2025 Volume 13 Issue 4 Pages 1-19
Habitat plays a pivotal role in shaping inhabitants’ quality of life, as housing location often symbolizes social status. Locational attributes, including social and public infrastructure, amenities, and accessibility, are crucial to residents’ overall well-being. Research indicates that satisfaction with one’s residential location relates to factors such as the physical and social environment, neighborhood characteristics, urban hierarchy status, and access to essential services. As a multi-dimensional concept, location satisfaction contributes to both residential satisfaction and broader quality of life studies. Numerous studies have explored residential satisfaction, focusing on various determinants and their overall influence on well-being. However, a deeper exploration of location-specific factors is necessary to refine this research. This paper presents an extensive review of existing studies on location and neighborhood satisfaction, elucidating the conceptual underpinnings of location satisfaction and its determinants. The review employed a systematic search across multiple databases, combined with bibliographic analysis and rigorous screening, yielding 66 relevant studies. Its findings highlight key location-related variables and their impact on quality of life and overall satisfaction. By underscoring the significance of location in residential satisfaction, this review aims to enrich current theoretical frameworks and inform future empirical work. Furthermore, it contributes valuable insights for urban planners and policymakers working toward equitable, accessible neighborhoods, particularly in developing economies. Ultimately, strengthening the role of location satisfaction in residential satisfaction theory has the potential to drive more nuanced, effective policies that enhance urban environments and the lives of their residents. Future research can refine and expand the understanding of location satisfaction.
Housing is one of the fundamental necessities for a person’s quality of life. In urban areas, the location of the house indicates his social status. The location of housing in terms of social and public infrastructure is very crucial and contributes significantly to the quality of life. There are many studies in the residential satisfaction domain (Abidin, Abdullah et al., 2019). These studies focused on factors and determinants of residential satisfaction and its overall impact on quality of life. (Varady and Preiser, 1998). The output of this research on location satisfaction differs depending on the context of the study.
While extensive research has been conducted on residential satisfaction, there is a notable gap in understanding the specific role of location satisfaction within this broader concept. This study seeks to address this gap by undertaking a comprehensive review of literature focusing specifically on location satisfaction and neighborhood satisfaction. By moving beyond the general framework of residential satisfaction, the research highlights the critical importance of location-specific factors in shaping the overall satisfaction of residents and their quality of life.
Location satisfactionLocation satisfaction is related to neighbourhood facilities, distance travelled for social and physical infrastructure and characteristics of individuals and groups in the area. Residential satisfaction is strongly influenced by neighborhood amenities, such as the proximity to the town center, school, hospital, market, and shopping center (Mohit, Ibrahim et al., 2010). Location satisfaction can be defined as a measure of differences between actual and desired neighbourhood situations (Galster and Hesser, 1981). Location or place in the urban hierarchy, residential environment and characteristics of individuals are determinants of location satisfaction (Uyeki, 1985). The residents' satisfaction with the locations is measured by how residents' expectations are met in their residences. He compares this with his experience or with his peers (Galster, 1985). The level of satisfaction with one's residential surroundings has been found to be associated with several factors, including the attributes of the residential setting, the characteristics of individuals and collectives residing in the vicinity, and the positioning or status within the urban hierarchy. Some researchers regard satisfaction as a cognitive concept, while some consider this as behavioural; moving out of the residence when unsatisfied is proof of the behavioural change (Chen, Y., Dang et al., 2020). Another way to describe location satifaction is as a multifaceted construct that is mostly related to the neighborhood's social reputation and the opportunities for relationships it provides for its citizens.. Sense of belonging and being identified with a place, as well as positive perceptions of the social image, friendliness, and quality exchanges with one's neighbours, promote a positive evaluation of the people and atmosphere in the residential environment, leading to satisfaction of location (Fleury-Bahi, Félonneau et al., 2008). Location satisfaction refers to the degree of contentment or happiness that individuals experience with the location of their living environment, including its proximity to important amenities such as schools, churches, markets, and other services. It is an important predictor of residential satisfaction and a determinant of quality of life(Mridha, A. M. M. H. and Moore, 2011). Location satisfaction is related to how close the house is to essential amenities such as the workplace, retailing centers, hospitals, and sports centres, and the most important factor among these is the workplace (Teck-Hong, 2012). It is the degree to which residents are satisfied with the position of their dwelling in relation to neighbourhood facilities and amenities (Buys and Miller, 2012).
Assessing the location satisfaction will empirically strengthen the satisfaction theories of residents.
Research objectivesThis study aims to conduct a comprehensive review of the literature on location satisfaction, emphasizing its relevance within the broader framework of residential satisfaction. The research systematically synthesizes findings from existing studies, identifying and categorizing the core determinants of location satisfaction. Additionally, it provides a refined definition of location satisfaction, highlighting its critical importance for policymakers and urban planners in designing accessible, inclusive, and livable residential environments.
The Scopus database is used to search for published studies. To collect relevant research articles on location satisfaction studies, specific keywords such as "location satisfaction," "residential location satisfaction," and "accessible housing”, “satisfaction with neighborhood”, “Satisfaction with neighbourhood amenities” were used ".Since location satisfaction is a component of residential satisfaction studies, keywords like "residential satisfaction" and "residential mobility" are also incorporated into the search criteria. Research studies on residential satisfaction encompass location satisfaction as an integral part of this domain. In studies where residential satisfaction is a primary focus, determinants of location satisfaction are derived from these works. No restrictions based on the publication year are imposed, allowing for the inclusion of both empirical and preliminary studies in the analysis.
The focus was on selecting studies that discussed residential satisfaction concerning housing location and associated amenities. Additionally, studies referencing the location of housing were included in the review.
Through a comprehensive bibliographical analysis of these studies, valuable insights were gathered . Figure 1 shows the growing trend in the research of residential satisfaction and quality of life studies.
After identifying the relevant research articles, a systematic review approach was employed to assess the quality and credibility of each study. Only peer-reviewed articles published in reputable academic journals were considered for inclusion. Efforts were also made to include studies from diverse geographical locations to ensure a comprehensive understanding of location satisfaction factors across different settings. To enhance the robustness of the findings, both qualitative and quantitative studies were included. Initially, 163 papers were identified from the Scopus database to determine preliminary relevance, and the titles of the studies were examined, further refining the literature review. A domain-specific filter reduced this number to 126 papers. Based on our research objectives and questions, the inclusion criteria incorporated studies on satisfaction across various populations, such as low-income groups, students, renters, and the elderly.
Additionally, we included studies examining different determinants of location satisfaction, including proximity to airports, highways, markets, neighborhoods, educational institutes, and recreational spaces. Studies lacking location satisfaction attributes or determinants were excluded. Finally, after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 66 research papers were included in the final review. This rigorous selection process ensured a comprehensive and relevant analysis of location satisfaction factors across diverse settings and populations, providing a thorough overview of the current state of research on location satisfaction and its significance in shaping residential preferences and decisions
This section offers a comprehensive review of influential studies investigating the determinants of location satisfaction. The findings underscore the multifaceted nature of location satisfaction, influenced by a wide range of factors such as neighbourhood characteristics, facility access, urban environment, socioeconomic status, and context-specific variables.
The research studies are described in terms of the determinant of location satisfaction; the factors in the studies are critically reviewed and categorized. Some studies have used questionnaires to determine satisfaction with infrastructure, and some have used surveys to assess satisfaction. The questionnaire method employed structured, closed-ended questions for efficient, quantitative data collection on location satisfaction, while methods, including interviews and focus groups, offer flexibility with open-ended questions for deeper qualitative insights. Both approaches complement each other in assessing satisfaction, considering their research objectives. However, predominantly exploratory interviews are utilized for the assessment of satisfaction(Aigbavboa and Thwala, 2018; Liang, Liu et al., 2018; Phillips, Siu et al., 2004; Ren and Folmer, 2017). Statistical tools such as sequential equation modelling, path analysis, regression analysis and factor analysis were used to analyze the surveyed or interviewed data(Aigbavboa and Thwala, 2018; Kshetrimayum, Bardhan et al., 2020; Mohit, Ibrahim et al., 2010).
The study on residential location satisfaction with neighbourhood characteristics (Uyeki, 1985) is one of the earliest studies on location satisfaction. According to Uyeki, where you live in the city, the type of home you have, and your personal preferences are what make you happy with where you live. This paper also states that the most important thing for people to be satisfied with their homes is where they are located. It talks about how people living in the middle of the city, the outskirts, and different sides of the city might feel different levels of happiness with where they live (Uyeki, 1985). Bonaiuto describes location satisfaction as the experience of pleasure or gratification deriving from living in a specific place (Bonaiuto, Fornara et al., 2003). According to Alison, residents in inner-city areas valued having friendly neighbours less than those residing in quieter areas in English towns, while people in striving areas appeared to be more reliant on their neighbours’; this makes the residents living in inner areas more satisfied with their neighbourhood also having a school nearby positively affect the satisfaction (Parkes, Kearns et al., 2002). Phillips et al. explained the importance of community facilities for residential satisfaction in Hong Kong, noting that even when the effects of housing types and housing locations were controlled, community facilities significantly influenced the satisfaction of elderly citizens (Phillips, Siu et al., 2004). Better access to bus stops typically results in lower transportation expenses for households, both in terms of time and resources. They are therefore more likely to be satisfied with where they live. Furthermore, in Yangon, Myanmar, living near to the nearest bus stop is positively correlated with higher levels of residential satisfaction (Olfindo, 2021). Regarding student housing, Judith (Thomsen and Eikemo, 2010) states that location is the major factor for satisfaction after ownership and housing character in Trondheim, Norway. Neighbourhood facilities majorly influence satisfaction in public low-cost housing in Malaysia (Mohit, Ibrahim et al., 2010) . Maarten Kroesen explained the level of road traffic and congestion directly affects satisfaction in Amsterdam (Kroesen, Molin et al., 2010). In a quality of life study in Dhaka, Abdul Mukim (Mridha, A. M. M. H. and Moore, 2011) Click or tap here to enter text.explains location is an important determinant of residential satisfaction; the proximity of a neighbourhood to important amenities such as churches, schools, and markets can contribute to higher levels of satisfaction; additionally, recreation facilities and the condition of surrounding streets and open space are all important factors in determining location satisfaction. Distance to the city centre and public facilities are major determinants of satisfaction and a contributor to the location satisfaction of the residents in social housing programs in Malaysia (Mohit and Nazyddah, 2011). Tan Teck Hong describes the location as an important factor contributing to housing satisfaction among households in Kuala Lumpur. Favourable locational attributes generally refer to accessibility to the central business district and local amenities such as shopping centres, schools, and transportation centres; homeowners are only satisfied with a house that is situated within 5 km from the workplace (Teck-Hong, 2012) . Laurie Buys’s research in inner urban higher-density Brisbane found that the resident’s location is insignificant and doesn’t contribute to residential satisfaction (Buys and Miller, 2012). Location attributes are not significant determinants of satisfaction in China’s informal settlements, and the demographic factor is an important determinant (Li, Z. and Wu, 2013). The study focused on elderly citizens in China stated that proximity to health facilities is a significant component of satisfaction among them (Li, Bin and Chen, 2011); also, access to local services contributes to the satisfaction of the elderly (Kwon and Beamish, 2013). Dwira Aulia explains in middle-income populations, the hierarchy of location in the city and location of residence is a major contributor to satisfaction in Medan, Iran (Aulia and Ismail, 2013). Li Chen states income disparity is a disadvantage for lower-income group citizens, and they are almost dissatisfied with their residence due to locational factors (Chen, L., Zhang et al., 2013); he also advocates an equitable distribution of land. Good schools and public services are significant contributors to satisfaction for the residents of slum rehabilitation housing in Dutch cities (Posthumus, Bolt et al., 2014).
Marjie Hamersma, in her study on residential satisfaction near highways in the Netherlands, states that highways can improve accessibility and reduce travel times, increasing satisfaction. On the other hand, highways can also generate negative externalities such as noise, air pollution, and visual intrusion, which can decrease satisfaction. The study found that perceived highway externalities are among the most important factors in residential satisfaction (Hamersma, Tillema et al., 2014). Abdul Mohit concludes from his studies done in Malaysia that the location attributes and neighbourhood facilities contribute very little to residential satisfaction (Mohit and Mahfoud, 2015). The most important attribute affecting residential satisfaction is proximity to amenities, followed by health, safety, and convenience in Japan (Novianto, Gao et al., 2016). Irene’s study in Accra, Ghana, states that neighbourhood facilities, green spaces, and environmental health are major contributors to location satisfaction (Addo, 2016). In his study in Hangzhou, China, Zhonghua Huangtates that transport facilities, neighbourhood environment and access to schools contribute significantly to residential satisfaction (Huang, Z. and Du, 2015; Huang, Z., Du et al., 2015). Xinyu Cao suggests improving parks and open spaces, neighbourhood safety, and neighbourhood appearance will increase satisfaction among residents in China (Cao, X. J. and Wang, 2016); in another study by Jason Cao, he explains transit accessibility is important for the satisfaction of residents (Cao, J., Hao et al., 2020). The study (Wang, D. and Wang, 2016) described in detail that employment and recreation opportunities, schools, public transportation, local shops, and service are important for a resident's location satisfaction in Indiana, United States. According to the study by Roya Erminani in Iran, the factors affecting residential satisfaction in the Mehr Housing Scheme include housing characteristics, infrastructures, services and facilities in the neighbourhood social environment, and socioeconomic attributes of residents (Etminani-Ghasrodashti, Majedi et al., 2017). Neighbourhood characteristics such as access to transportation services, neighbourhood security, access to school, and accessibility to public services have been identified as significant determinants of residential satisfaction by Nooreddin Azimi (Azimi and Esmaeilzadeh, 2017). Neighbourhood characteristics are a considerable aspect of residential satisfaction, such as the quality of public spaces, the availability of green areas, and the level of noise and pollution. Accessibility to schools, hospitals, and shopping centres should be nearby for a high degree of residential satisfaction in China (Jiang, Feng et al., 2017). Patricia explained that neighborhood satisfaction was positively correlated with the standards of public services, the physical attributes of the neighborhood, safety, and social network quality. However, the extent of social networks and access to transportation had an inverse relationship with neighbourhood satisfaction in low-income urban communities in North Camden (Ciorici and Dantzler, 2019) . In the case of public rental housing in China, neighbourhoods and public facilities positively influence residential satisfaction among public rental housing tenants in Wuhan, such as health care, shopping, transportation, recreation facilities and neighbourhood security (Li, J., Li et al., 2019). Myung -cheul, while finding the impacts of location on spatial clustering, found that accessibility to subway stations, amenities, and jobs play significantly positive roles in housing, which further leads to satisfaction (Shin, Shin et al., 2019). Dong wang, while studying relocation intention, found out that Neighbourhood environment factors, such as community attachment and housing facilities, were significant predictors of residential satisfaction in both urban and rural China (Wang, D. and Wang, 2016). Among low-income earners in government-provided housing in Ogun State, Nigeria, distance to the workplace and market from home is a crucial aspect of satisfaction (Ibem, Ayo-Vaughan et al., 2019). Yucel described predictors of children’s satisfaction in his study of mass housing sites in Ankara, Turkey; He explains proximity to green open spaces and playgrounds is directly proportional to children's satisfaction (Severcan, 2020). Kostas Mouratidis, in his research conducted in Thessaloniki, Greece and Oslo, Norway (Mouratidis, 2020; Mouratidis and Yiannakou, 2022), described how location satisfaction is important for livability in urban areas; he states that the determinants of neighbourhood satisfaction are the proximity to the city centre, neighbourhood perceived safety and neighbourhood attachment. He also explained that lower neighbourhood density, neighbourhood perceived quietness, neighbourhood social cohesion, park area, and tree cover wereeterminants of neighbourhood happiness for people of low-income groups (Mouratidis and Yiannakou, 2022). The determinants of neighbourhood satisfaction include physical neighbourhood characteristics, such as the presence of local amenities and access to green space, as well as perceived neighbourhood characteristics (Mouratidis, 2020). Mozammel Mridha described the effect of age, gender and marital status on satisfaction; he explained as per age, the social and physical infrastructures' proximity matters and outlined satisfaction in his research in Dhaka, Bangladesh (Mridha, M., 2020) .Bangkim, in his research on slums in Mumbai regarding satisfaction, mentions that access to public facilities such as public transportation, schools, police stations, healthcare facilities, markets, and food stalls are important predictors of location satisfaction (Kshetrimayum, Bardhan et al., 2020). Fenglong wang studied the effect of home relocation in Beijing and explained neighbourhood facilities and distance to the city centre are significant in the new location. According to Mehdi Moeinaddini, access to healthcare facilities and their location is a primary determinant of satisfaction, followed by the availability of public transport and retail shops (Moeinaddini, Asadi-Shekari et al., 2020). Bo Li states a nearby park is the most important determinant of satisfaction for private tenants in China’s Shenzhen; workplace distance and educational institutes also contribute to location satisfaction (Li, Bo, Jin et al., 2021). Kyung-young Lee states accessibility to the transportation system is the most important in terms of location satisfaction because commuting to work or needing to access service is a crucial part of living in Seoul, Korea (Lee and Jeong, 2021). Accessibility to services and facilities is a major contributor to satisfaction for public housing renters in Bejing (Liu and Ma, 2021). In cases of the forced relocation of slum dwellers in urban China, housing location, job accessibility, and neighborhood characteristics are contributors to satisfaction (Huang, X., He et al., 2020).
Chronological trendsThe progression of research on location satisfaction highlights its growing significance in urban studies. The body of literature has evolved over distinct phases, with each period emphasizing specific aspects of residential satisfaction.
1980–1999: Foundational PhaseDuring this period, foundational studies established the theoretical framework for location satisfaction. Galster and Hesser (1981) and Uyeki (1985) explored basic definitions and determinants, such as the influence of urban hierarchy, residential settings, and personal preferences on satisfaction. These studies, although limited in scope, were instrumental in identifying the importance of location within residential satisfaction.
2000–2009: Emergence of Community DynamicsThe early 2000s saw a notable increase in research focusing on neighborhood satisfaction and urban livability. Studies by Parkes, Kearns et al. (2002) and Phillips, Siu et al. (2004) emphasized the role of community facilities, social networks, and neighborhood dynamics in enhancing residential satisfaction. This period marked a methodological shift towards integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches, broadening the scope of research in location satisfaction.
2010–2015: Expansion of Urban and Neighborhood AttributesResearch during this phase expanded significantly, addressing urban and neighborhood factors that influence satisfaction. Studies identified accessibility to educational institutions and workplaces as vital determinants (Huang, Z. and Du, 2015; Mridha, A. M. M. H. and Moore, 2011; Teck-Hong, 2012).
Green spaces and recreational facilities also gained attention for their role in improving livability and enhancing residents' quality of life (Mohit and Mahfoud, 2015). The increased focus on specific urban attributes during this period reflects the growing complexity of location satisfaction research.
2016–2022: Emphasis on Sustainability and AccessibilityThe most significant growth in location satisfaction research occurred between 2016 and 2022. This period was characterized by an emphasis on sustainability, transit accessibility, and cultural diversity. For instance, studies by Cao, J., Hao et al. (2020) and Azimi and Esmaeilzadeh (2017) highlighted the critical role of public transportation in shaping satisfaction. Research by Addo (2016) and Severcan (2020) examined the importance of parks, open spaces, and recreational facilities. Additionally, contributions from developing economies, such as those in Asia and Africa, underscored the global relevance of location satisfaction in diverse cultural and socioeconomic contexts.
Temporal Variations in DeterminantsThe determinants of satisfaction have evolved over time. Early studies emphasized proximity to the city center and urban hierarchy as key factors (Uyeki, 1985). By the early 2000s, community dynamics and neighborhood characteristics, including social image and interactions, became significant (Bonaiuto, Fornara et al., 2003; Fleury-Bahi, Félonneau et al., 2008) .Research conducted between 2010 and 2015 identified housing and neighborhood attributes (Thomsen and Eikemo, 2010), access to local services
Kwon and Beamish (2013), and workplace proximity Mohit and Mahfoud (2015) as critical. More recent studies (2016–2022) have focused on transit accessibility (Cao, J., Hao et al., 2020; Olfindo, 2021) and the availability of green spaces (Addo, 2016; Jiang, Feng et al., 2017; Severcan, 2020).
Overall, the research trajectory indicates a growing recognition of location satisfaction as a multidimensional construct influenced by cultural, geographic, and temporal factors.
Geographical trends of location satisfactionThe determinants of location satisfaction exhibit distinct patterns when analyzed across economic, geographic, and climatic contexts. In lower-income countries, accessibility to basic services, including healthcare, education, markets, and public transportation, is of paramount importance due to limited infrastructure and economic constraints. Studies from countries such as Ghana and Nigeria emphasize proximity to essential amenities as a critical factor in residential satisfaction (Addo, 2016; Ibem, Ayo-Vaughan et al., 2019). Similarly, research on slum rehabilitation in Mumbai highlights the importance of access to public facilities and job centers for residents in low-income settings (Kshetrimayum, Bardhan et al., 2020). Conversely, in upper-income countries, location satisfaction is more influenced by livability and lifestyle-oriented factors, such as access to parks, green spaces, and high-quality educational institutions. For instance, studies from Norway and the Netherlands underline the significance of neighborhood safety, green spaces, and transit accessibility in shaping satisfaction (Mouratidis, 2020; Thomsen and Eikemo, 2010).
Geographically, countries in the Global South prioritize equity and access to resources, with affordability and workplace proximity being crucial due to urban sprawl and economic challenges. Research in China, India, and Malaysia highlights the importance of access to public services and workplaces as determinants of location satisfaction (Mohit, Ibrahim et al., 2010; Teck-Hong, 2012). In contrast, studies from the Global North emphasize sustainability, neighborhood cohesion, and quality of life, with a focus on green spaces and urban aesthetics (Bonaiuto, Fornara et al., 2003; Cao, J., Hao et al., 2020). These differences underscore the varying priorities shaped by the economic and infrastructural disparities between the Global South and the Global North.
Climatic conditions also influence the factors contributing to location satisfaction. In hot and humid regions, heat mitigation and proximity to essential services such as shaded public spaces, green infrastructure, and air-conditioned facilities play a significant role. For example, studies from Malaysia and Bangladesh emphasize the importance of workplace proximity and access to community centers in densely populated urban areas (Mohit and Nazyddah, 2011). On the other hand, colder countries prioritize indoor amenities and connectivity. Proximity to recreational facilities, transit integration, and neighborhood safety are particularly critical in these contexts, as evidenced by research from Norway and Canada (Mouratidis, 2020). These findings illustrate how climatic, geographic, and economic factors interact to shape the determinants of location satisfaction in different parts of the world.
Temporal Shifts in Preferred Factors and Developmental ContextsLocation satisfaction studies reveals notable temporal shifts in the factors considered critical over time. These shifts often align with the stage of development of the countries being studied. In the early phases of urban research, particularly in the 1980s and 1990s, studies primarily focused on foundational factors such as urban hierarchy, proximity to the city center, and basic infrastructure (Galster, 1985; Galster and Hesser, 1981; Uyeki, 1985). These priorities reflected the infrastructural and economic limitations prevalent in many countries at the time.
As countries advanced economically and socially, the focus of research shifted towards livability and lifestyle-enhancing factors. From the 2000s onwards, developed countries began emphasizing neighborhood characteristics such as social cohesion, green spaces, and recreational facilities (Bonaiuto, Fornara et al., 2003; Parkes, Kearns et al., 2002). In contrast, developing countries during this period concentrated on basic accessibility, such as proximity to workplaces, markets, and healthcare facilities, reflecting their stage of urban and economic development (Addo, 2016; Mohit, Ibrahim et al., 2010) .
In the last decade (2010–2022), a convergence of themes is evident, as both developed and developing countries grapple with shared global challenges such as urban density, sustainability, and transit accessibility. However, differences persist. In the Global South, research continues to prioritize essential services and affordability, while studies in the Global North focus on enhancing quality of life through urban design, transit systems, and environmental sustainability (Azimi and Esmaeilzadeh, 2017; Cao, J., Hao et al., 2020). This divergence highlights the interplay between a country's stage of development and the factors influencing location satisfaction.
These findings suggest that as countries progress through stages of development, their priorities in location satisfaction evolve—from meeting basic needs to enhancing livability and sustainability.
The determinants has been categorized in nine major headings, this headings and classification is done as per the urban planning and infrastructure guidelines. The urban infrastructure can be broadly categorized in two categories, i.e Physical and Social infrastructure. The amenities include includes basic facilities and services that contribute to the comfort and convenience of residents, city centre refers to the central part of the city, often characterized by its historical significance, administrative offices, and high accessibility to various services and attractions, community spaces are are areas designated for public gatherings, social interactions, and community events, such as community halls, parks, and plazas, Education encompasses all educational institutions, including schools, colleges, and universities, as well as libraries ,market and commercial includes markets, shopping centers, and commercial establishments that provide goods and services to the community,health covers healthcare facilities such as hospitals, clinics, and pharmacies that provide medical services and support to residents, park and playground are green spaces and recreational areas designed for leisure activities, sports, and children's play, public transportation includes all forms of public transit, such as buses, trains, and subways, that facilitate the movement of residents within the city and workplace refers to locations where people are employed, including office buildings, industrial zones. is The findings of the literature review are summarized, and the inferences are discussed below in Table 1 :
| Determinants | Representative Studies | Main Findings and Inference |
|---|---|---|
| Amenities | Biswas, Mallick et al. (2022); Kshetrimayum, Bardhan et al. (2020); Li, J., Li et al. (2019); Mohit, Ibrahim et al. (2010); Mohit and Mahfoud (2015); Wang, D. and Wang (2016); Zhan, Kwan et al. (2018) | Amenities play a crucial role in enriching the living experience and promoting the well-being of residents in a specific location, as they offer added convenience. It is essential for these amenities to be strategically positioned and easily accessible. Considering the diverse lifestyles and preferences of individuals or families, the significance of various amenities may vary. Nevertheless, the presence of well-rounded and desirable amenities generally fosters a heightened level of satisfaction with a housing location. |
| City centre | Addo (2016); Chen, Y., Dang et al. (2020); Huang, Z., Du et al. (2015); Mohit, Ibrahim et al. (2010); Thomsen and Eikemo (2010);Cao, J., Hao et al. (2020); Cao, X. J. and Wang (2016); Chen, L., Zhang et al. (2013); Ciorici and Dantzler (2019); Mouratidis (2020); Wang, D. and Wang (2016); Wang, F. and Wang (2020); Yin, He et al. (2019) Bendjedidi, Bada et al. (2018); Mohit and Nazyddah (2011); Mouratidis and Yiannakou (2022); Olfindo (2021); Riazi and Emami (2018); Shin, Shin et al. (2019); Widya, Kusuma et al. (2019) | The core of city and city centres are the heart of the city; it is often a hub of transportation, including public transit; the central location makes it easily accessible to residents, which helps in shorter commuting times to work, educational institutions, and other amenities contribute to increased satisfaction with the location. |
| Community Space | Chen, Y., Dang et al. (2020); Gan, Zuo et al. (2019); Han, Kim et al. (2021); Huang, Z., Du et al. (2015); Ibem, Ayo-Vaughan et al. (2019); Lee and Jeong (2021); Li, Bin and Chen (2011); Moeinaddini, Asadi-Shekari et al. (2020); Mohit and Nazyddah (2011); Severcan (2020); Zhan, Kwan et al. (2018) | Community spaces assume a paramount role in elevating residents' location satisfaction. They facilitate social interaction, nurturing a strong sense of belonging and community spirit while also serving as venues for cultural events. Notably, proximity to well-maintained community spaces positively influences property values. Consequently, homebuyers and renters often prioritize areas that offer access to such amenities, contributing to heightened location satisfaction. This research underscores the significance of community spaces as key factors in shaping residents' contentment with their living environment. |
| Education | (Aksel and İmamoğlu, 2020; Azimi and Esmaeilzadeh, 2017; Biswas, Mallick et al., 2022); Cao, J., Hao et al. (2020); Cao, X. J. and Wang (2016); Chen, N., Hall et al. (2019); Ciorici and Dantzler (2019); Dinç, Özbilen et al. (2014); Hamdan, Yusof et al. (2014); Huang, Z. and Du (2015); Huang, Z., Du et al. (2015); (Kshetrimayum, Bardhan et al., 2020); Kwon and Beamish (2013); Liu and Ma (2021) Moeinaddini, Asadi-Shekari et al. (2020); Mohit, Ibrahim et al. (2010); Phillips, Siu et al. (2004); Severcan (2020); Wang, D. and Wang (2016); Zhan, Kwan et al. (2018) | Proximity to quality educational facilities is a crucial consideration for families and individuals when choosing a place to live. Access to reputable schools ensures a good education for children, while nearby colleges offer higher education opportunities and skill development. Living close to educational institutions reduces commuting time and costs, providing convenience to students and parents alike. Moreover, the presence of such institutes fosters a sense of intellectual and cultural enrichment, attracting residents who value learning and academic excellence, thus contributing significantly to overall satisfaction with the housing location. |
| Market & Commercial | Addo (2016); Azimi and Esmaeilzadeh (2017); Bonaiuto, Fornara et al. (2003); Cao, J., Hao et al. (2020); Dinç, Özbilen et al. (2014); Etminani-Ghasrodashti, Majedi et al. (2017); Huang, Z., Du et al. (2015); Jiang, Feng et al. (2017); Kabisch, Poessneck et al. (2022); Kshetrimayum, Bardhan et al. (2020); Kwon and Beamish (2013); Lee and Jeong (2021); Li, Bin and Chen (2011); Liu and Ma (2021); Moeinaddini, Asadi-Shekari et al. (2020); Mohit, Ibrahim et al. (2010); Mohit and Mahfoud (2015); Severcan (2020); Teck-Hong (2012); Wang, D. and Wang (2016); Wang, F. and Wang (2020); Yin, He et al. (2019); Zhan, Kwan et al. (2018) | Having easy access to these centres ensures convenient shopping for daily necessities and recreational activities. Proximity to markets also supports local businesses and encourages community engagement. Residents benefit from various goods, services, and entertainment options, enhancing their overall living experience. Additionally, living near vibrant commercial areas often translates to increased property value, making these centres essential factors in determining housing satisfaction. |
| Health | Aulia and Ismail (2013); Azimi and Esmaeilzadeh (2017); Biswas, Mallick et al. (2022); Buys and Miller (2012); Dinç, Özbilen et al. (2014); Fleury-Bahi, Félonneau et al. (2008); Huang, Z., Du et al. (2015); Kabisch, Poessneck et al. (2022); Kshetrimayum, Bardhan et al. (2020); Kwon and Beamish (2013); Lee and Jeong (2021); Li, Bo, Jin et al. (2021); Li, J., Li et al. (2019); Liu and Ma (2021); Mohit, Ibrahim et al. (2010); Mohit and Mahfoud (2015); Mohit and Nazyddah (2011); Widya, Kusuma et al. (2019) | Proximity to healthcare facilities ensures quick access to medical services in emergencies and for regular health needs. Living close to hospitals provides a sense of security and peace of mind, making it a significant factor in determining location satisfaction for residents. |
| Park and Playground | Aulia and Ismail (2013); Bonaiuto, Fornara et al. (2003); Buys and Miller (2012); Cao, X. J. and Wang (2016); Chen, Y., Dang et al. (2020); Davoodi and Dağlı (2019); Etminani-Ghasrodashti, Majedi et al. (2017); (Kabisch, Poessneck et al., 2022); Kshetrimayum, Bardhan et al. (2020); Moeinaddini, Asadi-Shekari et al. (2020); Mohit and Mahfoud (2015); Posthumus, Bolt et al. (2014); Teck-Hong (2012); Trang and Tu (2020); Wang, F. and Wang (2020); Zanuzdana, Khan et al. (2013); Zhan, Kwan et al. (2018) | Parks offer recreational opportunities for families and individuals, promoting an active and healthy lifestyle. Access to nearby parks encourages outdoor activities, social interactions, and a sense of community. Residents enjoy the serenity and natural beauty these spaces provide, enhancing the overall living experience. Moreover, living close to playgrounds and parks is especially appealing to families with children, making them crucial factors in determining housing satisfaction. |
| Public Transportation | Addo (2016); Aksel and İmamoğlu (2020); Biswas, Mallick et al. (2022); Chen, Y., Dang et al. (2020); Dinç, Özbilen et al. (2014); Etminani-Ghasrodashti, Majedi et al. (2017); Huang, Z., Du et al. (2015); Kabisch, Poessneck et al. (2022); Kroesen, Molin et al. (2010); Kshetrimayum, Bardhan et al. (2020); Lee and Jeong (2021); Li, Bin and Chen (2011); Moeinaddini, Asadi-Shekari et al. (2020); Mohit, Ibrahim et al. (2010); Mohit and Mahfoud (2015); Severcan (2020); Tang, Puttanapong et al. (2024); Wang, D. and Wang (2016); Wang, F. and Wang (2020); Zhan, Kwan et al. (2018) | Proximity to public transportation options, major roads, and highways reduces commuting time and facilitates easy travel to work, schools, and amenities. Efficient transport connectivity enhances mobility, convenience, and overall quality of life for residents. Access to transportation hubs also fosters economic opportunities and social interactions. Consequently, the availability and ease of transportation significantly influence housing satisfaction, making it a key consideration for homebuyers and renters alike.() |
| Workplaces | Addo (2016); (Azimi and Esmaeilzadeh); Ciorici and Dantzler (2019); Moeinaddini, Asadi-Shekari et al. (2020); Mohit and Mahfoud (2015) Abidin, Abdullah et al. (2019); Cao, J., Hao et al. (2020); Cao, X. J. and Wang (2016); Hu and Wang (2019); Huang, Z., Du et al. (2015); Jun and Jeong (2018); Kwon and Beamish (2013); Novianto, Gao et al. (2016); Riazi and Emami (2018); Teck-Hong (2012); Trang and Tu (2020); Varady and Preiser (1998); Wang, F. and Wang (2020); Yin, He et al. (2019) | Living in proximity to one's workplace has numerous benefits. It lessens commuting time and expenses, resulting in reduced stress and increased personal time. Shorter distances to work promote a better work-life balance and overall well-being. Moreover, decreased commuting contributes to environmental sustainability by lowering carbon footprints. Selecting a housing location with an ideal workplace distance is a crucial factor for individuals seeking enhanced convenience and satisfaction in their daily routines. |
This systematic review highlights the multidimensional nature of location satisfaction and its integral role in understanding residential satisfaction and quality of life. Through an analysis of 66 studies, nine key determinants—amenities, proximity to the city center, community spaces, education, market and commercial access, health facilities, parks and playgrounds, public transportation, and workplaces—were identified as central factors influencing location satisfaction.
This systematic review highlight location satisfaction as a critical subset of residential satisfaction, deeply intertwined with broader urban satisfaction theories. Urban satisfaction, which encompasses the well-being derived from various aspects of urban living, includes housing, neighborhood environment, transportation, and accessibility to amenities as fundamental components (Galster and Hesser, 1981; Mouratidis, 2020). This study extends these theoretical foundations by providing a nuanced understanding of how location-specific factors contribute to overall urban livability and residential well-being.
Relevance of location satisfaction in urban satisfaction theoriesUrban satisfaction theories emphasize the role of spatial and social dimensions in shaping residents’ perceptions of quality of life. Key dimensions include:
Spatial Proximity: Accessibility to amenities such as workplaces, educational institutions, healthcare, and recreational spaces (Huang, Z. and Du, 2015; Huang, Z., Du et al., 2015; Teck-Hong, 2012). The reviewed studies confirm that proximity significantly influences location satisfaction, which aligns with Galster (1985) theory that spatial arrangement impacts both satisfaction and mobility decisions.
Social Interactions and Cohesion: Neighborhoods fostering social cohesion and community engagement enhance location satisfaction. Studies reviewed highlight the importance of community spaces and neighborhood attachment, particularly in high-density urban settings (Bonaiuto, Fornara et al., 2003; Fleury-Bahi, Félonneau et al., 2008). These findings support the place attachment theory, which posits that emotional and social ties to a location are critical for satisfaction.
Temporal evolution of determinantsThe temporal shift in determinants—from basic infrastructure in earlier studies to lifestyle and sustainability factors in recent decades—parallels broader urban development trends. Early urban satisfaction theories focused on meeting basic needs, while contemporary frameworks incorporate sustainability and inclusivity (Azimi and Esmaeilzadeh, 2017; Cao, J., Hao et al., 2020). This evolution reflects changing societal expectations and priorities, aligning with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, where basic physiological and safety needs give way to higher-order aspirations for community and self-actualization.
Implications for urban planning and policyIntegrating the findings into urban satisfaction theories offers several implications for planners and policymakers:
Context-Sensitive Approaches: The determinants of location satisfaction vary across geographic and economic contexts, requiring localized strategies. For instance, developing economies must prioritize basic services like healthcare and public transportation, whereas developed regions may focus on enhancing green spaces and transit-oriented development (Addo, 2016; Mohit, Ibrahim et al., 2010).
Balancing Objective and Subjective Factors: Urban satisfaction is shaped by both measurable attributes (e.g., accessibility, infrastructure) and subjective perceptions (e.g., neighborhood reputation, safety). Incorporating subjective indicators into planning can address residents’ nuanced needs, as suggested by Fleury-Bahi, Félonneau et al. (2008).
Promoting Equity and Inclusivity: Equity in access to amenities is essential for fostering urban satisfaction. Studies in lower-income contexts, such as slum rehabilitation housing in India, highlight the disparities that diminish location satisfaction (Kshetrimayum, Bardhan et al., 2020). Policies promoting equitable distribution of resources can address these gaps.
Expanding theoretical modelsThe findings call for an expansion of existing urban satisfaction models to incorporate:
Multidimensional Constructs: Recognizing location satisfaction as a composite of physical, social, and psychological factors.
Dynamic Interactions: Accounting for how location satisfaction interacts with broader urban systems, such as transportation networks and employment hubs.
Cultural and Climatic Variations: Integrating cultural and climatic contexts into urban satisfaction frameworks, as determinants differ significantly between hot and humid versus colder climates (Addo, 2016; Mouratidis, 2020).
By embedding location satisfaction within the broader framework of urban satisfaction, this study bridges theoretical and practical domains, offering a comprehensive perspective for enhancing residential and urban livability. Future research should further refine these models, considering emerging trends like remote work, urban densification, and climate resilience.
The current review study has some limitations. It may have missed certain articles because the search only used specific keywords and excluded content published in languages other than English and conference articles. However, the reviewed papers still provide a good quantity and variety of location satisfaction studies. Furthermore, the study was confined to academic papers published in reputable journals.
Conceptualization, Sahu S.K. and Agrawal V.; methodology, Sahu S.K. and Agrawal V.; resources Sahu S.K..; data curation Sahu S.K.; writing—original draft preparation Sahu S.K.; writing—review and editing, Sahu S.K.; supervision, Agrawal V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of the paper.
