WP2 Quality of Life Indicators

Charles University of PragueLudek Sykora

WP2: Quality of Life Indicators

Quality of Life: the Concept

SELMA proposal: The QoL of the individual arising from non-residential deconcentration Quality of Life is a personal and therefore subjective matterEnvironmental (external to an individual) aspects that contribute to a subjective perception of the quality of lifeWhich aspects are formed and transformed by non-residential deconcentration?SELMA pays attention to socio-economic and environmental aspects

Socio-economic

Spatial mismatch of employmentJob opportnitiesSocial polarisation, exclusionCommunity cohesionCosts of infrastructure provisionInfrastructure accessibilityOpportunity

Environmental

NoisePollutionWater qualityLoss of open spaceCongestion (???)

Structural or developmental view

QoL situation – link to the level of deconcentration (structural) in the spatial patternQoL change over 10 years – link to the deconcentration (structural / developmental) as a change in spatial patternSELMA proposal promised indicators of change in the quality of life !!!Proposal: combination of both approaches

Spatial level

Indicator for the whole metropolitan areaIndicator for the zones in metropolitan area (internal differentiation, relation between compact city and suburbs) Indicators for smaller spatial units

Scale

Metropolitan area (all cities)Zones in metropolitan areas (all cities)Smaller units within zones (in selected instances all cities)Grid (3 cities)

Qualitative and quantitative approaches

SELMA proposal promised a combination of both qualitative and quantitative assessmentQualitative - Case study (whole metropolitan area or localities ??)Aggregate data

Efficiency and equity

3 cities versus all the others

What is the difference in the level of analysis?What is the difference in the approach?3 – UrbanSim model, GIS, spatially detail data

Question?

SELMA proposal hypothesize that QoL impacts arising from non-residential deconcentration will be VERY DIFFERENT to those arising from residential deconcentrationIMPLICATIONS: SELMA does not study residential deconcentration and thus can not prove this hypothesisProvided we take the hypothesis into account, the traditional indicators are not very useful for us. What is the alternative?

SELMA WP 2

QoL

Approach, Concepts and the Purpose of Indicators

Main question: How changes in land use patterns caused by non-residential suburbanisation have affected quality of life of individuals and households in suburban areas and urban core of metropolitan regions?

Approach, Concepts and the Purpose of Indicators

intensive research of mechanism through which suburbanisation impacts on the quality of life conceptualisation of mechanisms must precede any assembly of large data sets and their statistical analysis we have to gather only such data and construct indicators of quality of life that reflect the impacts of non-residential suburbanisation

Approach, Concepts and the Purpose of Indicators

We have to start with a formulation of a scheme that would reflect links between different land use changes and changes of life of different population sub-groups. –> common work for WP 2, 3 and 5Then we shall search for available indicators that would best describe these impacts. –> WP 4

The spatial scale and level of complexity of our analysis

aggregated data and extensive research

case studies of places, non-residential developments and inhabitants employing intensive research techniques

Spatial scales

Metropolitan region as a whole (problem of external boundary delimitation)two zones in metropolitan region: suburban zone and urban core (compact city boundary)more detailed spatial scale: how large units in terms of area and population size? (smallest possible areas, in Prague ca 1000 units with population ranging from 0-10000 inhabitants, question for other metropolitan areas)

Case studiesimpacts of particular non-residential developments (out-of-town shopping and entertainment zone; logistic, warehousing and distribution complex; production facility in new industrial zone) on the quality of life of various population subgroups intensive analysis can serve as a source of data input to the model building, based on existing factual relations rather than on statistical relations generated by the comparison of independent land use and independent quality of life indicators

Population sub-groups

Who is benefiting from the use of the new non-residential facilities? Who is negatively affected by the use of these facilities? What is the difference between various groups of population in different places?Several aspects of non-residential suburbanisation affect every person. We have to identify these aspects, analyse and assess them.

Non-residential suburbanisation impacts research

1) on an individual, non-aggregated level, i.e. aspect by aspect for each individual2) weighting of these individual aspects -> a more complex assessment for an individual (inclusion only of the most important aspects)3) aggregation of individuals into sub-populations according to activities in daily life, place of living, socio-economic and demographic status

Quality of life impacts One suburban non-residential development impacts on the quality of life of one individual in several instances. This development impacts in various combinations of these instances on various people. We shall identify the most common combinations of these effects (the number of affected people).One person is influenced by many new suburban non-residential developments. We shall identify the most common impacts from suburban projects (in their mutual combination and complexity) on one person. Then we have to aggregate the most common combinations for population subgroups.

Quality of life impacts

the quality of daily life of individualsinformation can be obtained only by an intensive research on the level of individual projects and individual peopleimplications for research method – questionnaire survey of population and case studies of selected typical developments

What are the impacts of non-residential suburbanisation

on everyday life of people in

metropolitan area

suburban zoneurban core 

immediate vicinity of non-residential development

What are the impacts of non-residential suburbanisation

on basic activities of everyday life?

Home/housingWork/schoolServices/shopping

Leisure time

What are the impacts of non-residential suburbanisation

on different population groups by socio-economic and demographic/family status?

WealthyMiddle class

Poor

Focus on CHANGE

We have to look on changes in land use and changes in the quality of life.Indicators must reflect the change.