Quantifying Urban Diversity: Multiple Spatial Measures of Physical, Social, and Economic Characteristics - Computational Approaches for Urban Environments - page 147

“problems of organized complexity, like the life sciences” ( 1992 , p. 433). This
suggests that if we change the way that cities have been studied in the past, it is
possible to arrive at methods that produce master plans dramatically different than
those that Jacobs railed against. This is the void which the research presented in this
chapter attempts to begin filling.
The research presented here is related to other research in the fields of livability
and quality of life. Other authors have reviewed the literature relating to these
subjects from a broad perspective. These reviews find that the definitions of livability
are wide-ranging and note that “concepts such as livability, living quality, living
environment, quality of place, residential-perception and satisfaction, the evaluation
of residential and living environment, quality of life and sustainability do overlap,
and are often used as synonyms - but every so often are contrasted” (van Kamp
et al. 2003 ). It can be noted that some of these concepts, such as quality of life,
are usually studied by examining the perceptions of groups of people rather than
examining quantitative data that represents the built environment, as is being done
in the research presented here. Pacione ( 2003 ) also examines a large volume of
literature in the field and comes to many of the same conclusions as van Kamp et al.
( 2003 ), viewing quality of life and livability studies as having many sub-domains
reflecting the researcher's approach to the problem (objective vs. subjective, scale
of the study, etc.).
Two examples of the broad ranging nature of quality-of-life and livability studies
include the work of Doi et al. ( 2008 ) and the work of Wood et al. ( 2010 ). The
research of Doi et al. ( 2008 ) examines quality of life indicators in Takamatsu, Japan,
and includes the sweeping statement that “if individuals are enabled to make rational
choices about their location over the long term, they can ensure the highest [quality
of life] performance all the time.” This statement highlights the perceptive nature
of this particular study, which does not embrace the notion that individuals are
capable of making (and frequently do make) decisions that are irrational. While
these types of studies are important (what use is a safe neighborhood if everyone
in the community perceives it to be crime-ridden?), it is necessary to include non-
perceptive qualitative studies in the literature as well. Wood et al. ( 2010 ) attempts
to address this by examining the effects of the built environment on the sense
of community. However, this particular study used a study area that was largely
homogenous in nature, something acknowledged by the authors (Wood et al. 2010 ).
More robust studies are needed to bolster the understanding of the built environment
and its role in livability.
As noted earlier, many of the concepts that Jacobs introduced in Death and
Life have been incorporated into the New Urbanism movement. As such, much
of the modern criticism of these ideas comes under the umbrella of critiquing the
New Urbanism and Smart Growth planning ideals. Kristen Day ( 2003 ) argues that
in New Urbanism design, “diversity is not regarded as an existing characteristic
of communities :::the assumption breaks down, however, when New Urbanism
is applied to urban neighborhoods in which diversity already exists.” This is an
important statement, in that it reflects how the ideas of Jacobs differ from how they
have been incorporated into New Urbanism. Jacobs actually sees the situation as the