The Role of Neighborhood Origin in the Residential Satisfaction …
433
on the idea that all people have a fundamental right to housing, social housing was the
product of governmental policies put in place with the goal of guaranteeing exactly
that. In order to create effective policies, a comprehensive assessment was implemented, including an examination of residents’ perceptions in addition to objective
measures of the environment, such as density, cost, unit size, and neighborhood layout. On this basis, RS has become a vehicle through the demand-and-supply mechanisms of the market for expressing residential preferences, choices, and expectations
of people who lack the means to engage directly with that market.
Researchers typically pursue one of three approaches to RS studies. In one
approach, RS functions as a measure to evaluate the quality of a given residential area by identifying and analyzing the factors that best explain variations in the
extent to which and the ways in which residents are satisfied with a given area. In
this approach, RS is treated as a criterion variable, or the dependent variable. Some
examples of studies in which this approach is implemented are Marans and Rodgers
(1975), Galster and Hesser (1981), and Cutter (1982). A second approach takes RS as
an independent variable to predict a specific behavior, particularly residential mobility. The model presented by Speare (1974) is a good example of this approach. A
third option is described as a comprehensive approach in which RS is considered
both as a criterion variable to assess housing quality and as a predictor of certain
behaviors. The models presented by Weidemann and Anderson (1985), Francescato
et al. (1989) and Amérigo and Aragones (1990) are good examples of this approach.
RS is operationalized through the examination of three interrelated factors: satisfaction with the dwelling, satisfaction with the neighborhood, and satisfaction with
the community. Each of these factors has objective and subjective components that
define residents’ attitudes toward their residential environment.
A recent study by Arundel and Roland (2017) includes RS as an essential aspect
of the sustainability of the community concept (Bramley and Power 2009). Thus,
RS (i.e., stability and evaluation of current conditions), social capital (i.e., social
interaction and mutual reciprocity), and sense of community (i.e., psychological
attachment) are seen as key conditions for achieving collective involvement and
community well-being.
2.2 Residential Satisfaction and Social Sustainability
In attempting to operationalize social sustainability in relation to the built environment, researchers have developed a series of variables related to two broad underlying concepts: social equity and sustainability of the community (Bramley and Power
2009).
Among these variables, three crucial indicators of sustainability of the community
are highlighted in recent research: social capital, sense of community, and residential satisfaction. These indicators are used to examine the effects of urban form on
social sustainability at the neighborhood level, eliciting the relationship between
community and neighborhood features. The positive aspects of developing a strong
433
on the idea that all people have a fundamental right to housing, social housing was the
product of governmental policies put in place with the goal of guaranteeing exactly
that. In order to create effective policies, a comprehensive assessment was implemented, including an examination of residents’ perceptions in addition to objective
measures of the environment, such as density, cost, unit size, and neighborhood layout. On this basis, RS has become a vehicle through the demand-and-supply mechanisms of the market for expressing residential preferences, choices, and expectations
of people who lack the means to engage directly with that market.
Researchers typically pursue one of three approaches to RS studies. In one
approach, RS functions as a measure to evaluate the quality of a given residential area by identifying and analyzing the factors that best explain variations in the
extent to which and the ways in which residents are satisfied with a given area. In
this approach, RS is treated as a criterion variable, or the dependent variable. Some
examples of studies in which this approach is implemented are Marans and Rodgers
(1975), Galster and Hesser (1981), and Cutter (1982). A second approach takes RS as
an independent variable to predict a specific behavior, particularly residential mobility. The model presented by Speare (1974) is a good example of this approach. A
third option is described as a comprehensive approach in which RS is considered
both as a criterion variable to assess housing quality and as a predictor of certain
behaviors. The models presented by Weidemann and Anderson (1985), Francescato
et al. (1989) and Amérigo and Aragones (1990) are good examples of this approach.
RS is operationalized through the examination of three interrelated factors: satisfaction with the dwelling, satisfaction with the neighborhood, and satisfaction with
the community. Each of these factors has objective and subjective components that
define residents’ attitudes toward their residential environment.
A recent study by Arundel and Roland (2017) includes RS as an essential aspect
of the sustainability of the community concept (Bramley and Power 2009). Thus,
RS (i.e., stability and evaluation of current conditions), social capital (i.e., social
interaction and mutual reciprocity), and sense of community (i.e., psychological
attachment) are seen as key conditions for achieving collective involvement and
community well-being.
2.2 Residential Satisfaction and Social Sustainability
In attempting to operationalize social sustainability in relation to the built environment, researchers have developed a series of variables related to two broad underlying concepts: social equity and sustainability of the community (Bramley and Power
2009).
Among these variables, three crucial indicators of sustainability of the community
are highlighted in recent research: social capital, sense of community, and residential satisfaction. These indicators are used to examine the effects of urban form on
social sustainability at the neighborhood level, eliciting the relationship between
community and neighborhood features. The positive aspects of developing a strong