Neighbourly Relations Making and Remaking Neighbourly Relations

Neighbourly Relations

Making and Remaking Neighbourly Relations

For many residents, the idea of have a neighbourhood with a sense of community is very important. It is often the kinds of things that those interested in selling properties uses as a means of reassuring prospective buyers of the 'great neighbourhood' and the sense of solidarity neighbors can provide although interactions within neighbourhoods is not as clearly defined. Researchers assert that in the process of being neighbours in representing the relational identity of neighbor there is an ongoing process, both physical and ideological, of developing, modifying, and infracting and rebuilding boundaries between what is deemed public and private, and the home and street.

According to scholars, individual relationships with neighbours are contingent upon a number of factors inclusive of cultural background, socioeconomic stratification, age, and length of residency, individual preferences and social characteristics (Taylor, Hunchliffe, Clarke & Bromley, 2009). One of the factors critical to understanding neighbourly relations is understanding social identity. In the text, social identity is defined as 'an identity given by connections to other people and social situations often contrasted with personal identity' (Taylor, et al., 2009, p. 167). The definition goes on to advise, 'some examples are group and collective identities, situated identities, given by the immediate situation so liable to change, and relational identities, usually given by a two-sided, possibly unequal relationship' (Taylor, et al., 2009, p. 167). According to sociologist, Erving Goffman (1959) as cited in Taylor, et al., (2009), individual's daily interactions and behavior suggest to others who they are, what they do or are doing, and what his or her expectations are (p. 172).

One way posited of considering social identity is according to individual's practices; their actions or behaviours in social situations. This is also how daily life is encountered (Taylor et al., 2009). However, it has been argued that people are understood in terms of what they do rather than what or who they are. Individuals are said to encounter each other and relationally take up identities through what is done. Commensurate with Goffman (1959), Garfinkel (1967) as cited in Talor et al., (2009) asserts that the optimal way to study society is by way of examining the practical activities of individuals ordinary lives. Because social life is moving continuously while at the same refraining from being chaotic, individuals have the ability and skill set to generate and maintain social order situationally without active conscious thought. Nevertheless, if there is some disturbance to this order, there are ways to remediate the situation.

One of the research questions posited by many in the social sciences is what constitutes a good neighbor? Several empirical studies determined that neighbours are expected to possess and display a 'general disposition towards friendliness while at the same time, respecting others need for privacy and reserve' (Wilmott, 1986, p. 55). Moreover, it is suggested that a neighbour is expected to be readily available in difficult times, somewhat benevolent, friendly, while at the same time not invading the privacy of their neighbors or acting in an intrusive manner (Crow, Allan and Summers, 2002, p. 136). A conclusion from the studies noted by Taylor et al., (2009) is the departmentalization between public and private domains.

Taylor et al., (2009) purport that one of the most primal assumptions regarding the function of neighbourhoods is that they should offer some sense of security to the residents. According to a 2001 governmental study in the UK, nearly 84 per cent of those who responded defined the neighbourhood as a place wherein individuals 'look out for each other' (Attwood et al., 2003, p. 58). The neighborhood was also described as a 'safety zone' and providing a 'sense of protection' (Harris and Gale, 2004, p. 16). As such, within the contextual framework of culture, one of the available assumptions regarding neighbourly relations is looking out for the other, and is considered innate to the notion of living in close proximity to each other.

As there are no clearly articulated and specific roles regarding neighbourly relations, the code of conduct that is expected of neighbours is derived from knowledge that is culturally specific that is acquired and developed through socialization and the practice of being a neighbour (Taylor et al., 2009). These unwritten rules on how to behave neighbourly are a part of individuals' daily life and activity, and occur and transpire without conscious thought. Laurier et al., 2002) described neighboring as an 'occasioned activity' where pleasantries are exchanged when neighbours meet in an unplanned manner in public spaces.

Because the rules for neighbourly behavior, societies and cultures have different customs and rules regarding neighbourhood social interaction; however, there are circumstances in which the rules, conventions and customs go awry because of the subjective nature of these interactions and relationships. When disagreement between neighbours occurs, it is most often asserted that some neighbouring etiquette has been intentionally or inadvertently violated. In situations wherein complaints are raised, there is determined a negotiation process of what constitutes behavior deemed appropriate (Taylor et al., 2009). There is a notion as to what neighbouring is to be like; therefore, the foundation of any dispute lies in what determines appropriate neighbourly behavior vs. what is considered unreasonable, provocative and/or abnormal (Stokoe 2006). As such, in order to mediate neighbourly disputes, generating, reproducing and reinforcing the social order of the neighbourhood are necessary (Taylor et al., 2009).