While unearthing patterns and regularities in data, a recent article by Górny and
Torunczyk-Ruiz (2013) falls short of explaining the observed patterns. This
comment augments the article in this regard. The considerations that are brought
to bear here on the article relate to preferences and self-selection; to human,
social, neighbourhood-specific, and political capital; and to attachment to a
neighbourhood, and preference for diversity.
GórnyATorunczyk-RuizS (2013) Neighbourhood attachment in
ethnically diverse areas: The role of interethnic ties.
Urban Studies DOI: 10.1177/0042098013494418.
2.
LuttmerEFP (2005) Neighbors as negatives:
Relative earnings and well-being. Quarterly Journal
of Economics120(3):
963–1002.
3.
SorgerGStarkO (2013) Income redistribution going
awry: The reversal power of the concern for relative
deprivation. Journal of Economic Behavior and
Organization86: 1–9.
4.
StarkODornA (2013) Do family ties with those
left behind intensify or weaken migrants’ assimilation?Economics Letters118(1):
1–5.
5.
StarkOJakubekM (2013) Integration as a catalyst for
assimilation. International Review of Economics and
Finance28: 62–70.
6.
StarkOMicevskaMMycielskiJ (2009) Relative poverty as a
determinant of migration: Evidence from Poland.
Economics Letters103: 119–122.
7.
VernazzaD (2013) Does absolute or relative income
motivate migration?London School of Economics,
Mimeo.
