Bridging Environmental Sustainability and Quality of Life in Metropolitan Atlanta’s Urban Communities

  • Susannah Lee
  • Subhrajit GuhathakurtaEmail author
Part of the Community Quality-of-Life Indicators book series (CQLI, volume 4)


Quality of life (QOL) is a central concern in urban planning, given the profession’s orientation towards advancing the public well-being. This study develops a multi-attribute Quality of Urban Life (QoUL) Index to compare and track place-based amenities and the state of public welfare in cities within the Atlanta region. Of particular interest is the examination of QoUL in relation to an Urban Environmental Sustainability (UES) Index, which offers important insights about whether and how sustainability contributes to quality of life.


American Community Survey Local Food System Transit Stop Transit Access Metro Region 
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.


  1. American Community Survey. (2009a). Selected economic characteristics: 2005–2009. Retrieved from
  2. American Community Survey. (2009b). Selected housing characteristics: 2005–2009. Retrieved from
  3. American Community Survey. (2010a). Selected economic characteristics: 2006–2010. Retrieved from
  4. American Community Survey. (2010b). Educational attainment: 2006–2010. Retrieved from
  5. Atlanta Regional Commission. (2009a). Summer 2009 public opinion survey responses. Retrieved from
  6. Atlanta Regional Commission. (2009b). Summer 2009 regional poll results. Retrieved from
  7. Atlanta Regional Commission. (2009c). GIS data. Retrieved from
  8. Berke, P. R. (2002). Does sustainable development offer a new direction for planning? Challenges for the twenty-first century. Journal of Planning Literature, 17(1), 21–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bossard, E. (2011). Using census data to categorize and envision neighborhood sustainability prospects. Presentation at the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning Conference, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
  10. Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., & Rodgers, W. L. (1976). The quality of American life: Perceptions, evaluations, and satisfactions. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Castells, M. (2002). Local and global: Cities in the network society. Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie (Journal of Economic & Social Geography), 93(5), 548–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cervero, R. (1994). Transit-based housing in California: Evidence on ridership impacts. Transport Policy, 1(3), 174–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cervero, R. (2007). Transit-oriented development’s ridership bonus: A product of self-selection and public policies. Environment and Planning A, 39(9), 2068–2085.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cummins, R. (2000). Objective and subjective quality of life: An interactive model. Social Indicators Research, 52(1), 55–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cutter, S. L. (1985). Rating places: A geographer’s view on quality of life. Washington, DC: Association of American Geographers/Library of Congress.Google Scholar
  16. Das, D. (2008). Urban quality of life: A case study of Guwahati. Social Indicators Research, 88(2), 297–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1997). Measuring quality of life: Economic, social, and subjective indicators. Social Indicators Research, 40(1), 189–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Reports. (2009). Table 8 Georgia offenses known to law enforcement by state by city, 2009. Retrieved from
  19. Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Reports. (2010). Table 8 Georgia offenses known to law enforcement by state by city, 2010. Retrieved from
  20. Gatersleben, B. (2000). Sustainable household metabolism and quality of life: Examining the perceived social sustainability of environmentally sustainable household consumption patterns. Groningen: De Regenboog.Google Scholar
  21. Georgia Department of Agriculture. (2011). Community Farmers Markets. Retrieved from
  22. Georgia Organics. (2010). Online local food guide. Retrieved from
  23. Gottlieb, P. (1995). The ‘golden egg’ as a natural resource: Toward a normative theory of growth management. Society and Natural Resources, 8(1), 49–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Guhathakurta, S., & Cao, Y. (2011). Variations in objective quality of urban life across a city region: The case of phoenix. In R. W. Marans & R. J. Stimson (Eds.), Investigating quality of urban life: Theory, methods, and empirical research (pp. 135–160). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Howley, P., Scott, M., & Redmond, D. (2009). Sustainability versus liveability: An investigation of neighbourhood satisfaction. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 52(6), 847–864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jones, A., Hillsdon, M., & Coombes, E. (2009). Greenspace access, use, and physical activity: Understanding the effects of area deprivation. Preventive Medicine, 49(6), 500–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kates, R., & Wilbanks, T. (2003). Making the global local. Environment, 45(3), 12–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kawachi, I., & Kennedy, B. (1999). Crime: Social disorganization and relative deprivation. Social Science & Medicine, 48(6), 719–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Layton, R. (2009). On economic growth, marketing systems, and the quality of life. Journal of Macromarketing, 29(4), 349–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lee, S. (2011). Analyzing intra-metropolitan poverty differentiation: Causes and consequences of poverty expansion to suburbs in the metropolitan Atlanta region. The Annals of Regional Science, 46(1), 37–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Liu, B. (1975). Quality of life: Concept, measure and results. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 34(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Liu, B. (1977). Economic and noneconomic quality of life: Empirical indicators and policy implications for large standard metropolitan areas. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 36(3), 225.Google Scholar
  33. Lund, H., Cervero, R., & Wilson, R. (2004). Travel characteristics of transit-oriented development in California. Sacramento: Caltrans Statewide Planning Studies.Google Scholar
  34. Marans, R. (2003). Understanding environmental quality through quality of life studies: The 2001 DAS and its use of subjective and objective indicators. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65(1–2), 73–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  36. Mitchell, R., & Popham, F. (2007). Evidence based public health policy and practice: Greenspace, urbanity and health: Relationships in England. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 61(8), 681–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Moser, G. (2009). Quality of life and sustainability: Toward person–environment congruity. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(3), 351–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Myers, D. (1988). Building knowledge about quality of life for urban planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 54(3), 347–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Neighborhood Scout. (2011). Crime reports. Retrieved from
  40. Office of Health Indicators for Planning (OHIP), Georgia Department of Public Health (GDPH). (2011). Mortality statistics 2004–2008. Generated by Michael Rogers, OHIP [internal database query]. Atlanta: GDPH.Google Scholar
  41. Portney, K. E. (2003). Taking sustainable cities seriously: Economic development, the environment, and quality of life in American cities. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  42. Rice, B. (1983). Atlanta: If Dixie were Atlanta. In R. M. Bernard & B. R. Rice (Eds.), Sunbelt cities: Growth since world War II. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  43. Rogerson, R., Findlay, A., Morris, A., & Coombes, M. (1989). Indicators of quality of life: Some methodological issues. Environment and Planning A, 21(12), 1655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Romney, D. M., Brown, R. I., & Fry, P. S. (1994). Improving the quality of life: Prescriptions for change. Social Indicators Research, 33, 237–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Seaman, P., Jones, R., & Ellaway, A. (2010). It’s not just about the park, it’s about integration too: Why people choose to use or not use urban greenspaces. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 7, 78–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sirgy, M., Widgery, R., Lee, D., & Yu, G. (2010). Developing a measure of community well-being based on perceptions of impact in various life domains. Social Indicators Research, 96(2), 295–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Steg, L., & Gifford, R. (2005). Sustainable transportation and quality of life. Journal of Transport Geography, 13(1), 59–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Szalai, A. (1980). The meaning of comparative research on the quality of life. In A. Szalai & F. M. Andrews (Eds.), The quality of life: Comparative studies. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  49. Tazebay, I., Somuncu, M., & Akpinar, N. (2010). A quantitative assessment for quality of life: The case of metropolitan Ankara, turkey. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 5(12), 1360–1372.Google Scholar
  50. U.S. Census Bureau. (2010a). Profile of general population and housing characteristics: 2010. Retrieved from
  51. U.S. Census Bureau. (2010b). 2010 TIGER/Line Shapefiles. Retrieved from
  52. United States Department of Agriculture. (2011). Farmers market search. Retrieved from
  53. United States Department of Agriculture. (2011, September). Food locator tool. Retrieved from
  54. van Leeuwen, E., Nijkamp, P., & Vaz, T. (2010). The multifunctional use of urban greenspace. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 8(1/2), 20–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Vlek, C., Rooijers, A. J., & Steg, E. M. (1999). Sustainable consumption: More quality of life with less material? Groningen: Centre for Environmental and Traffic Psychology, University of Groningen.Google Scholar
  56. Wish, N. (1986). Are we really measuring the quality of urban life? Well-being has subjective dimensions as well as objective ones. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 45(1), 93–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Center for GISGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations