Four focus groups of 15 individuals each were conducted in greater London and Birmingham in adjacent locales, one diverse, one more homogeneous. Locations were Croydon and Bromley in Greater London, and Lozells and Sutton Coldfield in Greater Birmingham. Participants were paid £30 apiece for their time and recruited by a Recruitment company. Respondents were asked about perceptions of immigration and residential choice. We explored the 'halo' effect among those in whiter areas living in proximity to diversity, and the 'contact' effect of whites living with minorities in diverse areas. The former is theorised to increase threat perceptions of diversity, the latter to mitigate them. Questions also explored ethnically motivated 'white flight' or whether social ties and amenities account for ethnic sorting. The link between immigration and issues of fairness, housing, services and employment was also broached. Locations and dates: 3rd April, East Croydon United Reform Church, 6-7.30pm (diverse area) 8th April, Hayes Village Hall, Bromley, 6-7.30pm (White area) 9th April, Trinity Centre, Sutton Coldfield. 6-7.30pm (White area) 10th April, Lozells Methodist Community Centre, Birmingham, 6-7.30pm (diverse area) This project advances the hypothesis that ethnic change in England and Wales is associated with white working-class ‘exit,’ ‘voice’, or ‘accommodation’. ‘Voice’ is manifested as a rise in ethnic nationalist voting and anti-immigration sentiment and ‘exit’ as outmigration from, or avoidance of, diverse locales. Once areas reach a threshold of minority population share, however, these initial responses may give way to ‘accommodation’ in the form of decreased ethno-nationalist voting, reduced anti-immigration sentiment and lower white outmigration. In the course of our investigation, we ask the policy-relevant question: do residential integration and minority acculturation calm or fuel white working-class exit and voice? In other words, does contact improve ethnic relations or do ‘good fences make good neighbours’? This research adds to existing scholarship by integrating individual data with a more complex array of contextual variables, blending quantitative methods with focus-group qualitative research.

Focus groups of 90 minutes. Free discussion as well as structure questionnaire and games. Focus on local context of opinion on immigration, and immigration opinion affect on local residential decisions. 15 people each, recruited by a Focus Group Recruitment company, instructions to recruit only on White British without university degrees from the local area. Focus groups mainly moderated by Demos staff on instructions provided by us in the FGD protocol document. The four focus groups concentrated on white residents, without degrees. Study sites were chosen such that one area would be highly diverse (Croydon, Lozells) and another strongly white but proximal to diversity (Bromley, Sutton Coldfield). We were interested to see if opinion was more liberal in diverse areas due to contact, and whether threat was greater in 'halo' areas adjacent to diversity, as has been found in quantitative work on the far right. Method is described in detail in the 'Focus group protocol' document attached. We began with a short survey, mimicking questions from Citizenship Surveys, on immigration and neighbourhood. Next came a version of the 'white flight' showcard study as used in Multi-City Study of Urban Inequality in USA (http://www.russellsage.org/research/multi-city-study-urban-inequality). Next came questions about immigration where we tried to probe why people are so much more opposed to immigration nationally as compared to locally (in large surveys). Next came a tradeoff game where respondents were asked to choose between homes (see pictures A,B,C,D) in pairs. We deliberately varied proximity to family, countryside and co-ethnics inversely, as one theory is that preference for moving to white areas is driven by presence of family, friends or countryside. We next asked about actual mobility history as people's answers in showcard games seems to differ from their actual mobility pattern and we wanted to explore the reasons why. Finally a section on immigration opinion sources of opposition - we didn't always get around to covering this.