Quality of Life in Urban-Classified and Rural-Classified English Local Authority Areas

Abstract

This paper presents the results of an analysis of the Audit Commission's local quality-of-life indicators dataset to compare reported outcomes amongst 208 urban-classified and 144 rural-classified English local authority areas. We contextualise the demarcation of the urban and rural by reference to the transformational politics of the previous Labour government and its establishment of the sustainable communities initiative, whose controversial 'place-based' revitalisation essence continues to shape local government policy. According to the collectivist sustainability interpretation of the 73 indicators analysed, our results reveal that not only do urban-classified English local authority areas register a significantly lower quality of life than their rural counterparts but that they are also subject to much greater statistical and spatial variation. In addition, we find that the communityrelated and economy-related indicators serve to distinguish the reported quality-of-life conditions of rural and urban localities most, whereas the scores for transport are uniquely superior for urban areas, especially London. In considering the policy implications of our results, we draw attention to Labour's much-trumpeted justice-based approach to sustainable development, and contemplate the viability of the Conservative -Liberal Democrat coalition government's 'Big Society' endeavour.

Fuel poverty in the UK: Is there a difference between rural and urban areas?

“…This is perhaps surprising given the extensive research considering social deprivation and its experience across space (e.g. Campanera and Higgins, 2011;Cloke et al 1997;Huby et al, 2009;Phimister et al, 2000). 1 In the context of fuel poverty, an argument often raised in the policy debate is that rural households are disadvantaged due to the nature of rural housing stock and the more limited choice of energy available in rural areas.…”

The quality of life in Czech rural and urban spaces

“…In contrast, an objective quality of life assessment leads to varying results. For instance, Bertolini and Pagliacci (2017) and Campanera and Higgins (2011) pointed to a higher objective quality of life in rural spaces, while Ma et al (2020) showed comparable levels across urban and rural spaces. It should be noted, however, that these objective findings are always firmly linked to the country or region under study.…”

“…Studies of the spatial differentiation quality of life that simultaneously consider urban and rural spaces, and are carried out from the municipal to the regional level, often use data and products from national statistical offices (such as Bernini and Tampieri, 2017;Bertolini an Pagliacci, 2017;Székely 2006). Alternatively, data is gained from government commissions and organisations (Campanera and Higgins 2011) and specialised institutes (Gerdtham and Johannesson 2001). European data at the level of cohesion regions (Lenzi and Perucca 2018) and the level of countries measured by GDP (Shucksmith et al 2009; Sørensen 2014) are usually used.…”

“…In general, researchers tend to focus mainly on the subjective dimension of quality of life, while studies of the objective dimension are in the minorityit is specifically considered by Bertolini and Pagliacci (2017), Campanera and Higgins (2011), Ma et al (2020) and Székely (2006).…”