Planning for Happiness or Planning for Wealth Influences of urban form on residential satisfaction , social sustainabi

1. Planning for Happiness or Planning for Wealth? Influences of urban form on residential satisfaction , social sustainability and neighbourhood housing markets. Professor Glen Bramley With Dr Caroline Brown, Nicola Dempsey, & David Watkins g.bramley@sbe.hw.ac.ukCityForm Consortium EPSRC GRANT No:GR/S20529/01

2. Structure of the Presentation Explore/clarify different aspects of sustainability- esp social sustainability  (incl link with �happiness�)- also �wealth�, esp. role/interpretation of house prices Present selected evidence from recent research- measurement of social sustainability- descriptive vs modelled relationships- balancing different criteria Implications for planning housing- physical form (density & type)- social/tenure mix 3 main parts of the paper. I will discuss the first two parts and GB will discuss the third part.3 main parts of the paper. I will discuss the first two parts and GB will discuss the third part.

3. Sustainable Development

4. Dimensions of social sustainability No standard definition of social sustainability. From a review of the literature we identified two overarching concepts �. Relate to individual and collective dimensions. A number of other like-minded concepts� No standard definition of social sustainability. From a review of the literature we identified two overarching concepts �. Relate to individual and collective dimensions. A number of other like-minded concepts�

5. Government Policy Definition: What is a Sustainable Community? � Securing the Future, Cm 6467, Mar 2005, Annex A Active, inclusive & safe- identity & belonging-(tolerance of difference)- friendly, cooperative- leis/cult opps, esp for young- low crime/drugs/ASB- social inclusion & �good life� Well served- educ, health, SS- range of accessible services Well designed and built- sense of place/ approp form- friendly/healthy/safe public spaces- accessibility jobs/services/facilby p t/walk/cycle(- range of affordable housing) Well run Environmental sensitive Well connected Thriving Fair for everyone

6. Social Equity Poverty and Social Exclusion Survey Give examples of the types of questions that we are asking about these services and facilities. Trying to form a picture of how people use their neighbourhoods�.Poverty and Social Exclusion Survey Give examples of the types of questions that we are asking about these services and facilities. Trying to form a picture of how people use their neighbourhoods�.

7. Sustainability of community Identified these dimensions from the broader literature on social capital etc. Tap into Government policies on sustainable communities etc. Identified these dimensions from the broader literature on social capital etc. Tap into Government policies on sustainable communities etc.

8. Social Sustainability � Does it Matter? Increased emphasis in government policy statements: implies indirectly important via politics of urban growth The economic costs of social dysfunction- crime, illness, accelerated obsolescence, caring �Happiness� (the new science of�.Layard 2005)- fundamental goal; and we can measure it- higher/rising income does not necess incr happiness- of 7 main causes, several are related to our Soc Sust concept: - family relationships - community and friends - health - good (local) government (Layard pp 62-70)

9. Planning for Wealth? Third leg of sustainability �stool� Three (or five?) capitals model (family silver) Top level statements of planning system objectives PPS1, SPP1 Drivers of planning system reform (reducing obstacles to dynamic enterprise, regional competitiveness, etc) Barker (2004) � improving housing supply to help economy as well as social outcomes �Barker 2� (2006) �further reform to assist competitiveness

10. Housing as main store of personal wealth:so can we use house prices as measure of �success� in planning? House prices reflect regional economic & lab mkt performance House prices reflect valued environmental features House prices reflect consumers� view of housing quality House prices reflect accessibility provided by transport & other infrastructure (an aspect of planning) House prices below replacement cost imply non-sustainability Markets �distorted� by international, speculative & super- rich demands Markets inflated by inadequate land supply (a planning failure) Markets an outcome of consumer tradeoffs (e.g. access-space) and supply response Higher house prices worsen affordability (both a social equity and an economic labour supply �cost�)

11. Elements of Urban Form� Dimensions of urban form that we are interested in� Site survey to measure� Census data etc.Dimensions of urban form that we are interested in� Site survey to measure� Census data etc.

12. CityForm Household Survey 15 neighbourhoods in 5 cities: inner, middle and outer Varied social, tenure and built form mix; c.2000 hhds Random sample, self-completion, 30% responseN := 4300 Questionnaire covers all dimensions of social sustainability Questions often based on other surveys e.g. S.H.S. May be linked to Census data at output area, �sub-area� or ward level Also linked to deprivation indicators, house prices, etc. Urban form measures primarily from Mastermap & Site Survey.

13. Measuring Social Sustainability 8 elements measured; all based on responses to multiple questionse.g. social interaction based on 13 questions, such as whether they have friends in neighbourhood, see them frequently, know neighbours by name, look out for each other, chat, borrow, etc. Where possible, combined positives & negatives & scaled in natural way; (100 would be neutral; 0 would be worst possible scores; 200 best possible) Factor analysis generally confirmed groupings -�Neighbourhood pride/attachment� is best single representative measure (closely related to environmental quality, home satisfaction)- Social interaction, participation is second grouping - Third grouping around access & use of local services

14. Initial descriptive findings On most dimensions (except services and safety) outer areas show best scores and inner areas worst High density areas show worse scores than low or medium density; Access to services better in inner locations and denser areas;

15. Composite Scores for Different Outcomes by Location & Density � five cities

16. Statistical modelling Use of multiple regression analysis to predict/explain different scores Measures impact of particular urban form factors whilst controlling for lots of demographic, socio-economic etc. factors

17. Causal Model (illustrative)

18. Summary of model effects � urban form factors

19. Social Sustainability and Density � overall relationships and urban form effects

20. Comment on Findings As expected, scores fall with density in most cases Fall tends to be in range up to 120 DHP (net) Urban form effect not the same in each case- weaker for pride,environment than for home satis, safety- middle density areas best for interaction- medium/higher density areas best for use of services U F effects different due to effect of correlated socio-economic & demographic factors (e.g. poverty, tenure)

21. Comparing Urban Form and other Effects on Area (Dis-)satisfaction � based on S.E.H. analysis

22. Weighing and balancing different criteria of sustainability Can create composite social sustainability index But patterns depend somewhat on relative weighting of components- weighting pride/ environment favours lower density- weighting interaction favours middle density- weighting use of local services/facilities favours middle-higher density (or lessens overall slope) We also have to anticipate balancing social criteria against other dimensions- work on environment, transport, energy, etc. not complete yet- can illustrate using transport data from survey and Census (15 indicators)- and house price factor (? Non-linear due to affordability issue?)

23. Social and Transport Sustainability

24. Different Aspects of Urban Form- example of house type

25. House Prices, Urban Form and Other Influences

26. Social Sustainability versus Price: differing relationships with density & location

27. Importance of Tenure & Social Mix

28. Overall Sustainability and Density (5 Cities)

29. Urban Form Characteristics of High Sustainability Neighbourhoods in 5 Cities

30. So what sort of housing & neighbourhoods should we plan? Evidence base for planning guidance could/should be improved Social sustainability concept is meaningful, measurable, policy-relevant and arguably important (can be related to �happiness� literature) So is transport; �wealth� (prices) more tricky to interpret Compact city looks bad socially, but disadvantages more marginal once you control for socio-demographics- interaction & service use favour medium or higher dens Sustainable transport favours higher density, as apparently do house prices Overall best options will differ with location; e.g. moderate densities but plenty of flats in middle areas Poverty & social mix as important � who lives where, and whether they choose, matters - avoid SR concentration