ABSTRACT
For the stayers the last chapter revealed that overall they use their neighbourhood practically and symbolically. Particularly due to the high degrees of public familiarity and the shared sociable moments between residents, people feel part of a community and can thus use the neighbourhood for processes of identification. The movers have been living in the same neighbourhoods as the stayers still live in and they were mostly satisfied with their living situations. However, mostly due to changes in the life cycle, the neighbourhoods’ disadvantages surfaced, particularly regarding educational facilities. The question thus arises as to what neighbourhoods the movers choose and how they use the new place of residence, practically and symbolically. The current chapter reveals a separation of the movers into two groups. Based on the neighbourhood’s functional and ethnic diversity, the movers display more or less neighbourhood use. This chapter thus underlines the importance of absent ties and public familiarity – the prerequisite for the Turkish-Germans to identify with their neighbourhood. If these are not given, the neighbourhood is merely a place for residing. In that case, identification shifts to other neighbourhoods, where public familiarity is high and people share moments of sociability. For the movers, this is often the old, socioeconomically disadvantaged neighbourhood.
