Residential Satisfaction and Annoyance in Residents Living Near Industrial Estates

Poll, Ric van; Stellato, Rebecca K.; Kruize, Hanneke; Heisterkamp, S. H.

doi:10.1097/00001648-200509000-00056

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, smell also influences how people perceive places [19]. For example, a study showed that annoyance from (offensive) smells was related to low residential satisfaction [39].…”

Section: Annoyancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Air quality [15] Green/natural elements [30] Cleaning/ maintenance [34] Perceived safety [34] Smell [34] Noise [37] Smell [19,39] Control over time (e.g., looking for a parking space or traffic jams) [49] Perceived safety [24] Green/natural environments [41,42] Aesthetic quality [6,45,46] Noise [46] Atmosphere/ ambiance of a place [50] Distance to facilities (e.g., shops) [46] Furthermore, only a few studies tried to map emotions to specific places in cities. For instance, Matei, Ball-Rokeach and Qiu [51] tried to visualize feelings of fear and comfort in Los Angeles, based on people's perceived emotional response to places in the city.…”

Section: Satisfaction With Urban Public Space Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Analyzing the Relationships between Citizens’ Emotions and their Momentary Satisfaction in Urban Public Spaces

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is recognized that the urban environment, and specifically better-experienced urban public space, contribute to people’s subjective well-being. However, research on people’s momentary subjective well-being (i.e., emotional state) in relation to the multiple aspects of urban public spaces is still limited. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyze people’s emotional state and how this is influenced by the momentary satisfaction with urban public spaces, and also controlling for personal and experience characteristics. Data of 1056 momentary experiences of 161 citizens regarding the urban public space in Eindhoven, The Netherlands, were collected by means of an experience sampling method (ESM). These data were analyzed using a mixed multinomial logit (MMNL) model for each dimension of people’s momentary subjective well-being (i.e., sense of security, comfort, happiness, and annoyance). Results of this study showed that people were happier when they were satisfied with the atmosphere of the public space and felt more secure, comfortable, and less annoyed when they were more satisfied with traffic safety. Results could be used by policymakers and urban planners to create inclusive urban public spaces where people have more positive experiences, which eventually could lead to happier, comfortable, more secure and less annoyed citizens.

show abstract

“…In addition, smell also influences how people perceive places [19]. For example, a study showed that annoyance from (offensive) smells was related to low residential satisfaction [39].…”

Section: Annoyancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Satisfaction With Urban Public Space Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analyzing the Relationships between Citizens’ Emotions and their Momentary Satisfaction in Urban Public Spaces

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Firstly, the situation seen in the XMX and YGM village show that even in areas where human-environment relationship are harmonious, improper industry development was not conducive to human-environment relationship [23]. These two villages are located in Wenchuan County, north of the upper Minjiang River basin.…”

Section: Environmental Conditions Are the Basis And Human Activitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The gas discharged from the factory was treated and did not pollute the environment.' one of the residents who worked in the factory said [23].…”

Section: As the Subjective Evaluation Was Based On Individual Comprehmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Building a Framework of Evaluating Human–Environment Relationships: Considering the Differences between Subjective Evaluations and Objective Assessments

Liu

Deng

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The human–environment relationship is bidirectional, meaning that human attitudes and behavior to nature are at the root of environmental change, while changes in the environment affect human attitudes and behavior. It is necessary to analyze the human–environment relationship from two aspects: (a) Whether there is a good objective basis for maintaining an environment, and (b) whether people report that they are satisfied with that environment. This study attempted to construct a framework to evaluate the human–environment relationship considering these two aspects. The framework consists of three parts: Traditional evaluation, indicator construction, and evaluation considering the relationship between subjective and objective assessment. Traditional evaluations consist of subjective evaluations and objective assessments. Indicator construction focuses on putting forward indicators that quantitively evaluate the human–environment relationship, considering the results of objective assessments and subjective evaluations. The indicators introduced in this study include MD (match degree) and OSC (objective assessment and subjective evaluation comparison) to explain the difference and the relationship between objective assessments and subjective evaluations of the environment. Then, based on the indicator value, a matrix containing four situations (Match-H, Match-L, H-L, and L-H) was constructed to explore why a human–environment relationship may not be harmonious. Since the upper Minjiang River basin is a typical area, because of its intensive human activity, as well as its fragile ecological environment, this study chose it as a case study and used it to verify the framework. Through the framework construction and application, this study found that: (1) The framework of this study provided a more comprehensive method to evaluate the human–environment relationship; (2) as the subjective evaluation was based on individual comprehensive tradeoffs, the evaluation combining the subjective and objective assessment was more accurate; (3) environmental conditions were the basis, and human activities were the key factors, for the coordination of human–environment relationships; so the matrix put forward in this study was necessary for finding the cause of human–environment incongruity.

show abstract

Quality of life and sustainability: Toward person–environment congruity

Moser

2009

Journal of Environmental Psychology

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Residential Satisfaction and Annoyance in Residents Living Near Industrial Estates

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Analyzing the Relationships between Citizens’ Emotions and their Momentary Satisfaction in Urban Public Spaces

Analyzing the Relationships between Citizens’ Emotions and their Momentary Satisfaction in Urban Public Spaces

Building a Framework of Evaluating Human–Environment Relationships: Considering the Differences between Subjective Evaluations and Objective Assessments

Quality of life and sustainability: Toward person–environment congruity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About