SPONSORED BY:

There’s No Place Like Home

Fewer Americans are relocating than at any time since 1962. That's good news for families, communities ... and even the environment.

Roine Magnusson / Getty Images
American families are moving at the lowest rate since the 1940s
 

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

Separate multiple addresses with commas

SPONSORED BY
 

On almost any night of the week, Churchill's Restaurant is hopping. The 10-year-old hot spot in Rockville Centre, Long Island, is packed with locals drinking beer and eating burgers, with some customers spilling over onto the street. "We have lots of regulars—people who are recognized when they come in," says co-owner Kevin Culhane. In fact, regulars make up more than 80 percent of the restaurant's customers. "People feel comfortable and safe here," Culhane says. "This is their place."

Thriving neighborhood restaurants are one small data point in a larger trend I call the new localism. The basic premise: the longer people stay in their homes and communities, the more they identify with those places, and the greater their commitment to helping local businesses and institutions thrive, even in a downturn. Several factors are driving this process, including an aging population, suburbanization, the Internet, and an increased focus on family life. And even as the recession has begun to yield to recovery, our commitment to our local roots is only going to grow more profound. Evident before the recession, the new localism will shape how we live and work in the coming decades, and may even influence the course of our future politics.

Perhaps nothing will be as surprising about 21st-century America as its settledness. For more than a generation Americans have believed that "spatial mobility" would increase, and, as it did, feed an inexorable trend toward rootlessness and anomie. This vision of social disintegration was perhaps best epitomized in Vance Packard's 1972 bestseller A Nation of Strangers, with its vision of America becoming "a society coming apart at the seams." In 2000, Harvard's Robert Putnam made a similar point, albeit less hyperbolically, in Bowling Alone, in which he wrote about the "civic malaise" he saw gripping the country. In Putnam's view, society was being undermined, largely due to suburbanization and what he called "the growth of mobility."

Yet in reality Americans actually are becoming less nomadic. As recently as the 1970s as many as one in five people moved annually; by 2006, long before the current recession took hold, that number was 14 percent, the lowest rate since the census starting following movement in 1940. Since then tougher times have accelerated these trends, in large part because opportunities to sell houses and find new employment have dried up. In 2008, the total number of people changing residences was less than those who did so in 1962, when the country had 120 million fewer people. The stay-at-home trend appears particularly strong among aging boomers, who are largely eschewing Sunbelt retirement condos to stay tethered to their suburban homes—close to family, friends, clubs, churches, and familiar surroundings.

The trend will not bring back the corner grocery stores and the declining organizations—bowling leagues, Boy Scouts, and such—cited by Putnam and others as the traditional glue of American communities. Nor will our car-oriented suburbs replicate the close neighborhood feel so celebrated by romantic urbanists like the late Jane Jacobs. Instead, the we're evolving in ways congruent with a postindustrial society. It will not spell the demise of Wal-Mart or Costco, but will express itself in scores of alternative institutions, such as thriving local weekly newspapers, a niche that has withstood the shift to the Internet far better than big-city dailies.

Our less mobile nature is already reshaping the corporate world. The kind of corporate nomadism described in Peter Kilborn's recent book, Next Stop, Reloville: Life Inside America’s Rootless Professional Class, in which families relocate every couple of years so the breadwinner can reach the next rung on the managerial ladder, will become less common in years ahead. A smaller cadre of corporate executives may still move from place to place, but surveys reveal many executives are now unwilling to move even for a good promotion. Why? Family and technology are two key factors working against nomadism, in the workplace and elsewhere.

Family, as one Pew researcher notes, "trumps money when people make decisions about where to live." Interdependence is replacing independence. More parents are helping their children financially well into their 30s and 40s; the numbers of "boomerang kids" moving back home with their parents, has also been growing as job options and the ability to buy houses has decreased for the young. Recent surveys of the emerging millennial generation suggest this family-centric focus will last well into the coming decades.

Label

Newsweek Top Stories
Gone Rogue
Gone Rogue

How Sarah Palin hurts the GOP … and America.

The Decade's Best Quotes
The Decade's Best Quotes

NEWSWEEK's 20/10 Project recalls the lines we'll never forget.

Best Celebrity Mugshots
Best Celebrity Mugshots

10 unforgettable arrest photos from the 2000s.

An Evolutionary Edge
An Evolutionary Edge

How grandmas may play favorites.

Discuss

Sponsored by

Member Comments

  • Posted By: gesar @ 10/21/2009 3:49:47 PM

    > The trend will not bring back the corner grocery stores and the declining organizations???bowling leagues, Boy Scouts, and such???cited by Putnam and others as the traditional glue of American communities.

    On what facts are you basing this claim? Or worse, who paid you to take that point of view? It sounds like you're declaring that creating predatory behemoths like Walmart is 'evolution'. As people relocalize, they will naturally work together to bring back whatever elements of society give them autonomy and a sense of home -- something Walmart, Walgreens, and CostCo can only PRETEND to do through advertising. Industrialization means nothing more than a few profiting at the expense of many who are automated and dehumanized. I wouldn't call that evolution.

  • Posted By: froggyprager @ 10/14/2009 11:20:03 AM

    I think this trend is in the right direction but we have a way to go to create real communities and relationships that we need to strive. I???d hope that part of this trend is that people will realize that moving around all the time and living in a place where you don???t know anyone or have any connection is not fun. I hope people see that corporate nomadism is no way to live and the drawbacks far outweigh the benefits. Even if people stay where they are I think that the blending of suburb to suburb creates a lack of political involvement or interest and many American???s have no sense of place in their community. So many of us work in one ???burb, live in another, go to church in another and their kids go to camp in still another. I bet that most suburban adults don???t even have a clue who their Mayor is. Even if some of the reasons for these trends are not what we???d ideally want (We want to move to AZ but we can???t sell the house and the kids are living back at home) it may be a blessing in disguise.

  • Posted By: fsilber @ 10/12/2009 10:43:54 AM

    I suspect surgarlane's comment about divorce is on the mark. But even without divorce, It is harder to justify relocating for the sake of a promotion if the family also relies on a working spouse who has an equally good job.

    Another factor is job security; I would be more willing to relocate for my employer if my job is secure -- but whose job is secure these days? My roots to family and the community become more important if I fear being laid off due to downsizing or outsourcing.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse

My Take

Customize the NEWSWEEK homepage
to feature your favorite columnists.

Customize Now