvervsstyrelsen.dk/sites/default/files/media/publikation/hovedstaden20 30_ign_db_2017.pdf.
Shotter, John. 1984. Social accountability and selfhood. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Statistics Denmark. 2018a. BY1: Folketal 1. Januar efter Byområder, Landdistrikter, Alder og Køn. http://www.statistikbanken.dk/statbank5a/default.asp?w=1366. Accessed 20. March 2018.
———. 2018b. FOLK1A: Folketal den 1. I Kvartalet efter Område, Køn, Alder og Civilstand. http://www.statistikbanken.dk/statbank5a/default.asp?w=1366. Accessed 10. April 2018.
———. 2018c. FLY 66: Flytninger mellem Kommuner efter Køn, Alder og Til- /Fraflytningskommune. http://www.statistikbanken.dk/statbank5a/default.asp?w=1366. Accessed 22. March 2018.
Stålsat By. 2012. “Frederiksværks Industrielle Kulturarv - Foranalyse.” https://staalsatby.dk/files/media/documents/frederiksvarks_industrielle_kulturarv_- _1_maj_2013.pdf.
Stockdale, Aileen, and Gemma Catney. 2014. “A Life Course Perspective on Urban–Rural Migration: The Importance of the Local Context.” Population, Space and Place 20 (1): 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.1758.
Storper, Michael, and Allen J Scott. 2016. “Current Debates in Urban Theory: A Critical Assessment.” Urban Studies 53 (6): 1114–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098016634002.
Sørensen, Anne. 2017. “Stålværk fik millionunderskud på 72 millioner.” TV 2 Lorry, August 3, 2017. https://www.tv2lorry.dk/artikel/staalvaerk-fik-millionunderskud-paa-72-millioner. Accessed 20. October 2018.
Thomsen, Mathilde Fischer. 2018. “78 Statslige Arbejdspladser Rykkes Til Frederiksværk | TV 2 Lorry.” January 17, 2018. https://www.tv2lorry.dk/artikel/78-nye-statslige- arbejdspladser-rykkes-til-frederiksvaerk. Accessed 25. October 2018
Torres, Miguel, Petter Næss, José Pedro Reis, Fernanda Sousa, and Paulo Pinho. 2015. “People, Places and Travel Patterns in Copenhagen and Oporto.” In Mobility Patterns and Urban Structure, edited by Paulo Pinho and Cecilia Silva, 37-80. Transport and Mobility Series. Farnham: Ashgate.
111 van Heur, Bas. 2013. “Sociospatial specficity of economic development” In Cultural Political Economy of Small Cities, edited by Anne Lorentzen and Bas van Heur, 18-30. New York: Routledge.
Vi elsker Halsnæs, and Halsnæs Municipality. 2018. “Livet i Halsnæs.” Vi elsker Halsnæs. 2018. https://vielskerhalsnaes.dk/livet-i-halsnaes/. Accessed 3. November 2018.
Vries, Steffen de. 2017. “Mystisk Stålværk i Frederiksværk Har Gæld På over 800 Milllioner Kroner.” Børsen, July 29, 2017. https://borsen.dk/nyheder/virksomheder/artikel/1/348798/mystisk_staalvaerk_i_frederiks vaerk_har_gaeld_paa_over_800_milllioner_kroner.html. Accessed 20. October 2018
Weber, Alfred. 1929. Theory of the Location of Industries. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Winther, Lars. 2017. “Hvordan Sikrer vi Attraktive Lokaliteter Til Fremtidens Erhverv?” In Hovedstaden 2030, edited by Gertrud Jørgensen, Henrik Vejre, Ole Hjorth Caspersen, Karina Sehested, and Lars Winther. Institut for Geovidenskab og Naturforvaltning (IGN) og Dansk Byplanlaboratorium (DB), 20-32. https://planinfo.erhvervsstyrelsen.dk/sites/default/files/media/publikation/hovedstaden20 30_ign_db_2017.pdf.
Winther, Lars, and Høgni Kalsø Hansen. 2006. “The Economic Geographies of the Outer City: Industrial Dynamics and Imaginary Spaces of Location in Copenhagen.” European Planning Studies 14 (10): 1387–1406. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310600852589.
112