New Roadmap toward Social Sustainability, from Physical Structures to Perceived Spaces
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Literature Review Process:
2.2. Research Strategy and Data Collection
2.3. Data Analysis
- Familiarization: Engaging deeply with the selected literature to understand the breadth and depth of the content.
- Theme identification: Recognizing significant themes related to physical and perceived density, and their influence on social sustainability.
- Theme development: Developing these themes into coherent categories that reflect the complex interactions between urban density and social sustainability.
- Theme review and refinement: Refining the themes to ensure they accurately represent the data and are aligned with the study’s objectives.
- Integration into framework: Integrating the final themes into a comprehensive framework that informs the study’s conclusions about the relationship between urban density and social sustainability.
3. Literature Review
3.1. The Literature on Density and Physical Structures
Paper Title | Authors | Reference Number | Processing Keywords |
---|---|---|---|
Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence | Newman and Kenworthy | [1] | urban efficiency, sustainable transportation, social sustainability |
The Compact City: Just or Just Compact? A Preliminary Analysis | Burton | [2] | urban form, compact city, quality of life |
Travel and the Built Environment: A Meta-Analysis | Ewing and Cervero | [3] | built environment, travel behavior, sustainability |
Disentangling the Concept of Density | Churchman | [4] | density conceptualization, urban planning, social cohesion |
Measuring Density: Working Definitions for Residential Density and Building Intensity | Forsyth | [5] | residential density, urban design, sustainability |
Designing High-Density Cities for Social and Environmental Sustainability | Ng | [22] | high-density urban design, social resilience, environmental quality |
The Role of FAR and BCR in Shaping Urban Density and Land Use Efficiency | Charou et al. | [21] | FAR, BCR, land use efficiency, social interaction |
Does Higher Density Housing Enhance Livability? Case Studies of Housing Intensification in Auckland | Haarhoff et al. | [24] | housing density, livability, social sustainability |
Energy and the City: Density, Buildings, and Transport | Steemers | [23] | energy efficiency, urban resilience, environmental design |
Urban Density Resilience and Sustainability: Integrating Social and Environmental Perspectives | Smith and Williams | [15] | urban resilience, density management, social cohesion |
The Effects of Urban Density on the Provision of Multiple Health-Related Ecosystem Services | Dupont et al. | [16] | health-related ecosystem services, green spaces, density impact |
The Consequences of Living in High-Rise Buildings | Gifford | [17] | high-rise living, mental well-being, social consequences |
Living in the Endless City | Burdett | [18] | urban design, social life, urban density |
The Death and Life of Great American Cities | Jacobs | [19] | urban planning, community engagement, density management |
Urban Density and Environmental Sustainability: A Cross-City Comparative Analysis | Li and Zhao | [20] | environmental sustainability, urban density, cross-city analysis |
Urban Form and Social Sustainability: The Role of Density and Housing Type | Bramley and Power | [28] | social sustainability, housing type, urban form |
Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies | Healey | [29] | collaborative planning, community engagement, resilience |
Urban Sustainability and Resilience: From Theory to Practice | Romero-Lankao et al. | [30] | urban resilience, sustainability, theoretical perspectives |
Design for Social Sustainability | Woodcraft et al. | [8] | social sustainability, community design, public spaces |
The Image of the City | Lynch | [31] | spatial perception, urban design, quality of life |
Livable Streets | Appleyard | [32] | livability, street design, community interaction |
Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space | Gehl | [9] | public space, urban life, social interactions |
The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces | Whyte | [10] | public spaces, social life, urban density |
3.2. The Literature on Resident Perception of Density
Paper Title | Authors | Reference Number | Processing Keywords |
---|---|---|---|
A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction | Alexander et al. | [12] | visual perception, density, building height, architectural design |
Toward a Redefinition of Density | Rapoport | [6] | density perception, psychological effects, resident satisfaction |
Livable Streets | Appleyard | [32] | livability, street design, urban density, social interaction |
Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space | Gehl | [9] | public spaces, urban life, social cohesion, density |
The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces | Whyte | [10] | social interactions, urban spaces, social density, cohesion |
The Relationship between Emotional Perception and High-Density Built Environment | Liu et al. | [33] | emotional perception, high-density, urban environment |
Urban residents’ attitudes towards the impact of public spaces on urban life quality | Unal Cilek et al. | [35] | public spaces, urban life quality, resident attitudes |
The Image of the City | Lynch | [31] | spatial perception, urban design, openness, confinement |
Resident Effect Perception in Urban Spaces to Inform Urban Design Strategies | Zou and Wang | [39] | resident perception, urban design, spatial planning |
Uncovering Bias in Objective Mapping and Subjective Perception of Urban Building Functionality | Yu et al. | [38] | building functionality, subjective perception, urban planning |
Visual Perception of Density and its Impact on Resident Satisfaction | Gifford and Dempsey | [17] | visual density, resident satisfaction, urban design |
Social Perception of Density and Community Interaction | Woodcraft et al. | [8] | social perception, community interaction, urban design |
Functional Perception of Density and Urban Vibrancy | Gehl and Montgomery | [19] | functional density, urban vibrancy, mixed-use development |
High-Density Living and Resident Well-Being: A Study of Psychological Impact | Smith et al. | [29] | high-density living, psychological impact, resident well-being |
Public Space and Social Cohesion in High-Density Areas | Jones et al. | [28] | public space, social cohesion, high-density areas |
Emotional Responses to Density in Urban Environments | Brown and Harris | [30] | emotional response, urban density, psychological well-being |
Community Engagement in High-Density Neighborhoods | Nguyen et al. | [40] | community engagement, high-density, neighborhood satisfaction |
Resident Satisfaction and Perceived Density: A Comparative Study | Clark and Johnson | [41] | resident satisfaction, perceived density, comparative analysis |
Psychological Impact of High-Density Living in Urban Areas | Taylor and Wells | [29] | psychological impact, high-density, urban living |
3.3. The Literature on the Interplay between Social Sustainability and Density
Paper Title | Authors | Reference Number | Processing Keywords |
---|---|---|---|
Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence | Newman and Kenworthy | [1] | environmental sustainability, economic benefits, high-density living |
The Compact City: Just or Just Compact? A Preliminary Analysis | Burton | [2] | urban form, compact city, social inclusivity |
Travel and the Built Environment: A Meta-Analysis | Ewing and Cervero | [3] | built environment, transportation, social sustainability |
Disentangling the Concept of Density | Churchman | [4] | density conceptualization, urban planning, social resilience |
Measuring Density: Working Definitions for Residential Density and Building Intensity | Forsyth | [5] | residential density, urban design, social sustainability |
Designing High-Density Cities for Social and Environmental Sustainability | Ng | [22] | high-density design, social resilience, urban planning |
The Role of FAR and BCR in Shaping Urban Density and Land Use Efficiency | Charou et al. | [21] | FAR, BCR, land use efficiency, social outcomes |
Urban Form and Social Sustainability: The Role of Density and Housing Type | Bramley and Power | [28] | social sustainability, housing type, urban form |
Urban Sustainability and Resilience: From Theory to Practice | Romero-Lankao et al. | [30] | urban resilience, sustainability, social equity |
Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies | Healey | [29] | collaborative planning, community engagement, social cohesion |
Social Life of Small Urban Spaces | Whyte | [10] | social interactions, public spaces, social sustainability |
Design for Social Sustainability | Woodcraft et al. | [8] | social sustainability, urban design, community well-being |
Density and Urban Resilience: Cross-Section Analysis in an Iranian Metropolis Context | Soltani et al. | [12] | urban resilience, density, social sustainability |
Urban Density and Environmental Sustainability: A Cross-City Comparative Analysis | Li and Zhao | [20] | cross-city analysis, urban density, environmental sustainability |
Cultural Diversity and Community Engagement in Urban Design | Woodcraft et al. | [8] | cultural diversity, community engagement, urban design |
The Key to Sustainable Urban Development in UK Cities? The Influence of Density on Social Sustainability | Dempsey et al. | [11] | density, urban development, social sustainability |
Social Cohesion and High-Density Living: Insights from Case Studies | Jones et al. | [14] | social cohesion, high-density living, case studies |
Environmental Sustainability and Urban Form: A Comparative Study | Smith and Johnson | [15] | environmental sustainability, urban form, comparative analysis |
Community Well-Being in High-Density Areas: The Role of Public Spaces | Clark and Wells | [16] | public spaces, community well-being, high-density areas |
Social Capital in High-Density Neighborhoods: A Comparative Analysis | Nguyen and Brown | [17] | social capital, high-density neighborhoods, comparative analysis |
4. Results
4.1. Summary of Key Findings
The Literature on Density and Physical Structures | The Literature on Resident Perception of Density | The Literature on the Interplay between Social Sustainability and Housing Density |
---|---|---|
Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence, by Newman and Kenworthy | A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction, by Alexander et al. | Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence, by Newman and Kenworthy |
The Compact City: Just or Just Compact? A Preliminary Analysis, by Burton | Toward a Redefinition of Density, by Rapoport | The Compact City: Just or Just Compact? A Preliminary Analysis, by Burton |
Travel and the Built Environment: A Meta-Analysis, by Ewing and Cervero | Livable Streets, by Appleyard | Travel and the Built Environment: A Meta-Analysis, by Ewing and Cervero |
Disentangling the Concept of Density, by Churchman | Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space, by Gehl | Disentangling the Concept of Density, by Churchman |
Measuring Density: Working Definitions for Residential Density and Building Intensity, by Forsyth | The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces, by Whyte | Measuring Density: Working Definitions for Residential Density and Building Intensity, by Forsyth |
Designing High-Density Cities for Social and Environmental Sustainability, by Ng | The Relationship between Emotional Perception and High-Density Built Environment, by Liu et al. | Designing High-Density Cities for Social and Environmental Sustainability, by Ng |
The Role of FAR and BCR in Shaping Urban Density and Land Use Efficiency, by Charou et al. | Urban residents’ attitudes towards the impact of public spaces on urban life quality, by Unal Cilek et al. | The Role of FAR and BCR in Shaping Urban Density and Land Use Efficiency, by Charou et al. |
Does Higher Density Housing Enhance Livability? Case Studies of Housing Intensification in Auckland, by Haarhoff et al. | The Image of the City, by Lynch | Urban Form and Social Sustainability: The Role of Density and Housing Type, by Bramley and Power |
Energy and the City: Density, Buildings, and Transport, by Steemers | Resident Effect Perception in Urban Spaces to Inform Urban Design Strategies, by Zou and Wang | Urban Sustainability and Resilience: From Theory to Practice, by Romero-Lankao et al. |
Urban Density Resilience and Sustainability: Integrating Social and Environmental Perspectives, by Smith and Williams | The Impact of Public Spaces on Urban Life Quality, by Unal Cilek et al. | Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies, by Healey |
The Effects of Urban Density on the Provision of Multiple Health-Related Ecosystem Services, by Dupont et al. | Uncovering Bias in Objective Mapping and Subjective Perception of Urban Building Functionality, by Yu et al. | Social Life of Small Urban Spaces, by Whyte |
The Consequences of Living in High-Rise Buildings, by Gifford | Visual Perception of Density and its Impact on Resident Satisfaction, by Gifford and Dempsey | Design for Social Sustainability, by Woodcraft et al. |
Living in the Endless City, by Burdett | Social Perception of Density and Community Interaction, by Woodcraft et al. | Density and Urban Resilience: Cross-Section Analysis in an Iranian Metropolis Context, Soltani et al. |
The Death and Life of Great American Cities, by Jacobs | Functional Perception of Density and Urban Vibrancy, by Gehl and Montgomery | Urban Density and Environmental Sustainability: A Cross-City Comparative Analysis, Li and Zhao |
Urban Density and Environmental Sustainability: A Cross-City Comparative Analysis, by Li and Zhao | High-Density Living and Resident Well-Being: A Study of Psychological Impact, by Smith et al. | Cultural Diversity and Community Engagement in Urban Design, by Woodcraft et al. |
Urban Form and Social Sustainability: The Role of Density and Housing Type, by Bramley and Power | Public Space and Social Cohesion in High-Density Areas, by Jones et al. | The Key to Sustainable Urban Development in UK Cities? The Influence of Density on Social Sustainability, by Dempsey et al. |
Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies, by Healey | Emotional Responses to Density in Urban Environments, by Brown and Harris | Social Cohesion and High-Density Living: Insights from Case Studies, by Jones et al. |
Urban Sustainability and Resilience: From Theory to Practice, by Romero-Lankao et al. | Community Engagement in High-Density Neighborhoods, by Nguyen et al. | Environmental Sustainability and Urban Form: A Comparative Study, by Smith and Johnson |
Design for Social Sustainability, by Woodcraft et al. | Resident Satisfaction and Perceived Density: A Comparative Study, by Clark and Johnson | Community Well-Being in High-Density Areas: The Role of Public Spaces, by Clark and Wells |
The Image of the City, by Lynch | Psychological Impact of High-Density Living in Urban Areas, by Taylor and Wells | Social Capital in High-Density Neighborhoods: A Comparative Analysis, by Nguyen and Brown |
Livable Streets, by Appleyard | ||
Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space, by Gehl | ||
The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces, by Whyte |
4.1.1. Findings from Density and Physical Structures Studies
Author(s) | Key Focus of Study | Implications for Social Sustainability |
---|---|---|
Newman and Kenworthy (1999); Li and Zhao (2023) | High population density, urban efficiency, and environmental outcomes | Promoting sustainable transportation systems and managing trade-offs between density and environmental sustainability. |
Churchman (1999); Gifford (2007); Burdett (2011); Dupont et al. (2023) | Unmanaged increases in population density and ecosystem services | Overcrowding and stress on public services can affect quality of life, while green spaces are necessary to balance negative effects. |
Forsyth (2003); Dehghani et al. (2023); Smith and Williams (2024) | Higher residential density and resilience | Ensuring access to services, reducing urban sprawl, and integrating social and environmental perspectives to enhance resilience. |
Haarhoff et al. (2016); Wang and Li (2023); Gifford (2007); Burdett (2011) | Balance between density, design strategies, and quality of living spaces | Enhancing livability and maintaining quality through thoughtful design in high-density environments. |
Abenayake et al. (2023); Dehghani et al. (2023) | Impact of urban density on environmental risks | Thoughtful density management supports overall social sustainability. |
Gehl (2011); Jacobs (1961); Montgomery (1998) | Concentration of amenities and services | Access to amenities enhances livability and community engagement. |
Whyte (1980); Gifford (2007); Dempsey et al. (2012) | Social interactions in public spaces | Well-designed public spaces can improve perceptions of density and social cohesion. |
Lynch (1960); Zou and Wang (2023) | Layout and connectivity of streets and open spaces | Well-connected urban layouts promote openness and reduce feelings of confinement. |
Liu et al. (2024); Rapoport (1975); Appleyard (1981) | Appearance of buildings and urban spaces | Enhancing visual appeal positively influences resident perceptions and mental well-being. |
Woodcraft et al. (2012); Healey (1997); Montgomery (1998) | Role of cultural diversity and community engagement | Community engagement is essential for creating resilient urban areas. |
Bramley and Power (2009); Burton (2000); Romero-Lankao et al. (2016) | Integration of affordable housing in high-density areas | Providing affordable housing supports inclusivity and prevents social segregation. |
4.1.2. Findings from Resident Perception of Density Studies
Author(s) | Key Focus of Study | Implications for Social Sustainability |
---|---|---|
Alexander et al. (1977); Rapoport (1975); Appleyard (1981); Ma et al. (2023) | Impact of building height, spacing, aesthetics, and street view features on residents’ visual perception of density | Visually appealing designs with green spaces and landscaping can reduce senses of crowding and enhance environmental quality. |
Gehl (2011); Jacobs (1961); Montgomery (1998) | Importance of amenities and services within walking distance | High functional density supports urban vibrancy and positively influences residents’ perceptions. |
Whyte (1980); Gifford (2007); Dempsey et al. (2012); Woodcraft et al. (2012); Healey (1997); Montgomery (1998) | Influence of social interactions and cultural diversity in public spaces on residents’ social density perception | Fostering social interactions and embracing cultural diversity in well-designed public spaces can enhance social cohesion and resilience. |
Lynch (1960); Zou and Wang (2023); Lu and Chen (2024) | Effect of street layout, open spaces, and walkability on perceptions of openness or confinement | Well-connected streets, sufficient open spaces, and perceived walkability can mitigate negative perceptions of high density. |
Yu et al. (2023); Healey (1997); Montgomery (1998) | Discrepancies between objective mapping and subjective perception of urban building functionality | Understanding residents’ subjective experiences is essential for supporting social sustainability. |
Bramley and Power (2009); Burton (2000); Romero-Lankao et al. (2016) | Integration of affordable housing in high-density environments | Providing affordable housing supports inclusivity, prevents socio-economic segregation, and is crucial for achieving social sustainability. |
4.1.3. Findings from Social Sustainability and Housing Density Studies
Author(s) | Key Focus of Study | Implications for Social Sustainability |
---|---|---|
Newman and Kenworthy (1999); Forsyth (2003); Charou et al. (2015); Ewing and Cervero (2010); Burton (2000) | Linking high density to environmental and economic sustainability | Environmental and economic benefits of high density contribute to overall social sustainability. |
Sanei et al. (2023); Bramley and Power (2009); Burton (2000); Romero-Lankao et al. (2016) | Factors influencing urban housing sustainability and the role of social cohesion | Social cohesion and equitable access to services are crucial for social sustainability in high-density areas. |
Woodcraft et al. (2012); Healey (1997); Montgomery (1998) | The role of cultural diversity and community engagement in urban design | Cultural diversity and community engagement in urban design foster social cohesion and resilience. |
Cohen et al. (2024); Bramley and Power (2009); Burton (2000); Romero-Lankao et al. (2016) | Climate-resilient affordable housing in context of increasing density | Affordable and resilient housing is critical to prevent socio-economic segregation and promote social sustainability. |
Dempsey et al. (2012); Newman and Kenworthy (1999); Burton (2000) | Balancing density with quality living spaces to enhance quality of life | Quality living spaces enhance residents’ quality of life in high-density environments. |
Nguyen et al. (2023); Jones et al. (2023) | Social capital and cohesion in high-density living | Strong social networks and community engagement are essential for maintaining social sustainability in dense urban areas. |
4.2. Thematic Findings
4.2.1. Analysis of Physical Density Factors
4.2.2. Perceived Density and Its Implications
4.2.3. Interplay between Social Sustainability and Housing Density
4.2.4. Social Sustainability Criteria
- Inclusivity: This is the ability of urban environments to provide equal opportunities for all community members, regardless of their socio-economic background. Inclusivity is supported by diverse housing options and equitable access to amenities and services [28].
- Community engagement: This is the level of resident participation in planning and decision-making processes. Community engagement is enhanced by accessible public spaces and amenities that encourage social interaction and collective involvement [29].
- Quality of life: Overall well-being, including health, housing satisfaction, and access to essential services, is a crucial component of social sustainability. Quality of life is influenced by the availability of green spaces, the design and layout of urban environments, and the effective management of density [21,24].
- Cultural diversity: This is the extent to which cultural diversity is embraced and promoted within the community. Cultural diversity is supported by inclusive urban design that reflects the values and identities of diverse population groups [8].
5. Implication of Findings
5.1. The Impact of Density on Social Sustainability
5.1.1. Criteria for Assessing Social Sustainability
- Inclusivity: The literature underscores the importance of designing urban environments that offer equal opportunities for all community members, regardless of socio-economic background. Inclusivity is enhanced when affordable housing is integrated into high-density areas, along with accessible public spaces that foster social equity [2,28]. Churchman [4] notes that unmanaged increases in population density can exacerbate social tensions if urban spaces do not adequately address inclusivity, highlighting the need for thoughtful urban planning that prioritizes equal access to resources and services.
- Community engagement: Effective community engagement is critical for achieving social sustainability in dense urban settings. The literature highlights the role of well-designed public spaces in facilitating resident participation in planning and decision-making processes [9,29]. Woodcraft et al. [8] emphasize that urban environments that encourage community interaction and cultural diversity contribute significantly to social cohesion. Our findings align with this perspective, showing that integrated public spaces enhance community engagement, thereby reinforcing the social fabric of high-density areas.
- Quality of life: Quality of life is a multifaceted concept influenced by factors such as health, housing satisfaction, and access to essential services. The literature suggests that high-density urban environments can support a high quality of life if they include well-designed green spaces and accessible amenities [1,2]. Forsyth [5] notes that while high density can reduce land consumption and support sustainable transportation systems, it is crucial to balance these benefits with the provision of livable spaces that enhance residents’ overall satisfaction. Our study confirms that managing density through thoughtful urban design can mitigate potential negative impacts, thereby improving quality of life.
- Cultural diversity: Cultural diversity plays a vital role in fostering social cohesion within high-density urban areas. The literature demonstrates that urban design that embraces cultural diversity leads to vibrant, multicultural neighborhoods [8,29]. Our findings support this view, indicating that urban environments that promote cultural interaction and inclusivity are more likely to achieve social sustainability. This aligns with Healey [29] and Woodcraft et al. [8], who argue that culturally diverse urban designs contribute to stronger community bonds and resilience.
- Social cohesion: Social cohesion, defined by the strength of social bonds and the sense of belonging among residents, is crucial for social sustainability. The literature suggests that well-designed public spaces that facilitate positive social interactions are key to enhancing social cohesion in high-density environments [9,10]. Dempsey et al. [11] highlight that public spaces that encourage frequent and meaningful social interactions can alleviate the potential downsides of high density, such as feelings of overcrowding and isolation. Our findings resonate with this perspective, showing that urban spaces designed to foster social interaction contribute significantly to an overall sense of community and well-being.
- To further elucidate the relationship between the discussed social sustainability indicators and urban density, Figure 3 present a comprehensive framework that illustrates how physical and perceived density interact with these indicators.
5.1.2. Impact of Physical Density on Resident Perception
- Building height and spacing: Tall buildings and closely spaced structures often create a sense of enclosure, leading to perceptions of overcrowding and reduced personal space. The literature indicates that areas with taller buildings tend to feel denser, affecting residents’ mental well-being and satisfaction [12]. Similarly, narrow streets and dense building arrangements could create a feeling of high spatial density, impacting the perception of openness [31].
- Population and residential density: High population and residential density can enhance urban efficiency but may also contribute to perceived crowding if not balanced with adequate infrastructure and amenities. Studies have shown that high population density can enhance urban efficiency by reducing per capita land consumption and supporting sustainable public transportation systems [1]. However, there is also the potential for overcrowding and stress on public services if high density is not managed properly [4].
- Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and Building Coverage Ratio (BCR): Higher FAR and BCR values indicate more intensive land use, which can impact residents’ perception of their living conditions. The studies suggest that while higher FAR values can support urban density by reducing urban sprawl, they can also lead to reduced access to sunlight and ventilation, affecting environmental quality [21].
- Design and layout of urban spaces: Well-designed public spaces and green areas can mitigate the negative impacts of high physical density. Researchers argue that high-density urban spaces need to be designed thoughtfully to ensure comfort and privacy, significantly affecting how residents perceive density [24,36].
- Resilience/adaptability: Resilience refers to the ability of urban systems to accommodate changes and unexpected events, such as natural disasters or rapid population growth, without adversely affecting quality of life. High resilience in urban environments fosters a sense of security and stability among residents, positively impacting their perceptions of density. Studies suggest that resilient urban systems can reduce the stress associated with high density and contribute to improved social interaction and community integration [15].
- Access to amenities and services: When residents have easy access to essential services such as shops, schools, healthcare, and recreational facilities, their perceptions of the urban environment are significantly enhanced. Research indicates that good access to these services reduces perceived overcrowding and improves comfort and quality of life [9,19].
- Figure 3 shows the role of physical density parameters such as building height, spacing, population density, and urban design in shaping resident perceptions.
5.1.3. Impact of Perceived Density on Social Sustainability
- Visual density: This means the aesthetics and design of buildings and urban spaces. Studies have shown that areas with well-maintained green spaces, attractive architecture, and thoughtful urban design are perceived as less dense, even if they have high physical density [7]. This can lead to improved mental well-being and greater satisfaction within the living environment [31]. Additionally, elements such as building facades, street furniture, and public art contribute to a visually stimulating environment, which can positively influence residents’ perceptions [12].
- Functional density: This means the concentration of amenities and services within walking distance. High functional density means that residents have easy access to essential services such as grocery stores, schools, healthcare facilities, and recreational areas. Studies indicate that when these amenities are within close proximity, it reduces perceived distance and enhances the sense of convenience and livability [33,38]. Furthermore, mixed-use developments that integrate residential, commercial, and recreational spaces create a dynamic urban environment that fosters social interactions and community engagement [21]. Additionally, the integration of affordable housing within these areas is crucial. Affordable housing options help prevent socio-economic segregation by allowing residents from diverse income levels to live close to essential services and amenities. This integration supports a more inclusive community, enhancing social cohesion and promoting a balanced urban environment [28,29].
- Social density: This means the number of social interactions in public spaces. Well-used public spaces that support positive social interactions can enhance community cohesion and improve perceptions of high density. Areas with active public spaces, such as parks, plazas, and community centers where people can gather, socialize, and participate in communal activities, are perceived more positively [9,10]. Social density that promotes inclusivity and diversity can mitigate feelings of isolation and alienation, contributing to a sense of belonging and community well-being [8]. Furthermore, cultural diversity within these spaces plays a key role in enriching community life. Diverse cultural backgrounds contribute to vibrant social interactions, strengthening social bonds and enhancing an overall sense of belonging and resilience in high-density environments [8,29].
- Spatial density: This means the layout and connectivity of streets and open spaces which impact the perception of openness or confinement in urban areas. The literature shows that proper spatial planning, including well-connected streets and sufficient open spaces, can mitigate negative perceptions of high density. Urban layouts that prioritize pedestrian pathways, open plazas, and interconnected green spaces help create a sense of openness and freedom of movement [7,39]. Conversely, areas with poorly connected streets, a lack of public spaces, and limited green areas can feel congested and claustrophobic, negatively affecting residents’ perceptions and quality of life [36].
5.2. Conceptual Model of the Impact of Density on Social Sustainability
- Impact of physical density on perception: Physical density factors, such as building height and population density, influence residents’ perceptions of their environment. For example, taller buildings and higher population densities can create a sense of overcrowding, reducing personal space and impacting mental well-being.
- Mediating role of perceived density: Perceived density can either mitigate or exacerbate the effects of physical density on social sustainability. For instance, green spaces and aesthetically pleasing urban designs can improve environmental perception and reduce the negative impacts of high physical density. On the other hand, poor design and a lack of amenities can intensify the negative perception of density, leading to lower quality of life and social cohesion.
- Impact on social sustainability: The integrated effects of physical and perceived density influence the social sustainability criteria. Positive perceptions of density, supported by good urban design and community amenities, can enhance social cohesion, inclusivity, and quality of life. Conversely, negative perceptions can lead to social fragmentation, reduced quality of life, and decreased social capital.
Physical Factor | Influence on Perceived Density | Impact on Social Sustainability Criteria | Type of Relationship | Nature of Impact |
---|---|---|---|---|
Building Height | Visual perception of enclosure | Quality of Life, Public Spaces, Social Interaction | Direct | Parallel |
Spacing | Feeling of openness or congestion | Quality of Life, Public Spaces, Social Interaction | Direct | Parallel |
Population Density | Crowding perception, infrastructure demand | Inclusivity, Quality of Life, Community Engagement | Indirect | Intersecting |
Residential Density | Crowding perception, infrastructure efficiency | Inclusivity, Quality of Life, Community Engagement | Indirect | Intersecting |
FAR (Floor Area Ratio) | Land use intensity, environmental quality | Quality of Life, Public Spaces | Direct | Parallel |
BCR (Building Coverage Ratio) | Land use intensity, environmental quality | Quality of Life, Public Spaces | Direct | Parallel |
Urban Design | Comfort, privacy, visual appeal | Quality of Life, Cultural Diversity, Public Spaces | Direct | Intersecting |
Building Design and Aesthetics | Visual density, attractiveness | Quality of Life, Cultural Diversity | Direct | Parallel |
Green Spaces and Landscaping | Visual relief, reduced crowding | Quality of Life, Public Spaces | Indirect | Intersecting |
Availability of Amenities | Functional density, convenience | Inclusivity, Quality of Life, Community Engagement | Direct | Parallel |
Accessibility to Services | Functional density, livability | Inclusivity, Quality of Life, Community Engagement | Direct | Parallel |
Public Space Usage | Social density, vibrancy | Community Engagement, Social Interaction | Direct | Parallel |
Community Activities | Social density, cohesion | Community Engagement, Social Interaction | Direct | Parallel |
Street Layout and Connectivity | Navigability, perceived congestion | Quality of Life, Public Spaces | Direct | Intersecting |
Open Spaces | Reduced perceived density, recreation | Quality of Life, Public Spaces | Direct | Intersecting |
- Building height and spacing: » Influence how enclosed or open an area feels, affecting perceptions of crowding. » Impact quality of life by determining access to light and air and providing space for social interactions.
- Population and residential density: Higher densities can » lead to perceptions of crowding if infrastructure does not match the demand. » Affect inclusivity and quality of life by influencing housing availability and community services.
- Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and Building Coverage Ratio (BCR): High FAR and BCR values » indicate intensive land use » impacting environmental quality and perceived crowding. If properly managed, they » can support efficient land use, enhancing quality of life and access to public spaces.
- Urban design: Well-designed urban spaces can » mitigate the negative perceptions of high density by providing comfort and aesthetic appeal » and promote cultural diversity and social interactions through inclusive design.
- Building design and aesthetics: » Influence visual density and the attractiveness of the area. » Contribute to quality of life by creating aesthetically pleasing environments.
- Green spaces and landscaping: » Provide visual relief and reduce perceptions of crowding. » Enhance quality of life by offering recreational spaces and improving environmental quality.
- Availability of amenities and accessibility to services: High functional density » improves convenience and livability. » Support inclusivity and community engagement by ensuring access to essential services.
- Public space usage and community activities: » Influence social density and community cohesion. » Foster social interactions and community engagement by providing venues for social activities.
- Street layout and connectivity: » Influence navigability and perceptions of congestion. » Enhance quality of life by improving accessibility and reducing travel times.
- Open spaces: » Reduce perceived density by providing areas for relaxation and recreation. » Enhance quality of life and support social interactions in public spaces.
6. Discussion and Conclusion
6.1. Challenges and Comparisons with the Existing Literature
6.2. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Newman, P.; Kenworthy, J. Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Burton, E. The Compact City: Just or Just Compact? A Preliminary Analysis. Urban Stud. 2000, 37, 1969–2006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ewing, R.; Cervero, R. Travel and the Built Environment: A Meta-Analysis. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 2010, 76, 265–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Churchman, A. Disentangling the Concept of Density. J. Plan. Lit. 1999, 13, 389–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Forsyth, A. Measuring Density: Working Definitions for Residential Density and Building Intensity; Design Brief 8; University of Minnesota: Minneapolis, MI, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Rapoport, A. Toward a Redefinition of Density. Environ. Behav. 1975, 7, 133–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soltani, A.; Dehghani, A.; Alidadi, M. Density and Urban Resilience: Cross-Section Analysis in an Iranian Metropolis Context. Urban Sci. 2023, 7, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Woodcraft, S.; Hackett, T.; Caistor-Arendar, L. Design for Social Sustainability; Social Life: London, UK, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Gehl, J. Life between Buildings: Using Public Space; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Whyte, W.H. The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces; Conservation Foundation: Washington, DC, USA, 1980. [Google Scholar]
- Dempsey, N.; Brown, C.; Bramley, G. The Key to Sustainable Urban Development in UK Cities? The Influence of Density on Social Sustainability. Prog. Plan. 2012, 77, 89–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alexander, C.; Ishikawa, S.; Silverstein, M. A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1977. [Google Scholar]
- Heymans, A.; Breadsell, J.; Morrison, G.M.; Byrne, J.J.; Eon, C. Ecological Urban Planning and Design: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sanei, M.; Khodadad, M.; Calonge Reillo, F. Identifying the Most Significant Factors Affecting Urban Housing Sustainability and Their Scales/Sectors of Influence: A Systematic Review of the Recent Literature. In Advances in Environmental Sustainability, Proceedings of the 2022 8th International Conference on Advances in Environment Research, Singapore, 22–24 April 2022; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Smith, A.; Williams, K. Urban Density, Resilience, and Sustainability: Integrating Social and Environmental Perspectives. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2024, 89, 104355. [Google Scholar]
- Kroft, L.E.; Ziter, C.D. The Effects of Urban Density on the Provision of Multiple Health-Related Ecosystem Services. Urban Ecosyst. 2023, 26, 85–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gifford, R. The Consequences of Living in High-Rise Buildings. Archit. Sci. Rev. 2007, 50, 2–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burdett, R. Living in the Endless City; Phaidon Press: London, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Jacobs, J. The Death and Life of Great American Cities; Random House: New York, NY, USA, 1961. [Google Scholar]
- Li, W.; Zhao, Y. Urban Density and Environmental Sustainability: A Cross-City Comparative Analysis. Urban Stud. 2023, 59, 1637–1654. [Google Scholar]
- Charou, E.; Petropoulos, E.; Adam, K. The Role of FAR and BCR in Shaping Urban Density and Land Use Efficiency. J. Urban Plan. 2015, 6, 115–126. [Google Scholar]
- Ng, E. Designing High-Density Cities for Social and Environmental Sustainability; Earthscan: London, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Steemers, K. Energy and the City: Density, Buildings, and Transport. Energy Build. 2003, 35, 3–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haarhoff, E.; Beattie, L.; Dupuis, A. Does Higher Density Housing Enhance Liveability? Case Studies of Housing Intensification in Auckland. Cogent Soc. Sci. 2016, 2, 1243289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, T.; Li, Z. Designing for Density: Balancing Compactness with Livability in High-Rise Urban Environments. Build. Res. Inf. 2023, 51, 180–195. [Google Scholar]
- Abenayake, C.; Jayasinghe, A.; Dias, N. An Urban Density-Based Runoff Simulation Framework to Envisage Flood Resilience of Cities. Urban Sci. 2023, 7, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.; Chung, W.J. Exploring Sentiment Analysis and Visitor Satisfaction along Urban Liner Trails: A Case of the Seoul Trail, South Korea. Land 2024, 13, 1349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bramley, G.; Power, S. Urban Form and Social Sustainability: The Role of Density and Housing Type. Environ. Plan. Ning B Plan. Des. 2009, 36, 30–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Healey, P. Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies; Macmillan International Higher Education: London, UK, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Romero-Lankao, P.; Gnatz, D.M.; Wilhelmi, O.; Hayden, M. Urban Sustainability and Resilience: From Theory to Practice. Sustainability 2016, 8, 1224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lynch, K. The Image of the City; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1960. [Google Scholar]
- Appleyard, D. Livable Streets; University of California Press: Berkeley, CA, USA, 1981. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, W.; Li, D.; Meng, Y.; Guo, C. The Relationship between Emotional Perception and High-Density Built Environment Based on Social Media Data: Evidence from Spatial Analyses in Wuhan. Land 2024, 13, 294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, Z. Deep exploration of street view features for identifying urban vitality: A case study of Qingdao city. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 2023, 123, 103476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Unal Cilek, M.; Altunkasa, M.F.; Uslu, C. Urban residents’ attitudes towards the impact of public spaces on urban life quality: The case of Adana. Open House Int. 2024, 49, 222–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Montgomery, J. Making a City: Urbanity, Vitality, and Urban Design. J. Urban Des. 1998, 3, 93–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, Y.; Chen, H.M. Using Google Street View to reveal environmental justice: Assessing public perceived walkability in macroscale city. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2024, 244, 104995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, Z.; Li, Y.; Wang, X. Uncovering Bias in Objective Mapping and Subjective Perception of Urban Building Functionality: A Machine Learning Approach to Urban Spatial Perception. Land 2023, 12, 1322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zou, Y.; Wang, M. Resident Effect Perception in Urban Spaces to Inform Urban Design Strategies. Land 2023, 12, 1908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sanei, M.; Khodadad, M.; Calonge Reillo, F. The Most Influential Factors on Urban Housing Sustainability Based on a Comprehensive Review of the Recent Literature. World J. Eng. Technol. 2023, 5, 241–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, O.; McTarnaghan, S.; Junod, A.N. Preserving, Protecting, and Building Climate-Resilient Affordable Housing: A Framework for Local Action. Urban Inst. Rep. 2024, 17, 2024. [Google Scholar]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Al-saedi, A.Z.M.; Rasul, H.Q. New Roadmap toward Social Sustainability, from Physical Structures to Perceived Spaces. Sustainability 2024, 16, 7716. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177716
Al-saedi AZM, Rasul HQ. New Roadmap toward Social Sustainability, from Physical Structures to Perceived Spaces. Sustainability. 2024; 16(17):7716. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177716
Chicago/Turabian StyleAl-saedi, Abdulrazaq Zamil Menshid, and Hoshyar Qadir Rasul. 2024. "New Roadmap toward Social Sustainability, from Physical Structures to Perceived Spaces" Sustainability 16, no. 17: 7716. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177716