IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v13y2016i1p111-d61852.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Housing Stakeholder Preferences for the “Soft” Features of Sustainable and Healthy Housing Design in the UK

Author

Listed:
  • Agne Prochorskaite

    (Department of the Built Environment, Liverpool John Moores University, Cherie Booth Building, Byrom Street, Liverpool L3 3AF, UK)

  • Chris Couch

    (School of Environmental Sciences, University of Liverpool, Jane Herdman Building, Liverpool L69 3GP, UK)

  • Naglis Malys

    (School of Life Sciences, Centre for Biomolecular Science, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK)

  • Vida Maliene

    (Department of the Built Environment, Liverpool John Moores University, Cherie Booth Building, Byrom Street, Liverpool L3 3AF, UK
    Institute of Land Management and Geomatics, Faculty of Water and Land Management, Aleksandras Stulginskis University, Universiteto 10, Akademija, Kaunas LT-53361, Lithuania)

Abstract

It is widely recognised that the quantity and sustainability of new homes in the UK need to increase. However, it is important that sustainable housing is regarded holistically, and not merely in environmental terms, and incorporates elements that enhance the quality of life, health and well-being of its users. This paper focuses on the “soft” features of sustainable housing, that is, the non-technological components of sustainable housing and neighbourhood design that can impact occupants’ health and well-being. Aims of the study are to ascertain the relative level of importance that key housing stakeholders attach to these features and to investigate whether the opinions of housing users and housing providers are aligned with regards to their importance. An online survey was carried out to gauge the level of importance that the key stakeholders, such as housing users, local authorities, housing associations, and developers ( n = 235), attach to these features. Results revealed that while suitable indoor space was the feature regarded as most important by all stakeholders, there were also a number of disparities in opinion between housing users and housing providers (and among the different types of providers). This implies a scope for initiatives to achieve a better alignment between housing users and providers.

Suggested Citation

  • Agne Prochorskaite & Chris Couch & Naglis Malys & Vida Maliene, 2016. "Housing Stakeholder Preferences for the “Soft” Features of Sustainable and Healthy Housing Design in the UK," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:13:y:2016:i:1:p:111-:d:61852
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/13/1/111/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/13/1/111/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pauline Van den Berg & Astrid Kemperman & Boy De Kleijn & Aloys Borgers, 2015. "Locations that Support Social Activity Participation of the Aging Population," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-18, August.
    2. Cohen, D.A. & McKenzie, T.L. & Sehgal, A. & Williamson, S. & Golinelli, D. & Lurie, N., 2007. "Contribution of public parks to physical activity," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 97(3), pages 509-514.
    3. Austin, D. Mark & Furr, L. Allen & Spine, Michael, 2002. "The effects of neighborhood conditions on perceptions of safety," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 417-427.
    4. Fish, J.S. & Ettner, S. & Ang, A. & Brown, A.F., 2010. "Association of perceived neighborhood safety on body mass index," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 100(11), pages 2296-2303.
    5. Kaplan, S. & Kaplan, R., 2003. "Health, Supportive Environments, and the Reasonable Person Model," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 93(9), pages 1484-1489.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ken’ichi Matsumoto & Yuki Yamamoto & Nao Ohya, 2018. "Effect of Subsidies and Tax Deductions on Promoting the Construction of Long-Life Quality Houses in Japan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-16, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tashi Dendup & Xiaoqi Feng & Stephanie Clingan & Thomas Astell-Burt, 2018. "Environmental Risk Factors for Developing Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-25, January.
    2. Meryem Hayir-Kanat & Jürgen Breuste, 2020. "Outdoor Recreation Participation in Istanbul, Turkey: An Investigation of Frequency, Length, Travel Time and Activities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-23, January.
    3. Chen, Duan-Rung & Wen, Tzai-Hung, 2010. "Socio-spatial patterns of neighborhood effects on adult obesity in Taiwan: A multi-level model," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 823-833, March.
    4. Mark P.C. Cherrie & Niamh K. Shortt & Catharine Ward Thompson & Ian J. Deary & Jamie R. Pearce, 2019. "Association Between the Activity Space Exposure to Parks in Childhood and Adolescence and Cognitive Aging in Later Life," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-13, February.
    5. Xiaohu Zhang & Scott Melbourne & Chinmoy Sarkar & Alain Chiaradia & Chris Webster, 2020. "Effects of green space on walking: Does size, shape and density matter?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(16), pages 3402-3420, December.
    6. Boncinelli, Fabio & Riccioli, Francesco & Marone, Enrico, 2015. "Do forests help to keep my body mass index low?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 11-17.
    7. Stafford, Mai & Cummins, Steven & Ellaway, Anne & Sacker, Amanda & Wiggins, Richard D. & Macintyre, Sally, 2007. "Pathways to obesity: Identifying local, modifiable determinants of physical activity and diet," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(9), pages 1882-1897, November.
    8. Macdonald, Elizabeth & Harper, Alethea & Williams, Jeff & Hayter, Jason A., 2006. "Street Trees and Intersection Safety," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt4sk6m275, University of California Transportation Center.
    9. Stephanie A. Prince & Elizabeth A. Kristjansson & Katherine Russell & Jean-Michel Billette & Michael Sawada & Amira Ali & Mark S. Tremblay & Denis Prud’homme, 2011. "A Multilevel Analysis of Neighbourhood Built and Social Environments and Adult Self-Reported Physical Activity and Body Mass Index in Ottawa, Canada," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-26, October.
    10. Olga L. Sarmiento & Ana Paola Rios & Diana C. Paez & Karoll Quijano & Rogério César Fermino, 2017. "The Recreovía of Bogotá, a Community-Based Physical Activity Program to Promote Physical Activity among Women: Baseline Results of the Natural Experiment Al Ritmo de las Comunidades," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-15, June.
    11. Linh Nguyen & Pauline van den Berg & Astrid Kemperman & Masi Mohammadi, 2020. "Where do People Interact in High-Rise Apartment Buildings? Exploring the Influence of Personal and Neighborhood Characteristics," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-23, June.
    12. Antonios Kolimenakis & Alexandra D. Solomou & Nikolaos Proutsos & Evangelia V. Avramidou & Evangelia Korakaki & Georgios Karetsos & Georgios Maroulis & Eleftherios Papagiannis & Konstantinia Tsagkari, 2021. "The Socioeconomic Welfare of Urban Green Areas and Parks; A Literature Review of Available Evidence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-26, July.
    13. Elliott, Lewis R. & White, Mathew P. & Taylor, Adrian H. & Herbert, Stephen, 2015. "Energy expenditure on recreational visits to different natural environments," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 53-60.
    14. Mohammad Paydar & Asal Kamani Fard & Verónica Gárate Navarrete, 2023. "Design Characteristics, Visual Qualities, and Walking Behavior in an Urban Park Setting," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, September.
    15. Zhou, Min & Tan, Shukui & Tao, Yinghui & Lu, Yongzhong & Zhang, Zuo & Zhang, Lu & Yan, Danping, 2017. "Neighborhood socioeconomics, food environment and land use determinants of public health: Isolating the relative importance for essential policy insights," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 246-253.
    16. Congbao Xu & Jing Wang & Yanxue Li & Weijun Gao, 2023. "Evaluation and Optimization Design of Coastal Cycling Environment Based on Importance Performance Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, August.
    17. Bittencourt, Tainá A. & Giannotti, Mariana, 2023. "Evaluating the accessibility and availability of public services to reduce inequalities in everyday mobility," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    18. Haiyun Xu & Tobias Plieninger & Jørgen Primdahl, 2019. "A Systematic Comparison of Cultural and Ecological Landscape Corridors in Europe," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-32, February.
    19. Schafer, Joseph A. & Huebner, Beth M. & Bynum, Timothy S., 2006. "Fear of crime and criminal victimization: Gender-based contrasts," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 285-301.
    20. M. Reza Shirazi & Ramin Keivani & Sue Brownill & Georgia Butina Watson, 2022. "Promoting Social Sustainability of Urban Neighbourhoods: The Case of Bethnal Green, London," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(3), pages 441-465, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:13:y:2016:i:1:p:111-:d:61852. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.