Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Quality of Life (QoL) Effects of Sustainable Transport Policy Framework in Developing Economies

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Transportation in Developing Economies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Urban mobility is a major part of urban economics and is crucial in defining the ‘Quality of Life (QoL).’ QoL is a multi-dimensional paradigm and is demarcated as the degree to which essential values and needs of current and future generations are fulfilled. Sustainable transport goals entail optimal stability between current and future economic and environmental qualities and unevenly affect the QoL of society. In this paper, an extensive literature review on the influence of sustainable transport measures on QoL is conducted. A list of QoL indicators measuring desires, standards, and human well-being is also rigorously studied for developing economies. A conceptual framework is formulated to understand the interaction between the transport sector and QoL. The study focuses on identifying the research gaps and developing a conceptual framework associating transportation and QoL. The paper also proposes a methodological framework for appraising the impact on QoL due to the transition towards sustainable transport systems in developing economies. The study also emphasizes assessing the impact on QoL at the local and regional levels. The goal is to enhance the QoL by incorporating QoL aspects into the comprehensive transportation planning process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ahmed M, El Monem NA (2020) Sustainable and green transportation for better quality of life case study greater Cairo – Egypt. HBRC J 16(1):17–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/16874048.2020.1719340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Banister D, Bowling A (2004) Quality of life for the elderly: the transport dimension. Transp Policy 11:105–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Boottledooren D, Dekoninck L, Gillis D (2011) The influence of traffic noise on appreciation of the living quality of a neighborhood. Int J Environ Res Public Health 8:777–798

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bugliarello G (2006) Urban sustainability: dilemmas, challenges, and paradigms. Technol Soc 28:19–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2005.10.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Campbell A, Converse P, Rodgers W (1976) Quality of american life, the: perceptions, evaluations, and satisfactions. russell sage foundation. Retrieved October 30, 2020, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/https://doi.org/10.7758/9781610441032

  6. Cao J, Ettema D (2014) Satisfaction with travel and residential self-selection: How do preferences moderate the impact of the Hiawatha light rail transit line? J Transp Land Use 7(3):93–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Carse A (2011) Assessment of transport quality of life as an alternative transport appraisal technique. J Transp Geogr 19:1037–1045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2010.10.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dalkmann H, Brannigan C (2007) Transport and climate change, Module 5e, sustainable transport: a sourcebook for policymakers in developing countries. Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), October. Eschborn

  9. de Groot J, Steg L (2006) Impact of transport pricing on quality of life, acceptability, and intentions to reduce car use: An exploratory study in five European countries. J Transp Geogr 14(6):463–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2006.02.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dėdelė A, Miškinytė A, Andrušaitytė S, Nemaniūtė-Gužienė J (2020) Dependence between travel distance, individual socioeconomic and health-related characteristics, and the choice of the travel mode: a cross-sectional study for Kaunas, Lithuania. J Transp Geograp. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102762

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Delbosc A (2012) The role of well-being in transport policy. Transp Policy 23:25–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Diener E, Suh EM, Lucas RE, Smith HL (1999) Subjective well-being: three decades of process. Psychol Bull 125(2):276–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Doi K, Kii M, Nakanishi H (2008) An integrated evaluation method of accessibility, quality of life, and social interaction. Environ Plann B Plann Des 35(6):1098–1116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. D’Orso G, Migliore M (2020) A GIS-based method for evaluating the walkability of a pedestrian environment and prioritized investments. J Transp Geograp. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2019.102555

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Editor: Magnusson (2018) Sustainable transport. Publisher: Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP)

  16. Fan Y, Guthrie AE, Levinson DM (2012) Impact of light rail implementation on labor market accessibility: a transportation equity perspective. J Transp Land Use 5:28–39. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.v5i3.240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Fedra K (2004) Sustainable urban transportation: A model-based approach. Cybernet Syst Int J 35(5–6):455–485. https://doi.org/10.1080/01969720490451779

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Felce D, Perry J (1995) Quality of life: Its definition and measurement. Res Dev Disabil 16(1):51–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/0891-4222(94)00028-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Feng CM, Hsieh CH (2009) Implications of transport diversity for quality of life. J Urban Plann Develop 135(1):13–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gatersleben BCM (2000) Sustainable household metabolism and quality of life: Examining the perceived social sustainability of environmentally sustainable household consumption patterns. Doctoral dissertation University of Groningen, Department of Psychological, Pedagogical and Sociological Sciences, Groningen, The Netherlands

