Urban happiness: context-sensitive study of the social sustainability of urban settings

Abstract

Previous studies have reported multifaceted, controversial social outcomes of densely built urban settings. Social sustainability of urban environments have rarely been studied in a context-sensitive manner, identifying the specific ways urban structural characteristics contribute to the behavioural, experiential and well-being outcomes. In this study, an online public participation geographic information system (PPGIS) methodology allowed the place-based study of urban and suburban contexts in the metropolitan region of Helsinki, Finland. Respondents (N = 3119) located their meaningful places and reported the experiential and well-being outcomes. GIS-based measures of urban structures were calculated within a 500m buffer around their homes. Structural equation modeling was used to assess the contextual variation and the mediational role accessibility and perceived environmental quality play in linking urban structural characteristics with well-being outcomes. Our findings indicated that although increasing urban density was associated with shorter distances to everyday services in both urban and suburban settings, the experiential and well-being outcomes varied. In the urban context, easy access to services contributed to higher perceived environmental quality and positive well-being outcomes, whereas in the suburban setting, the closeness of services decreased the experiential and well-being outcomes. Perceived environmental quality was strongly associated with well-being in both contexts. We concluded that densely built urban neighborhoods can also support social sustainability, but the processes vary between suburban and urban settings. A challenge remains for urban planners on how to improve accessibility and related positive experiential outcomes in suburban contexts.

Social Sustainability in Metropolitan Areas: Accessibility and Equity in the Case of the Metropolitan Area of Valencia (Spain)

“…Its complementarity with other specialist areas-such as sociology, political science, economics, etc.-that address such crucial issues as inequality, social cohesion, health and political involvement, among others, enables it to contribute to a better understanding of everything involved in social sustainability, including the practical consequences. The scientific and technical contributions from many different spheres concerning possible indicators for measuring urban sustainability are innumerable [14][15][16][17][18]. This interdisciplinary approach is indispensable, although, in the interests of clarity, the present paper will focus only on the subject of equity, as this is the area in which geography has made the greatest contribution.…”

“…Scholars and decision-makers therefore need to work together to understand a structure of life-urban life-which is steadily acquiring greater substance as a key factor for human development, now and in the future. The challenges faced by urban areas inevitably require public and political planning decisions that it is essential to address [18,19].…”

“…Nowadays, the quality of a service includes the need for a good site. This is one of the main requirements for citizens-the demand-to value it highly, and therefore helps to improve and increase its sustainability [13,18,48]. Harvey [10] was one of the first geographers to define the term spatial equity, also known as spatial justice.…”

Vol. 2 n. 4 | 2017 | FULL ISSUE

“…Livability of places is set by many factors, which are in turn influenced by a variety of tangible and intangible elements -such as good quality design and materials, place identity, accessibility and so on -concerning the area in question and its surrounding (AAVV, 2017;Appleyard, 1981;Kyttä et Al, 2015;Burns, 2005). Urban happiness PPS, 2001;Evans et Al, 2011) is one of these factors and contemporaneously one of its synonymous that, together with the term sustainability meant in its wide meaning, constitutes a key concept in placemaking, namely, in the "art of making places for people" (Sepe, 2017).…”

“…Through the analysis of places, a more detailed and qualitative interpretation of the city is carried out. This is not circumscribed to its aesthetic essence, nor even to its physical geometry (Gehl, 2010;Kyttä et Al., 2015;Lynch, 1960;Madanipour, 2003). The functional and symbolic interpretations of the elements of a place are the fundamental factors for understanding its meaning.…”