This Place Matters: A social connection map of Britain

Disconnected communities

The areas reporting disconnection fall into three broad groups:

The left behind (Doncaster, Folkestone)

Former industrial towns and coastal communities that have struggled economically since deindustrialisation. These areas often have ageing populations, limited economic opportunities, and feel forgotten by national politics and investment.

Areas of high ethnic diversity and historically low levels of integration (Manchester Rusholme, Leicester South)

Constituencies with large immigrant populations where different communities may live separate lives with limited interaction across cultural or ethnic difference.

Commuter areas (Reading, West Bromwich)

Places where many residents travel elsewhere for work, creating communities where some people sleep but don't necessarily build deep local roots or engage with neighbours and local institutions.

Connected communities

The areas reporting the greatest connection tend to be:

Affluent suburbs (Wimbledon, Battersea)

Wealthy areas with stable populations and residents who have both the time and resources to engage in local life.

Rural areas (Hexham, Wetherby)

Sparsely populated constituencies where traditional institutions like parish councils and local pubs foster tight-knit social networks.

Areas of high ethnic diversity with historically high levels of cross-community integration (Tooting, Eltham, East Dulwich)

Diverse communities where different groups interact regularly through shared spaces, mixed schools, and local businesses. These areas have managed demographic change and enabled community cohesion simultaneously.

Speaking to people in the more connected parts of the country reveals a range of reasons for these reported feelings. For example, in a focus group in East Dulwich:

The relationship between immigration, integration and social connection

When comparing levels of immigration and reported levels of cohesion, there is no strong relationship between the two - instead there are parts of Britain in all four quadrants:

Those which have received high levels of immigration and where cohesion appears to be stronger: such as Putney and Tooting

Those which have received high levels immigration where cohesion does not appear to be working: such as parts of Leeds, Leicester and Slough

Those which have not received much immigration but where cohesion does not appear to be working: such as Doncaster and the Welsh Valleys

Those which have not received much immigration and where cohesion appears to be working: such as Northumberland and the Wirral

Overall, we find that feelings of connectedness are higher in high-immigration areas where there are higher rates of multi-ethnic households - a good proxy for multi-ethnic integration. For example, compare Lewisham West and East Dulwich with Coventry East - both have similar numbers of immigrants; however, in Lewisham West and East Dulwich, there is a higher rate of inter-ethnic mixing, and feelings of connectedness are significantly higher.

The relationship between deprivation and connection

There is a clear relationship in the data between levels of deprivation and self-reported social connection. Areas in the 20% most deprived constituencies report an average social connection score of -7, compared to a score of +10 in the average constituency in the top 20% least deprived constituencies.

One group of places where this is particularly clear is those de-industrialised parts of the country where the closure of heavy industry and mining has led to weakened social infrastructure. For example, the former mining towns in the Welsh valleys have by far the lowest levels of self-reported social connection in Wales.

For example, in our focus group in Merthyr Tydfil, people were clear about the impact of the closure of the mines on social connection in the village: