Motivation for this study and previous research in the field

In general level, this problematic of different local opportunity structures can be seen on the level of population development. For example, in recent decades there has been a strong trend in the Nordic parts of the Barents Region towards population being increasingly concentrated into larger communities. Especially those areas situated close to national borders have suffered depopulation (Wiberg 1994, 36). It is the question of the future of these places in the Barents Regions which are unfavourably located geographically, and which are many times at risk of withering away, which makes investigating migration and young people particularly important. The exodus of significant numbers of young people is having a major effect on local conditions in such places, particularly in terms of the age composition and opportunity structure. This out-migration of young peo-ple may also have longer term effects locally by creating a biased age structure, particularly in smaller municipalities and in the countryside (Waara 2002, 3);

especially since young people are effectively taking with them the next, as yet unborn generation. The outward migration of young people also has an effect on the development of a physical, man-made environment, and an immaterial, social living environment. Outward migration in general creates unclear and uncertain future prospects for those young people which remain – especially when it is their peers which are leaving.

For this reason, migration is broad and complex phenomenon, and it should be dealt with in terms of local realities and features of actual living environ-ments. Local possibilities and features not only offer a material arena for life;

they also shape young people’s images of their living environment. These im-ages are shaped by local features and by prevalent opinions regarding the status and image of the living environment (Tuhkunen 2002, 43). Furthermore, local images can be constructed entirely on the basis of myths which give the periphery a lower status than urban environments. This leads to the peripheral

23

living environment being labelled as traditional and poor, and urban areas as modern and desirable (Paulgaard, 2000).

This study is intended to open a broader understanding of young people’s migration. It is significant to see that migration is not guided only by present openings in education and work⁷; but it is also guided by and structured accord-ing to local realities and possibilities (Viinamäki 1999, 112); and furthermore, according to personal experience of place. For example, over the recent decades young people in northern Karelia and Lapland have developed a certain culture of migration due to diminished educational and employment opportunities. It has also been reported that young people want to move to areas which have versatil-ity in educational opportunities and labour markets. This tendency can be seen especially clearly in Lapland and northern Sweden (Viinamäki 1999, 114-115).

Instead of writing a normative developmental programme for regional plan-ning or other political purposes here, in this doctoral thesis I am trying to depict the local realities and opinions of young people, which affect migration alacrity.

This is an important question, since the individual is not a passive entity regu-lated by external factors. Individuals (even young people) should rather be seen as active subjects with various competences (France 2004); as actors who contribute to and directly promote social influences, which may even have global implications and consequences, regardless of how local the individual’s context of action is (Giddens 1991, 2, 221).

In the light of previous studies, this rather strong regional aspect to migration alacrity and to young people’s views of their home regions is important since the majority of studies dealing with young people and their notions of living envi-ronment stress more or less sociological perspectives. Some good examples of sociological perspectives in regional youth studies are Waara’s (1996) dissertation about youth in the Tornedalica region and Paulgaard’s (1999, 2002) studies of young people’s living conditions and constructions of cultural identi-ties in coastal communiidenti-ties; Wiborg’s studies of local attachment (2001a) and rural students in higher education (2001c); Mäntykorpi’s (1986) research con-cerning cultural identity and social and spatial transitions; and Soininen’s (1998) study of young people’s operational models in the country side. A sociological perspective can also be seen in reports by Paunikallio (1997, 2000, 2001), even when research settings are more local development oriented and the sociological theory basis is rather tentative. Ollila’s (2004) study of how young Lapps envi-sion their future belongs to the field of pedagogy, though it differs greatly from the focus of the pedagogical mainstream in youth studies. The mainstream ori-entation in pedagogy is seen, for instance, in Tervo’s (1993) dissertation regard-ing future occupational expectations and attitudes towards education.

Also studies related to regional studies can be found among studies dealing with young people and their relation to their living environment. For example Jukarainen (2000) has studied young people’s cross-border activities in Finnish-Swedish and Finnish-Russian borderlands. Kuusisto-Arponen (2003), in turn, has

7 In my research I take such factors as work and education for granted, because there are lot of information about those issues. I concentrate rather on migration alacrity and the significance of regional and local factors, and material and immaterial (social) living environments. My own view is that such regional factors have been neglected, both in migration and in youth studies.

24

in her dissertation investigated the problem of local territoriality as a social proc-ess and a culturally contextual phenomenon.

My own contribution to the discussions presented above is based on the theo-retical framework and traditions of both sociology and regional studies. A multi-disciplinary perspective is rather noticeable in this work, since investigating young people’s migration alacrity means that the researcher has to be aware of debates concerning the everyday lives of young people. The multidisciplinary nature of youth studies is a great aid, offering numerous perspectives on being young in contemporary society.

However, one important viewpoint of this study is its connections to the youth studies, since especially youth studies have paid very little attention to peripheral regions. For example very few studies are being done concerning rural youth or young people in peripheral areas in Finland or the Barents Region. One notable exception here is the RYPE-project (Helve 2000) which was carried out in Finland, Sweden, Germany, Italy and Estonia, presenting and exploring rather broadly the situation of young people in European rural areas. Yet, in spite of that promising initiative, there is still a lack of comparative and coherent research material regarding these issues, though various reports and books can be found about young people in general. On the other hand regional studies, naturally, have paid attention to various regional phenomena and problems, but there is a lack of information about and focus on young people.

Additionally, general social sciences, such as sociology and anthropology, have not paid enough attention to regional differentiation – e.g. the het-erogeneous nature of the Barents Euro Arctic Region. Researchers have concen-trated mainly on national, international and local levels. The reason for that may be that the Barents Euro Arctic Region is not regarded as a “normal region”⁸, because of its administrative and heterogeneous nature. Also the border (as a set of national borders and as a cultural frontier) between the Nordic countries and Russia creates an unclear status for the Barents Region (Hønneland 1995, 34).

Social scientists may have been looking for “real and easy regions”, thus con-centrating rather on villages, suburbs and nation-states (Kerkelä 1998, 4-5).

However, for political, developmental and in some respects administrative pur-poses, constructed areas such as the Barents Region have also been seen as “too easy” to use for research purposes. Gustafson (2002, 12), for example, claims that such areas “have often be used as taken-for-granted research settings”. In addition to this, Gustafson argues that such taken-for-granted research settings implicitly assume that areas with an administrative or political nature can be treated as stable, homogenous units and containers with a common cultural, po-litical and social structure. In this study the heterogeneity of the Barents Region is considered to be an important factor which has an effect on young people’s migration alacrity.

The goal of this study is to develop the discussion of young people and mi-gration in the context of peripheral areas by combining what have hitherto been

8 Northern parts of Sweden, Norway and to some extent Finland may be regarded as a natural identity region, since Sweden and Norway have similar languages and they belong to same Western cultural sphere as Finland (Hønneland 1995, 34).

25 bits of incoherent information, and elevating the discussion by adding to it a new perspective: personal relation to the location and place experience.