A Spatial Clustering Approach Analyzing Types of Objective Quality of Urban Life Using Spatial Data for Survey Respondents: South East Queensland, Australia

  • Rod McCreaEmail author
Part of the Social Indicators Research Series book series (SINS, volume 45)


This chapter shows how an integrated approach using spatial objective data and subjective survey data can be used to develop a statistical model analyzing objective quality of urban life (QOUL). Ten broad dimensions of the urban environment are identified, four relating to the physical environment and six to the social environment. The analysis uses spatial clustering of objective QOUL for the Brisbane-South East Queensland (SEQ) region in Australia to identify different types of QOUL dimensions associated with the residential location of respondents to a 2003 SEQQOL survey. GIS tools are used to integrate the survey data with spatial objective data, and cluster analysis is used to derive the typologies of objective QOUL.


Urban Environment Objective Dimension Residential Location Social Disorganization Theory Objective Density 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This chapter is based on research funded by the Australian Research Council Discovery project # DP0209146.


  1. Aldenderfer, M. S., & Blashfield, R. K. (1984). Cluster analysis. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  2. Archibugi, F. (2001). City effect and urban overload as program indicators of the regional policy. Social Indicators Research, 54(2), 209–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2001a). Census of population and housing: Basic community profiles. Retrieved September 2004.Google Scholar
  4. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2001b). Census of population and housing: Census geographic areas digital boundaries, Australia, 2001 (2923.0.30.001). Retrieved September 2004.Google Scholar
  5. Baldassare, M., & Wilson, G. (1995). More trouble in paradise – Urbanization and the decline in suburban quality-of-life ratings. Urban Affairs Review, 30(5), 690–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berto, R. (2005). Exposure to restorative environments helps restore attentional capacity. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(3), 249–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boyer, R., & Savageau, D. (1981). Places rated almanac. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  8. Boyer, R., & Savageau, D. (1985). Places rated almanac. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  9. Boyer, R., & Savageau, D. (1989). Places rated almanac. New York: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  10. Brown, D. L., Fuguitt, G. V., Heaton, T. B., & Waseem, S. (1997). Continuities in size of place preferences in the United States, 1972–1992. Rural Sociology, 62(4), 408–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Butler, T. (2007). For gentrification? Environment and Planning A, 39(1), 162–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cantillon, D., Davidson, W. S., & Schweitzer, J. H. (2003). Measuring community social organization: Sense of community as a mediator in social disorganization theory. Journal of Criminal Justice, 31(4), 321–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chiang, L. N., & Hsu, J. R. (2005). Locational decisions and residential preferences of Taiwanese immigrants in Australia. GeoJournal, 64(1), 75–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cicerchia, A. (1996). Indicators for the measurement of the quality of urban life: What is the appropriate territorial dimension? Social Indicators Research, 39(3), 321–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cicerchia, A. (1999). Measures of optimal centrality: Indicators of city effect and urban overloading. Social Indicators Research, 46, 276–299.Google Scholar
  16. Clark, E. (2005). The order and simplicity of gentrification – a political challenge. In R. Atkinson & G. Bridge (Eds.), Gentrification in a global context: The new urban colonialism (pp. 256–264). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Clark, W. A. V., & Huang, Y. Q. (2003). The life course and residential mobility in British housing markets. Environment and Planning A, 35(2), 323–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Clark, W. A. V., Deurloo, M. C., & Dieleman, F. M. (2006). Residential mobility and neighbourhood outcomes. Housing Studies, 21(3), 323–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cramer, V., Torgersen, S., & Kringlen, E. (2004). Quality of life in a city: The effect of population density. Social Indicators Research, 69(1), 103–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cummins, R. (1996). The domains of life satisfaction: An attempt to order chaos. Social Indicators Research, 38(3), 303–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cutter, S. (1985). Rating places: A geographer’s view on quality of life. Washington D.C.: Association of American Geographers.Google Scholar
  22. D’Andrea, S. S. (1998). Italian quality of life. Social Indicators Research, 44(1), 5–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Desbarats, J. (1983). Spatial choice and constraints on behaviour. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 73(3), 340–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dokmeci, V., & Berkoz, L. (2000). Residential-location preferences according to demographic characteristics in Istanbul. Landscape and Urban Planning, 48(1–2), 45–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Filion, P., McSpurren, K., & Appleby, B. (2006). Wasted density? The impact of Toronto’s residential-density-distribution policies on public-transit use and walking. Environment and Planning A, 38(7), 1367–1392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fischer, C. S. (1984). The urban experience. New York: Harcourt, Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
  27. Fredland, D. R. (1974). Residential mobility and home purchase: A longitudinal perspective on the family life cycle and the housing market. Lexington: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  28. Ge, J., & Hokao, K. (2006). Research on residential lifestyles in Japanese cities from the viewpoints of residential preference, residential choice and residential satisfaction. Landscape and Urban Planning, 78(3), 165–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Glaeser, E., Kolko, J., & Saiz, A. (2000) Consumer city (Working paper 7790). Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  30. Glavac, S. M., & Waldorf, B. (1998). Segregation and residential mobility of Vietnamese immigrants in Brisbane, Australia. Professional Geographer, 50(3), 344–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrated framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15, 169–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kawachi, I., Kennedy, B. P., & Wilkinson, R. G. (1999). Crime: Social disorganization and relative deprivation. Social Science and Medicine, 48(6), 719–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lazarsfeld, P. F., & Merton, R. K. (1954). Friendship as a social process: As substantive and methodologicalaAnalysis. In M. Berger (Ed.), Freedom and control in modern society (pp. 18–66). New York: Van Nostrand.Google Scholar
  34. Lees, L. (2000). A reappraisal of gentrification: Towards a ‘geography of gentrification’. Progress in Human Geography, 24(3), 389–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Liu, B. (1975). Quality of life indicators in U.S. metropolitan areas, 1970. Washington: Washington Environmental Research Center.Google Scholar
  36. Lowenkamp, C. T., Cullen, F. T., & Pratt, T. C. (2003). Replicating Sampson and Groves’s test of social disorganization theory: Revisiting a criminological classic. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 40(4), 351–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. MapInfo (2003) User guide: MapInfo StreetPro 8. Greenwich, New South Wales: MapInfo, Australia.Google Scholar
  38. McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mitrany, M. (2005). High density neighborhoods: Who enjoys them? GeoJournal, 34, 131–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Perz, S. G. (2000). The quality of urban environments in the Brazilian Amazon. Social Indicators Research, 49(2), 181–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Queensland Department of Local Government Planning Sport and Recreation (2002) Land use zones for land parcels in South East Queensland [unpublished data for Geographic Information Systems]. Brisbane: Queensland Department of Local Government, Planning, Sport and Recreation.Google Scholar
  42. Rogerson, R. J., Findlay, A. M., Morris, A. S., & Coombes, M. G. (1989). Indicators of quality of life - some methodological issues. Environment and Planning A, 21(12), 1655–1666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rogerson, R. J., Findlay, A. M., Paddison, R., & Morris, A. S. (1996). Class, consumption and quality of life. Progress in Planning, 45, 1–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sampson, R. J., & Groves, W. B. (1989). Community structure and srime – Testing Social-Disorganization Theory. American Journal of Sociology, 94(4), 774–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277(5328), 918–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Savage, M., Warde, A., & Ward, K. (2003). Urban sociology capitalism and modernity. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  47. Savage, M., Bagnall, G., & Longhurst, B. (2005). Globalisation and belonging. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  48. Savageau, D., & D’Agostino, R. (1999). Places rated almanac. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  49. Schwanen, T., & Mokhtarian, P. L. (2004). The extent and determinants of dissonance between actual and preferred residential neighborhood type. Environment and Planning B-Planning and Design, 31(5), 759–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Schwirian, K. P., Nelson, A. L., & Schwirian, P. M. (1995). Modeling urbanism - economic, social and environmental-stress in cities. Social Indicators Research, 35(2), 201–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Senecal, G., & Hamel, P. J. (2001). Compact city and quality of life: Discussions of the Canadian approach to sustainability indicators. Canadian Geographer, 45(2), 306–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Shaw, C. R., & McKay, H. D. (1942). Juvenile delinquency and urban areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  53. Speare, A., Goldstein, S., & Frey, W. H. (1975). Residential mobility, migration, and metropolitan change. Cambridge: Ballinger Pub. Co.Google Scholar
  54. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics. New York: HarperCollins College Publishers.Google Scholar
  55. Taylor, R. B. (1996). Neighborhood responses to disorder and local attachments: The systemic model of attachment, social disorganization, and neighborhood use value. Sociological Forum, 11(1), 41–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A., & Zelson, M. (1991). Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11(3), 201–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. van den Berg, A. E., Hartig, T., & Staats, H. (2007). Preference for nature in urbanized societies: Stress, restoration, and the pursuit of sustainability. Journal of Social Issues, 63(1), 79–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Walmsley, D. J. (1988). Urban living: The individual in the city. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  59. Western, J., & Larnach, A. (1998). The social and spatial structure of South-East Queensland. Australasian Journal of Regional Studies, 4(2), 215–237.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Social Science ResearchThe University of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations