Quality of life in residential environments

Abstract

This paper proposes a different approach to study residential well-being, i.e. a quality of life (QoL) approach, that complements common approaches in this area. Under this approach, residential well-being is defined and studied as the extent to which important needs and values of residents are satisfied under given residential conditions. We argue that measuring QoL in a particular neighbourhood helps to assess residential well-being, to explain what determines residential well-being, and to identify which changes may improve residential well-being in that neighbourhood. In a study on the QoL of residents in Groningen (the Netherlands), we provided initial support for the applicability of the QoL measure to study residential well-being and demonstrated how the QoL approach may serve the functions discussed above. Calidad de vida en entornos residenciales ResumenEste artículo propone un enfoque diferente para el estudio del bienestar residencial, un enfoque centrado en la calidad de vida (CdV, QoL en inglés), y que complementa a otras perspectivas más comunes en esta área. Según este enfoque, el bienestar residencial se define y estudia como la medida en que se satisfacen las necesidades y valores de los residentes bajo determinadas condiciones residenciales. Argumentamos que la evaluación de la CdV en un barrio en concreto ayuda a evaluar el bienestar residencial, a explicar qué determina el bienestar residencial, y a identificar qué cambios pueden contribuir a la mejora del bienestar residencial en ese barrio. En un estudio sobre la calidad de vida de los habitantes de Groningen (Países Bajos), encontramos un apoyo inicial a la aplicabilidad de la evaluación de la calidad de vida al estudio del bienestar residencial, y demostramos la forma en que este enfoque puede cumplir las funciones mencionadas.

On the Necessity of an Integrated, Participative and Adaptive Approach to Sustainable Urban Environmental Quality Planning

“…From a theoretical viewpoint, dimensions of quality have, since Maslov (1954), been envisaged to have a hierarchical relationship: as acknowledged by Perlaviciute and Steg (2012), some quality aspects are likely to be found relatively more important than others, and this perception of importance may vary across different groups. Building on theories from social psychology, De Haan et al (2014) suggested three hierarchically dependent levels of societal needs in a dynamic model explaining how needs that are met -or failed to be meton one level influence expression of needs at other levels.…”

“…It is the subjective perception and evaluation of these objective conditions that ultimately determines how quality is perceived, whether in terms of quality of life (Felce & Perry, 1995) or urban environmental quality (Moore et al, 2006). Although objective and subjective measures of quality differ fundamentally, they are generally considered to complement one another and, jointly, to well represent quality (Marans, 2003;Marans, 2015;Pacione, 2003;Perlaviciute & Steg, 2012;Santos & Martins, 2007). The question remains how urban planners should handle differences in quality preferences among stakeholders in order to optimally and equitably stimulate urban environmental quality.…”

Subjectively and Objectively Integrated Assessment of the Quality Indices of the Suburban Residential Environment

“…urban planners) tend to overestimate what is important to the general public of experts and underestimate the importance of individual resident factors (Perlavičiūtė, Steg 2012). Therefore, objective measurements alone do not provide a comprehensive understanding of how residents experience their environments and should be complemented by subjective measures (Marans 2003).…”

Quality Analysis and Integrated Assessment of Residential Environment of Developing Suburban Settlements

“…Specialists, e.g. urban planners, tend to overestimate what is important to the general experts' public, while underestimating the importance of individual residents' factors (Perlavičiūtė and Steg 2012). Therefore, objective measurements alone do not provide a comprehensive understanding of how residents experience their environments and should be complemented by subjective measures (Marans 2003).…”