  21. Goodman R, Kroen A, Davern M (2020) Quality of life, sustainability and transport: The case of melbourne, Australia. Handbook of Quality of Life and Sustainability, pp. 203–226

  22. Gunaruwan LT, Jayasekera DHW (2015) Social inclusivity through public transportation: a strategic approach to improve quality of life in developing countries. J Adv Transp 46(6):738–751. https://doi.org/10.1002/atr.1302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Han J, Liang H, Hara K, Uwasu M, Dong L (2018) Quality of life in china’s largest City, Shanghai: a 20-year subjective and objective composite assessment. J Clean Prod 173:135–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Jaskiewicz M, Besta T (2014) Heart and mind in public transport: analysis of motives, satisfaction and psychological correlates of public transportation usage in the Gdansk-Sopot-Gdynia Tricity agglomeration in Poland. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav. 26:92–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.06.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Jeon CM, Amekudzi AA, Vanegas J (2006) Transportation system sustainability issues in high-, middle-, and low-income economics: Case studies from Georgia U.S., South Korea, Colombia, and Ghana. J Urban Plann Dev 132:172–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Jones T, Harms L, Heinen E (2016) Motives, perceptions and experiences of electric bicycle owners and implications for health, well-being, and mobility. J Transp Geogr 53:41–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2016.04.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kachi N, Kato H, Hayashi Y (2007) A computable model for optimizing residential relocation based on quality of life and social cost in built-up areas. J Eastern Asia Soc Transp Stud Vol. 7

  28. Keles R (2012) The quality of life and environment. Procedia Soc Behvior Sci 35:23–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kim S, Ulfarsson GF (2013) Transportation in an aging society: Linkage between transportation and quality of life. Transp Res Record J Transp Res Board. https://doi.org/10.3141/2357-13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kolodinsky JM, DeSisto TP, Propen D, Putnam ME, Roche E, Sawyer WR (2013) It is not how far you go; it is whether you can get there: modeling the effects of mobility on quality of life in rural New England. J Transp Geogr 31:113–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lee RJ, Sener IN (2016) Transportation planning and quality of life: Where do they intersect? Transp Policy 48:146–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.03.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Levinson D (2003) Perspectives on efficiency in transportation. Int J Transp Manage 13:145–155

    Google Scholar 

  33. Mani A, Pai M, Aggarwal R (2012) Sustainable urban transport in India-Role of the Auto-rickshaw Sector. EMBARQ. World Resources Institute

  34. Mollenkopf H, Baas S, Marcellini F, Oswald F, Ruoppila I, Szeman Z, Tacken MHHK, Wahl HW (2005) A new concept of out-of-home mobility. In: Mollenkopf H, Marcellini F, Ruoppila I, Szeman Z, Tacken MHHK (Eds.), Enhancing mobility in later life: personal coping, environmental resources, and technical support. The out-of-home mobility of older adults in urban and rural regions of five European countries (pp. 257–277). IOS Press

  35. Myers D (1987) Community-relevant measurement of quality of life: a focus on local trends. Urban Affairs Rev 23(1):108–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/004208168702300107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Nakamura K, Morita H, Vichiensan V, Togawa T, Hayashi Y (2017) Comparative analysis of QOL in station areas between cities at different development stages, Bangkok, and Nagoya. Transp Res Procedia 25:3188–3202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2017.05.361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Nakanishi H, Sinclair H, Lintern J (2013) Measuring quality of life: An integrated evaluation of built environment. Proceedings of CUPUM 2013: 13th International Conference on Computers in Urban Planning and Urban Management - Planning Support Systems for Sustainable Urban Development, 1–29

  38. Ness B, Urbel-Piirsalu E, Anderberg S, Olsson L (2007) Categorizing tools for sustainability assessment. Ecologic Econ 60:498–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2001). Good practice greenhouse abatement policies: Transport. OECD environment directorate and International Energy Agency

  40. Panagopoulos T, Tampakis S, Karanikola P, Karipidou-Kanari A, Kantartzis A (2018) The usage and perception of pedestrian and cycling streets on residents’ well-being in Kalamaria, Greece. Land. https://doi.org/10.3390/land7030100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Poortinga W, Steg L, Vlek C (2004) Values, environmental concern, and environmental behavior: a study into household energy use. Environ Behav 36(1):70–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Putra K (2016) The effect of public transport services on quality of life in Medan city, in: AMER International Conference on Quality of Life, AicQoL. Medan Indonesia. February, pp. 25–27

