Advertisement

Applied Research in Quality of Life

, Volume 6, Issue 2, pp 159–179 | Cite as

Quality of Life and Compact Development Policies in Bandung, Indonesia

  • Sigit Dwiananto ArifwidodoEmail author
  • Ranjith Perera
Article

Abstract

The study explores whether Quality of Life (QOL) corresponds to the spatial pattern of urban system as a result of compact development policy practice in Bandung city, Indonesia. It examines the connection between QOL and selected attributes of compact development. A self-reported life satisfaction is used as a proxy for QOL based on a cross-sectional survey data from 400 respondents. The analysis shows that the changes in QOL significantly correspond to the change of different attributes of compact development. The result suggests that compact development policies in Bandung have not shown a desirable result in improving QOL of the urban residents. The result also indicates that the implementation of the policy is less beneficial in the context of developing countries. The study strengthens the existing argument that compact development policies need to be tailored to suit the context of developing countries, rather than just be taken for granted from the practices in developed countries.

Keywords

Quality of life Life satisfaction Spatial planning Compact development Urban form 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This paper benefits greatly from the insightful comments by two anonymous referees.

References

  1. Bandung CSA. (2008). Bandung in figures 2008. Bandung: Central Statistic Agency of Bandung City.Google Scholar
  2. Bandung PDA. (2003). Bandung city master plan 2003–2013. Bandung: Planning and Development Agency of Bandung City.Google Scholar
  3. Bramley, G., & Power, S. (2009). Urban form and social sustainability: the role of density and housing. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 36, 30–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bruegmann, R. (2005). Sprawl: A compact history. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  5. Burgess, R. (2000). The compact city debate: A global perspective. In M. Jenks & R. Burgess (Eds.), Compact cities: Sustainable urban forms for developing countries (pp. 9–24). London: Spon.Google Scholar
  6. Burton, E. (2000). The compact city: just or just compact? A preliminary analysis. Urban Studies, 37(11), 1969–2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Caruthers, J. I., & Ulfarsson, G. F. (2008). Does smart growth matter to public finance? Urban Studies, 45(9), 1791–1823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clark, A. E., & Oswald, A. J. (1994). Unhappiness and unemployment. Economic Journal, 104, 648–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clark, A. E., & Oswald, A. J. (1996). Satisfaction and comparison income. Journal of Public Economics, 61(3), 359–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Costanza, R., Fisher, B., Ali, S., Beer, C., Bond, L., Boumans, R., et al. (2007). Quality of life: an approach integrating opportunities, human needs, and subjective well-being. Ecological Economics, 61, 267–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cummins, R. A., Eckersley, R., Pallant, J., van Vugt, J., & Misajon, R. (2003). Developing a national index of subjective wellbeing: the Australian unity wellbeing index. Social Indicators Research, 64(2), 159–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cummins, R. A., Walter, W., & Woerner, J. (2007). Australian unity well-being index: Report 16.1—The well-being of Australians—Groups with the highest and lowest well-being in Australia. Melbourne: Australian Centre on Quality of Life, School of Psychology, Deakin University.Google Scholar
  13. Cutler, D., & Glaeser, E. L. (1997). Are ghettos good or bad? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112, 827–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dawkins, C. J., & Nelson, A. C. (2003). State growth management programs and central city revitalization. Journal of the American Planning Association, 72(1), 19–31.Google Scholar
  15. Day, R. (2007). Place and the experience of air quality. Health and Place, 13, 249–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. De La Cruz, E. E. R. (2009). Local political institutions and smart growth: An empirical study of the politics of compact development. Urban Affairs Review, 45(2), 218–246.Google Scholar
  17. Dijst, M. V. (2000). Compact urban policies in Randstand Holland. In G. D. Roo & D. Miller (Eds.), Compact cities and sustainable development: A critical assessment of policies and plans from an international perspective. Hampshire: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  18. Dissart, J. C., & Deller, S. C. (2000). Quality of life in the planning literature. Journal of Planning Literature, 15, 135–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Di Tella, R., & MacCulloch, R. J. (2006). Some uses of happiness data in economics. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(1), 25–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Di Tella, R., MacCulloch, R. J., & Oswald, A. J. (2001). Preferences over inflation and unemployment: evidence from surveys of happiness. American Economic Review, 91, 335–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dujardin, C., Selod, H., & Thomas, I. (2008). Residential segregation and unemployment: the case of Brussels. Urban Studies, 45(1), 89–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Easterlin, R. E. (1995). Will raising the income of all increase the happiness of all? Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization, 27, 342–353.Google Scholar
  23. Easterlin, R. A. (2001). Income and happiness: towards a unified theory. Economic Journal, 111, 465–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ewing, R., & Rong, F. (2008). The impact of urban form on U.S. residential energy use. Housing Policy Debate, 19(1), 1–30.Google Scholar
  25. Ferrer-i-carbonell, A., & Fritjers, P. (2004). How important is methodology for the estimates of the determinants of happiness? Ecological Economics, 60(3), 509–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Frey, H. (1999). Designing the city: Towards a more sustainable urban form. London: E. & F. N. Spon.Google Scholar
  27. Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2002). What can economists learn from happiness research? Journal of Economic Literature, 40, 402–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Frey, B., & Stutzer, A. (2005a). Happiness research: state and prospects. Review of Social Economy, 62(2), 207–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2005b). Stress that doesn’t pay: the commuting paradox. Review of Social Economy, 62(2), 207–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Frey, B. S., Luechinger, S., & Stutzer, A. (2009). The life satisfaction approach to valuing public goods: the case of terrorism. Public Choice, 138, 317–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Fritjers, P., Haisken-DeNew, J. P., & Shields, M. A. (2004). Money does matter! Evidence from increasing real incomes and life satisfaction in East Germany following reunification. American Economic Review, 94, 730–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Haughton, G., & Hunter, C. (1994). Sustainable Cities. London: Jessica Kingsley.Google Scholar
  33. Landis, J. D. (2006). Growth management revisited. Journal of the American Planning Association, 72(4), 411–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Layard, R. (2006). Happiness and public policy: a challenge to the orofession. Economic Journal, 116(510), C24–C33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. MacKerron, G., & Mourato, S. (2009). Life satisfaction and air quality in London. Ecological Economics, 68(5), 1441–1453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Massam, B. H. (2002). Quality of life: public planning and private living. Progress in Planning, 58, 141–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. McMahon, D. M. (2006). Happiness: A history. New York: Atlantic Monthly.Google Scholar
  38. Meijers, E. (2008). Summing small cities does not make a large City: Polycentric urban regions and the provision of cultural, leisure and sport amenities. Urban Studies, 45(11), 2323–2342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Moro, M., Brereton, F., Ferreira, S. J., & Clinch, P. (2008). Ranaking quality of life using subjective well-being data. Ecological Economics, 65, 448–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Moulton, B. R. (1990). An illustration of a pitfall in estimating the effects of aggregate variables on micro units. Review of Economics and Statistics, 72(2), 334–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mulder, K., Constanza, R., & Erickson, J. (2006). The contribution of built, human, social and natural capital to quality of life in intentional and unintentional communities. Ecological Economics, 59, 13–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Neuman, M. (2005). The compact city fallacy. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 25(11), 11–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Neuman, M. (2009). The compact city fallacy. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 25(1), 1–26.Google Scholar
  44. Newman, P., & Kenworthy, J. (1999). Sustainability and cities: Overcoming automobile dependence. Washington D.C.: Island.Google Scholar
  45. Pacione, M. (2003). Urban environmental quality and human wellbeing—a social geographical perspective. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65(1–2), 19–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pendall, R. (1999). Do land use controls cause sprawl? Environment and Planning B, 26, 555–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Petersen, R. (2002). Land use planning and urban transport. A sourcebook for policy-makers in developing cities. Eshborn: GTZ.Google Scholar
  48. Powdthavee, N. (2008). Putting a price tag on friends, relatives, and neighbours: using surveys of life satisfaction to value social relationships. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 37(4), 1459–1480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Redfearn, C. L. (2009). Persistence in urban form: the long-run durability of employment centers in metropolitan areas. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 39(2), 224–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rehdanz, K., & Maddison, D. (2008). Local environmental quality and life-satisfaction in Germany. Ecological Economics, 64, 787–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Robin, M., Matheau-Policea, A., & Couty, C. (2007). Development of a scale of perceived environmental annoyances in urban settings. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(1), 55–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sandercock, L. (1997). Towards cosmopolis: Planning for multicultural cities. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
  53. Sandercock, L. (2000). Cities of (in) difference and the challenge for planning. DISP, 140, 7–15.Google Scholar
  54. Selod, H., & Zenou, Y. (2006). City structure, job search, and labor discrimination: theory and policy implications. Economic Journal, 116, 1057–1087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Shen, Q., & Zhang, F. (2007). Land use changes in a pro smart growth state: Maryland, USA. Environment and Planning A, 39(6), 1457–1477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ulengin, B., Ulengin, F., & Guvenc, U. (2001). A multidimensional approach to urban quality of life: the case of Istambul. European Journal of Operational Research, 130, 361–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Van Praag, B. M. S., & Baarsma, B. E. (2005). Using happiness surveys to value intangibles: the case of airport noise. The Economic Journal, 115(500), 224–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Veenhoven, R. (2006). Quality of life in modern society. In Y.-K. Ng & L. S. Ho (Eds.), Happiness and public policy, theory, case studies and implications (pp. 19–44). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  59. Vemuri, A. W., & Costanza, R. (2006). The role of human, social, built, and natural capital in explaining life satisfaction at the country level: toward a national well-being index (NWI). Ecological Economics, 58(1), 119–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Welsch, H. (2006). Environment and happiness: valuation of air pollution using life satisfaction data. Ecological Economics, 58(4), 801–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Williams, K. (2000). Does intensifying cities make them more sustainable? In K. Williams et al. (Eds.), Achieving sustainable urban form: An introduction (pp. 30–45). New York: E & FN Spon.Google Scholar
  62. Wilson, W. J. (1987). The truly disadvantaged: The inner city, the underclass and public policy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  63. Yeh, A. G. (2008). GIS as a planning support system for planning of harmonious cities. Nairobi: Un-Habitat.Google Scholar
  64. Yusuf, A. A., & Resosudarmo, B. P. (2009). Does clean air matter in developing countries’ megacities? A hedonic price analysis of the Jakarta housing market, Indonesia. Ecological Economics, 68(5), 1398–1407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V./The International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies (ISQOLS) 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Urban Environmental Management Field of StudyAsian Institute of TechnologyKlong LuangThailand

Personalised recommendations