  43. Pujiati A, Nihayah DM, Adzim F, Nikensari SI (2020) Implementation of sustainable transportation using Gap Analysis: Case Study of Semarang City. J Crit Rev 7, 7, ISSN-2394–5125

  44. Saxena S, Misra PJ, Vishwanth NS, Varma RP, Soman B (2013) Quality of life and its correlates in Central India. Int J Res Develop Health, Vol 1(2). https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d000/4fef4d23319965a94cce6a38354546bfa1ae.pdf

  45. Saxena S, Orley J (1997) Quality of life assessment: The World Health Organization perspective. Eur Pyschiatry 12:263s–2266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Schneider IE, Guo T, Schroeder S (2013) Quality of life: Assessment for transportation performance measures. Final report. Minnesota Department of Transportation Research Services

  47. Senlier N, Yildiz R, Aktaş ED (2009) A perception survey for the evaluation of urban quality of life in kocaeli and a comparison of the life satisfaction with the European cities. Soc Indic Res 94(2):213–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-008-9361-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Sola AG (2018) Understanding sustainable accessibility in urban planning: Themes of consensus, themes of tension. J Transp Geograp 70:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Sottile E, Meloni I, Cherchi E (2017) Hybrid choice model to disentangle the effect of awareness from attitudes: Application test of soft measures in medium size city. Case Stud Transp Policy 5:400–407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Spinney JEL, Newbold KB, Scott DM, Vrkljan B, Grenier A (2020) The impact of driving status on out-of-home and social activity engagement among older Canadians. J Transp Geogr 85(April):102698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102698

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Steg L, Gifford R (2005) Sustainable transportation and quality of life. J Transp Geogr 13:59–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Stutzer A, Frey BS (2008) Stress that does not pay: the commuting paradox. Sand J Econ 110:339–366

    Google Scholar 

  53. Tainio M, Woodcock J, Brage S, Gotschi T, Goodman A, Kelly P, De Nazelle A (2017) Research into valuing health impacts in Transport Appraisal, update (November 2016). Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/transport-appraisal-valuing-health impacts%0Ahttps://trid.trb.org/view/1485096

  54. The World Health Organization Quality of Life assessment (WHOQOL): position paper from the World Health Organization. Soc Sci Med. (1995) 41(10):1403–1409. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(95)00112-k

  55. Törnvall E, Marcusson J, Wressle E (2016) Health-related quality of life in relation to mobility and fall risk in 85-year-old people: A population study in Sweden. Ageing Soc 36(9):1982–1997. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X15000896

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Vajjarapu H, Verma A, Allirani H (2020) Evaluating the climate change mitigation potential of sustainable urban transport measures in India. Available at SSRN, Elsevier: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3715492https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3715492

  57. Verma A, Sasidharan S, Beeramoole PB, Hemanthini AR (2020) Review of studies on health impact assessment and modelling from transport sector in the context of BRIC Countries. Transp Develop Econom Springer 6:10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40890-020-0098-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Wann-Ming W (2019) Constructing urban dynamic transportation planning strategies for improving quality of life and urban sustainability under emerging growth management principles. Sustain Cities Soc 44:275–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development). Our common future. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1987)

  60. Woodcock J, Tainio M, Cheshire J, O’Brien O, Goodman A (2014) Health effects of the London bicycle sharing system: health impact modelling study. BMJ 348: g425

  61. Xia T, Nitschke M, Zhang Y, Shah P, Crabb S, Hansen A (2015) Traffic-related air pollution and health co-benefits of alternative transport in Adelaide, South Australia. Environ Int 74:281–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Xiong Y, Zhang J (2016) Effects of land use and transport on young adults’ quality of life. Travel Behav Soc 5: 37–47, ISSN 2214-367X, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2015.10.002.

  63. Zhang K, Batterman S (2013) Air pollution and health risks due to vehicle traffic. Sci Total Environ 450–451:307–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Zhang F, Li D (2019) How the Urban neighborhood environment influences the quality of life of chinese community-dwelling older adults: an influence model of “NE-QoL.” Sustainability 11:5739. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11205739

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India

    Hemanthini Allirani & Ashish Verma

Authors
  1. Hemanthini Allirani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ashish Verma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ashish Verma.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Allirani, H., Verma, A. Quality of Life (QoL) Effects of Sustainable Transport Policy Framework in Developing Economies. Transp. in Dev. Econ. 8, 3 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40890-021-00141-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40890-021-00141-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation