49
Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2021/2/29

*Corresponding author: Bemanian@modares.ac.ir

Investigation of the 
Effects of Applying 
Social Sustainability 
Components on 
Residential Satisfaction Received  2021/06/07

Accepted after  
revision 
2021/07/13

Journal of Sustainable 
Architecture and Civil Engineering
Vol. 2 / No. 29 / 2021
pp. 49-61
DOI 10.5755/j01.sace.29.2.29217

Investigation of the 
Eeffects of Applying 
Social Sustainability 
Components 
on Residential 
Satisfaction

JSACE 2/29

http://dx.doi.org/10.5755/j01.sace.29.2.29217

Mohammadhossein Azizibabani, Mohammadreza Bemanian*, Mansour Yeganeh
Faculty of Art, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran 

Introduction

Today, decades after the emergence of the concept of sustainable development, the long-term positive 
effects of achieving sustainable development goals in all environmental, economic, and social dimensions 
on the quality of human life are undeniable. The purpose of this research is to explain the mechanism of 
effects of applying the social sustainability components on the level of residential satisfaction in the scale 
of residential complexes. The research uses a mixed (quantitative and qualitative) methodology in terms 
of the nature of the data and the research method is descriptive-analytical (causal and comparative). The 
conceptual model of the research, which includes the relationships between the variables of perceived 
quality of social sustainability components, residential desires associated with these components, 
perceived quality of housing architecture, and residential satisfaction, has been proposed based on the 
study of theoretical foundations through logical reasoning method. This model has been tested through 
obtained data from a questionnaire in a field study conducted in the Baghe Behesht residential complex 
in the Saadatabad neighborhood of Tehran. According to the results, the application of the components 
of social sustainability has a significant effect on residential satisfaction by improving the quality of 
housing architecture, and in conditions of qualitative deficiency in social sustainability components, 
residential desires associated with these components will reduce the perceived quality and the level of 
residential satisfaction.

Keywords: social sustainability, residential satisfaction, residential desires, perceived quality, residen-
tial complex.

Nowadays, moving towards achieving sustainable development goals in various fields, including 
architecture and urban planning, is known as a necessity than a choice. The application of the 
components of sustainable design in architecture is the main solution to achieve the goals of sus-
tainable development in this field. In this regard, most of the conducted researches have focused 
on the environmental and economic dimensions of sustainability. The goals related to these two 
dimensions of this concept will be mainly achieved by conserving resources and energy and mov-
ing towards the use of renewable energies in the long term. In addition to finding a comprehen-
sive solution for environmental and economic considerations, the main challenge of sustainable 
architecture is achieving an appropriate level of quality of life and preserving cultural and social 
values along with providing environmental comfort (Kim, 1998). The second part of this challenge 



Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2021/2/29
50

which is related to residential buildings is more important, and also is presented as a subset of 
social sustainability issues.

Social sustainability is based on the general view of the status of social justice for the present and 
future generations and adherence to its principles can affect activities related to the construction 
of residential environments. Although the issue of energy and resource consumption in residential 
buildings, especially in developing countries, is important and this is related to environmental and 
economic goals of sustainability, but providing comfort and tranquility in residential environments is 
a vital point. It should be noted that achieving the desired goals should be in the short term or at the 
very beginning of the work cycle of residential buildings. In fact, this refers to the well-known defini-
tion of sustainable development, which was presented in the Brundtland Report as follows: develop-
ment that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to 
meet their own needs (WCED, 1987). Therefore, improving the quality of life through environmental 
design is an issue that has been addressed as the concept of residential satisfaction.

The concept of satisfaction refers to a wide range of desires to meet the basic or transcendent needs 
of human beings (Rafieian, Aminsalehi, & Taghvaei, 2011) which are necessary to ensure human 
comfort and tranquility in residential environments. Numerous factors including cultural, econom-
ic, household livelihoods, climatic conditions, and construction technologies affect the formation of 
housing and urban fabrics and housing has mutually a significant effect on the lifestyle and cultural 
pattern of residence. Therefore, housing is considered beyond a basic need for human beings. In 
this regard, residential satisfaction is a concept based on the perception of space and depends on 
the quality of responding to a set of residential needs that are rooted in culture, lifestyle, geography 
and climate. In definition, residential satisfaction is the result of peoples’ understanding of the differ-
ences between their preferences and aspirations and standards and the actual housing conditions 
(Campbell, Converse, & Rodgers, 1976). In other words, residential satisfaction is the result of the 
comparison between residential conditions and residential desires that several factors, including 
cultural, economic conditions and social status of residents play a role in this analogy.

The environmental and economic effects of applying sustainability components in architecture 
are more tangible on large scales that may not affect the quality of human life directly. Therefore, 
the present research has investigated the effects of the architectural application of social sustain-
ability components on the level of residential satisfaction at the residential complexes scale. This 
research was carried out aimed to explain the mechanism of the relationship between the quality 
of social sustainability components in architecture and the level of residential satisfaction. In this 
regard, the following questions are raised:

Which components of social sustainability in architecture play a key role in improving the level of 
residential satisfaction?

How is the mechanism of the effect of social sustainability components on the quality of housing 
architecture and residential satisfaction?

This research uses a mixed (quantitative and qualitative) methodology in terms of the nature of 
the data and the research method is descriptive-analytical (causal and comparative). Theoretical 
foundations and literature have been reviewed to identify the components and indicators of social 
sustainability in architecture, and residential satisfaction in the scale of the architectural quality 
of residential complexes. To extract the indicators related to the mentioned variables, the content 
analysis method has been used. In this regard, the content unit is sentences and words that were 
related to the variables. Categories and subcategories have been extracted from the existing lit-
erature and then have been classified. The conceptual model of the research and relationships 
between the variables have been determined using the logical reasoning method. The conceptual 
model should be tested in an experimental study, so the Baghe Behesht residential complex in the 

Research 
Methodology



51
Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2021/2/29

Theoretical 
Foundations

Saadatabad neighborhood of Tehran city has been considered as a case study. The data related to 
the variables have been obtained through a questionnaire and the method of path analysis was 
used to verify the conceptual model. To answer the first research question, regression analysis on 
the collected data has been used to determine the key components of social sustainability in im-
proving the level of residential satisfaction. In this analysis, the level of residential satisfaction has 
been considered as a dependent variable on the application of the components of social sustain-
ability. Concerning the second question, the conceptual model of the research has been evaluated 
through the Amos-Version 24 software.

The concept of residential satisfaction
Studies on residential satisfaction can be divided into three categories based on the general view, 
objectives, and scope of research. According to the general view, a group of researchers investi-
gated residential satisfaction as a criterion for determining the quality of the living environment 
(Marans & Rodgers, 1975; Galster & Hesser, 1981; Cutter, 1982). The other researchers consider 
this concept as a predictor of the residents' behavior regarding residential mobility, improving 
housing status, or adaptation to the current situation (Separe, 1974; Premius, 1986). According 
to the objectives, researches on residential satisfaction are divided into three categories. Some 
researchers have sought to determine the relationships between factors affecting residential sat-
isfaction (Garcia, 1994; Amerigo & Aragones, 1997; Varady, Preiser, & Wolfgang, 1998; Parkes, Ke-
arns, & Atkinson, 2002; Choudhury, 2005; Fallahi, Hariza, Husniyah, & Abdul Rahim, 2015). Some 
other researchers have focused on predicting residential satisfaction in residential environments 
(Theodori, 2001; Ogu, 2002). Moreover, the third group of researchers has investigated settlements 
based on factors affecting residential satisfaction (Lu, 1999; Russell & James, 2008; Azimi & Es-
maeilzadeh, 2017; Azizibabani & Bemanian, 2019). According to the scope, researches on res-
idential satisfaction are divided into three categories. A group of researchers has investigated 
residential satisfaction at the scale of urban apartments to residential complexes (Zabihi, Habib, & 
Rahbarimanesh, 2011; Abbaszadeh, Gohari, & Askari Rabori, 2017). Another group has examined 
this concept at the neighborhood or urban scale (Dekker, de Vos, Musterd, & van Kempen, 2011; 
Azemati, Pourbagher, & Rostami, 2017). Moreover, another group has examined this concept on 
the scale of urban geography (Theodori, 2001). 

The concept of residential satisfaction contains a wide range of studies, but most of them were 
empirical and haven't led to a theoretical model or theory. Therefore, Basic theoretical studies on 
the concept of residential satisfaction are listed in Table 1.

The concept of social sustainability
The emergence of the concept of social sustainability coincided with the presentation of the 
Brundtland report on various dimensions of sustainable development in 1987. In the beginning, 
the environmental dimension of sustainable development was more important compared to other 
dimensions, but over time the importance of all environmental, economic, and social dimensions 
was equal in development-related activities (Colantonio & Lane, 2007). The social dimension of 
sustainable development provides the context for strengthening social solidarity, increasing the 
level of social interactions, and creating equality for access to public facilities such as health, ed-
ucation, transportation, housing, etc  (McKenzie, 2004). According to Qanbari and Farhadi (2017), 
the foundations of sustainable social development are equality (creating equal opportunities for 
all members of society), diversity (possibility of racial and cultural diversity), solidarity, quality of 
life (meeting basic needs and hierarchical needs), and democratic government. Thin et al. (2002), 
introduce social justice, social solidarity, participation, and security as four criteria of sustainable 
social development. Murphy (2012) concluded that the four main pillars of social sustainability are 
justice, participation, awareness for sustainability and social solidarity. Weingaertner and Moberg 



Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2021/2/29
52

Table 1
Basic theoretical 
research on the 

concept of residential 
satisfactio

Title Researcher Description

Sociological 
Theory of Home 
Adjustment

(Reimer, 
1943)

According to this theory, the variables that determine human residential 
needs change under the influence of two factors of time and type of house-
hold.

Residential Mo-
bility

(Rossi, 
1955)

According to this theory, residential mobility is defined as a natural part of 
every family life cycle. Therefore, people change their place of residence to 
meet their residential needs that are affected by time. Some of the most im-
portant factors affecting the change of residential needs and desires that have 
been discussed in the context of this theory are the number of family mem-
bers, aging, and changing social status of the family. After the emergence of 
this theory, the concept of residential mobility was more investigated in the 
researches.

Migration as an 
Adjustment to 
Environmental 
Stress

(Wolpert, 
1966)

Wolpert believed that the hypotheses about economic, climatic, aesthetic, etc. 
factors regarding residential mobility are all minor factors and none of them 
can be considered as a determining criterion in the residential mobility behav-
ior of residents. He believed that environmental stress is a determining factor 
in residents’ behavior regarding residential mobility in an urban environment, 
and some of the sub-factors of stress include heavy traffic, noise, light, air and 
water pollution, and lack of outdoor space. He developed an environmental 
model which showed the impact of these variables on the migration decision 
of residents.

A Theory of 
Family Housing 
Adjustment

(Morris 
& Winter, 
1975)

Morris and Winter provide a conceptual and theoretical framework for study-
ing the behavior of households in adapting to a residential environment. Ac-
cording to their theory, each family evaluates its housing according to cultural 
and family norms and seeks to meet the normative housing deficits. Resi-
dential mobility, relocation based on household needs, or adjustment of the 
family desires and needs based on current housing status are some of the 
measures that can be taken in this regard which may be done when restric-
tions prevail over behavioral patterns.

A Theory of The 
Purposes of 
Human Life

(Marans & 
Rodgers, 
1975)

Marans & Rodgers have presented a conceptual framework based on 
Maslow's (1958) theory of the level of human needs to determine the quality 
of urban life in three spatial scales, which includes objective and subjective 
data. These three spatial scales include community (country-city), neighbor-
hood, and private home. According to this theory, people's assessment of 
their satisfaction in the three mentioned scales depends on their personal 
characteristics and residential satisfaction in every scale affects the others.

Fig. 1. A broad model framework for investigating subjective assessment of 
determinants of satisfaction with the residential environment 

The concept of residential satisfaction contains a wide range of studies, but most of them were 
empirical and haven't led to a theoretical model or theory. Therefore, Basic theoretical studies on 
the concept of residential satisfaction are listed in Table 1. 

 
Table 1: Basic theoretical research on the concept of residential satisfaction 

Title Researcher Description 

Sociological Theory 
of Home Adjustment  (Reimer, 1943) 

According to this theory, the variables that determine human residential needs 
change under the influence of two factors of time and type of household. 

Residential Mobility  (Rossi, 1955) 

According to this theory, residential mobility is defined as a natural part of every 
family life cycle. Therefore, people change their place of residence to meet their 
residential needs that are affected by time. Some of the most important factors 
affecting the change of residential needs and desires that have been discussed in 
the context of this theory are the number of family members, aging, and changing 
social status of the family. After the emergence of this theory, the concept of 
residential mobility was more investigated in the researches. 

Migration as an 
Adjustment to 

Environmental Stress 
 (Wolpert, 1966) 

Wolpert believed that the hypotheses about economic, climatic, aesthetic, etc. 
factors regarding residential mobility are all minor factors and none of them can 
be considered as a determining criterion in the residential mobility behavior of 
residents. He believed that environmental stress is a determining factor in 
residents’ behavior regarding residential mobility in an urban environment, and 
some of the sub-factors of stress include heavy traffic, noise, light, air and water 
pollution, and lack of outdoor space. He developed an environmental model which 
showed the impact of these variables on the migration decision of residents. 

A Theory of Family 
Housing Adjustment 

(Morris & 
Winter, 1975) 

Morris and Winter provide a conceptual and theoretical framework for studying 
the behavior of households in adapting to a residential environment. According to 
their theory, each family evaluates its housing according to cultural and family 
norms and seeks to meet the normative housing deficits. Residential mobility, 
relocation based on household needs, or adjustment of the family desires and needs 
based on current housing status are some of the measures that can be taken in this 
regard which may be done when restrictions prevail over behavioral patterns. 

A Theory of The 
Purposes of Human 

Life 

(Marans & 
Rodgers, 1975) 

Marans & Rodgers have presented a conceptual framework based on Maslow's 
(1958) theory of the level of human needs to determine the quality of urban life in 
three spatial scales, which includes objective and subjective data. These three 
spatial scales include community (country-city), neighborhood, and private home. 
According to this theory, people's assessment of their satisfaction in the three 
mentioned scales depends on their personal characteristics and residential 
satisfaction in every scale affects the others. 

 
Figure 1: A broad model framework for investigating subjective assessment of 

determinants of satisfaction with the residential environment. Source: (Marans 
& Rodgers, 1975) 

Residential 
Satisfaction Theory  (Glaster, 1985) 

As the cognitive psychology trend grew, Glaster developed a theory of residential 
satisfaction based on psychology. Glaster describes the psychological structure of 
the concept of residential satisfaction as follows: 

Source: (Marans & Rodgers, 1975)



53
Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2021/2/29

Title Researcher Description

Residential Sat-
isfaction Theory

(Glaster, 
1985)

As the cognitive psychology trend grew, Glaster developed a theory of resi-
dential satisfaction based on psychology. Glaster describes the psychological 
structure of the concept of residential satisfaction as follows:
Each person's cognitive structure acts as a source of coping with life situa-
tions and leads to adaptation or incompatibility with living conditions. In this 
process, each person's mental schemas play a vital role as a benchmark. 
Regarding housing, if people's perceptions of housing conditions meet or 
exceed their mental standards, residential satisfaction would be high. Other-
wise, people will resort to adaptive processes such as redefining their desires 
and needs and changing their assessment of the current housing conditions 
or will not be able to tolerate the current housing conditions and will make 
broad changes in housing or move to another place.
Glaster believes that the aspects of the living environment that have the great-
est impact on the level of residential satisfaction do not necessarily determine 
the priority of residents in the improvement of the living environment. There-
fore, he introduces a new social index to assess the residential preferences 
of individuals under the title of “marginal residential improvement priority”. 
According to the psychological structure of this index, people consciously 
or unconsciously prioritize different aspects of the residential environment 
based on their preferences. According to the results of glaster’s field study, 
regardless of the dissatisfaction in which aspect of the living environment, 
people give the priority to improving the quality of the housing unit to improve 
the level of residential satisfaction.

Theoretical 
model of Ameri-
go & Aragones

(Amerigo & 
Aragones, 
1997)

The approach of Amerigo and Aragones in the study of residential satisfaction 
is to provide a conceptual framework for studying the relationship between 
personal characteristics and the residential environment in providing residen-
tial satisfaction. Their approach goes beyond providing a conceptual model of 
satisfaction, examines the interaction between the personal characteristics and 
the residential environment, and analyzes various cognitive, emotional, and be-
havioral interactions in the context of this relationship. According to this model, 
the objective attributes of the residential environment, when evaluated by the 
person, become subjective and bring a degree of satisfaction. Thus, mental 
characteristics are influenced by the personal characteristics of individuals.

Each person's cognitive structure acts as a source of coping with life situations and 
leads to adaptation or incompatibility with living conditions. In this process, each 
person's mental schemas play a vital role as a benchmark. Regarding housing, if 
people's perceptions of housing conditions meet or exceed their mental standards, 
residential satisfaction would be high. Otherwise, people will resort to adaptive 
processes such as redefining their desires and needs and changing their assessment 
of the current housing conditions or will not be able to tolerate the current housing 
conditions and will make broad changes in housing or move to another place. 
Glaster believes that the aspects of the living environment that have the greatest 
impact on the level of residential satisfaction do not necessarily determine the 
priority of residents in the improvement of the living environment. Therefore, he 
introduces a new social index to assess the residential preferences of individuals 
under the title of “marginal residential improvement priority”. According to the 
psychological structure of this index, people consciously or unconsciously 
prioritize different aspects of the residential environment based on their 
preferences. According to the results of glaster’s field study, regardless of the 
dissatisfaction in which aspect of the living environment, people give the priority 
to improving the quality of the housing unit to improve the level of residential 
satisfaction. 

Theoretical model of 
Amerigo & Aragones 

 (Amerigo & 
Aragones, 1997) 

The approach of Amerigo and Aragones in the study of residential satisfaction is 
to provide a conceptual framework for studying the relationship between personal 
characteristics and the residential environment in providing residential 
satisfaction. Their approach goes beyond providing a conceptual model of 
satisfaction, examines the interaction between the personal characteristics and the 
residential environment, and analyzes various cognitive, emotional, and 
behavioral interactions in the context of this relationship. According to this model, 
the objective attributes of the residential environment, when evaluated by the 
person, become subjective and bring a degree of satisfaction. Thus, mental 
characteristics are influenced by the personal characteristics of individuals. 

 
Figure 2: A systemic model of residential satisfaction. Source:  (Amerigo & 

Aragones, 1997)  

Theoretical model of 
McCrea (McCrea, 2007) 

McCrea sought to find the relations between the objective dimensions of the urban 
environment and the mental evaluations based on them, as well as the effects of 
psychological processes and residential mobility on these relations. His findings 
indicate a weak correlation between the objective dimensions of the environment 
and the subjective assessments based on it. This indirect relation arises from the 
effect of people's comparative standards on their mental perception of the objective 
aspects of the environment. 

The concept of social sustainability 

The emergence of the concept of social sustainability coincided with the presentation of the 
Brundtland report on various dimensions of sustainable development in 1987. In the beginning, 
the environmental dimension of sustainable development was more important compared to other 

Fig. 2. A systemic model of residential satisfaction  

Source:  (Amerigo & Aragones, 1997)

Theoretical 
model of Mc-
Crea

(Mc-
Crea, 2007)

McCrea sought to find the relations between the objective dimensions of the 
urban environment and the mental evaluations based on them, as well as the 
effects of psychological processes and residential mobility on these relations. 
His findings indicate a weak correlation between the objective dimensions of 
the environment and the subjective assessments based on it. This indirect 
relation arises from the effect of people's comparative standards on their 
mental perception of the objective aspects of the environment.



Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2021/2/29
54

(2011) recognized accessibility (job, open space, neighborhood services), social capital, health, 
social cohesion, local participation, and a sense of place as indicators of social sustainability.

The theoretical foundations of social sustainability show that any actions that might change basic 
social relations are not acceptable in the process of development. The purposes of any kind of 
development should more focus on improving the quality of humans’ life and meeting their needs. 
Therefore, the general strategy regarding the issue of social sustainability is social development 
based on responding to welfare, cultural and psychological needs, the need for adaptability, and 
the need for growth and prosperity (Nazarpour, 2000). The components of social sustainability 
can be summarized into four groups: social justice, security, participation, and standard (quality) 
of living. The indicators of these components, which are related to the design of the environment, 
are shown in Table 2.  A part of the questionnaire which was distributed among participants (Resi-
dents of the Baghe Behesht complex) was based on measuring the perceived quality of these indi-
cators in the living space, and the other part measures their willingness to apply these indicators.

Table 2  
Components and 

indicators of social 
sustainability 
in relation to 

architectural design 

Components and indicators No

Social justice

Access to the facilities 1

The similarity of units in having good light and view 2

Proper access to municipal services 3

security

Physical security in the interior spaces 4

Feeling of Psychological security in the interior spaces 5

Physical security in the open spaces of the residential complex 6

Feeling of Psychological security in the open spaces of the residential complex 7

participation
A sense of belonging to the complex 8

Opportunity to establish social interactions with neighbors 9

Standard of living

Quality of environmental comfort inside residential units 10

Quality of environmental comfort in open and semi-open spaces of the complex 11

Quality of housing response to residential needs 12

Derived from: (Qanbari & Farhadi, 2017; Murphy, 2012; Weingaertner & Moberg, 2011; Thin, Lockhart, & Yaron, 2002)

The effects of the Components of Social Sustainability on Residential Satisfaction
Regarding the relationship between social sustainability and residential satisfaction, Karuppannan & 
Sivam (2011) examined the impact of urban form on social sustainability and residents' satisfaction 
at the neighborhood level. The results of this study demonstrated that the provision of high quality 
and well-located open space at the precinct level, mixed land use and good accessibility to the public 
realm and social infrastructure play an important role in increasing social sustainability and resi-
dents’ satisfaction. Howley et al. (2009) believe that it is not only high density per se that is the source 
of dissatisfaction for residents but rather other related factors such as environmental quality, noise, 
lack of community involvement, traffic and lack of services and facilities. Ríos & Moreno-Jiménez 
(2012) focused on the concepts of place identity, social identity, residential satisfaction and commu-
nity participation among immigrant and native populations. They found that greater place identity 
was seen to be linked with greater community participation and residential satisfaction. Ibrahim 
(2020) assessed the level of satisfaction with public housing offered by the UAE government to its 
citizens. The survey results show that the majority of residents are mostly satisfied, although the 
overall level of satisfaction with the functionality of the building and public facilities provided was 
generally higher than that related to the social environment in the residential district.



55
Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2021/2/29

According to the results obtained from the study of basic theories on the concept of residential 
satisfaction, the scale of the investigation of this concept is important in determining the variables 
and indicators involved. In the case of measuring residential satisfaction on the scale of residential 
complexes, three main variables play role in determining residential satisfaction as follows:

The quality of housing architecture, which includes formal, functional, and semantic dimensions. 
Quality of social sustainability components and finally, residential desires associated with so-
cial sustainability. Another point about the qualities of variables is the necessity to measure the 
perceived qualities, which is possible to measure their impacts on residential satisfaction. The 
variables of residential desires associated with social sustainability and perceived quality of so-
cial sustainability were measured in the four titles of social justice, participation, security, and 
standard of living by the 12 indicators mentioned in Table 1. The measurement of the perceived 
quality of housing architecture has also been done in three material, psychological and semantic 
dimensions as described in Table 3.

Qualitative aspects of housing architecture No

Semantic quality

Using symbols and signs formed  based on culture and beliefs 1

Transfer of concepts through using semantic components such as light, water, etc. 2

Application of various geometries in the plan to transmit meanings of shapes 3

Using various colors and textures to transmit their related meanings 4

Functional quality

Providing physical security and environmental comfort 5

Compatibility of dimensions of spaces with considered functions 6

Quality of functional relationships between spaces 7

Formal quality

Preserving static and visual balance in architectural forms 8

The aesthetic quality of the design 9

Compatibility of architectural forms with the surrounding urban fabric 10

Table 3
Indicators of different 
aspects of the 
quality of housing 
architecture

Determinant indicators of residential satisfaction are defined based on meeting the residential 
needs of the target community according to Table 4. The validity of the questionnaire was con-
firmed by interviewing a group of experts, and the indicators for measuring the variables were 
developed on this basis.

Derived from: (Bemanian & Zandi, 2018; Altman, 1975; Naghizadeh, 2012; Raeisi, 2019; Pirnia, 1997) 

Table 4
Indicators of residential 
satisfaction based on 
meeting residential 
needs 

Residential satisfaction indicators based on meeting residential needs No

Residential 
needs of the 
material di-
mension

Responding to physical functions 1

Providing physical security 2

Providing necessary daylight for spaces 3

Providing climatic comfort 4

Residential 
needs of the 
psychological 
dimension

Preservation of individual and family boundaries 5

Providing a context for understanding sensory beauty 6

Inducing a sense of peace and Psychological security 7

Providing a context to promote social interactions 8

Residential 
needs spiritu-
al dimension

Providing a context for individual and family privacy 9

Providing a context for understanding the concepts of natural phenomena 10

Providing a context to understand the spiritual beauty and flourishing of cultural values 11

Derived from: (Raeisi, 2019; Bemanian & Zandi, 2018; Altman, 1975; Azizibabani & Bemanian, 2019)



Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2021/2/29
56

The theoretical framework of the research is explained based on the relationship of variables so that 
the residential desires of residents regarding the application of the components of social sustainabil-
ity in architecture form the basis of initial expectations and are considered as an independent variable 
in this study. Although personal and cultural factors affect these residential desires but examining 
how they are affected is not within the scope of this study. Perceived quality of applying indicators 
of social sustainability has been considered as a dependent of mentioned residential desires. In this 
regard, it is hypothesized that the perceived quality of a component will decrease due to the increase 

Residential satisfaction indicators based on meeting residential needs No 
Residential needs 

of the material 
dimension 

Responding to physical functions 1 
Providing physical security 2 
Providing necessary daylight for spaces 3 
Providing climatic comfort 4 

Residential needs 
of the 

psychological 
dimension 

Preservation of individual and family boundaries 5 
Providing a context for understanding sensory beauty 6 
Inducing a sense of peace and Psychological security 7 
Providing a context to promote social interactions 8 

Residential needs 
spiritual 

dimension 

Providing a context for individual and family privacy 9 
Providing a context for understanding the concepts of natural phenomena 10 
Providing a context to understand the spiritual beauty and flourishing of 
cultural values 11 

The theoretical framework of the research is explained based on the relationship of variables so 
that the residential desires of residents regarding the application of the components of social 
sustainability in architecture form the basis of initial expectations and are considered as an 
independent variable in this study. Although personal and cultural factors affect these residential 
desires but examining how they are affected is not within the scope of this study. Perceived quality 
of applying indicators of social sustainability has been considered as a dependent of mentioned 
residential desires. In this regard, it is hypothesized that the perceived quality of a component will 
decrease due to the increase in its related residential desire, and the reason for such a hypothesis 
is the increase in the level of initial expectations about that component. In addition, the variable of 
perceived quality of housing architecture is affected by the perceived quality of social 
sustainability components and all three variables will affect residential satisfaction. The conceptual 

 
Figure 3: Conceptual model of the effects of the components of social sustainability on residential satisfaction. Source: 

Authors 

in its related residential de-
sire, and the reason for such 
a hypothesis is the increase 
in the level of initial expecta-
tions about that component. 
In addition, the variable of 
perceived quality of hous-
ing architecture is affected 
by the perceived quality of 
social sustainability com-
ponents and all three vari-
ables will affect residential 
satisfaction. The conceptual 
model of these relations is 
depicted in Fig. 3.

To verify the conceptual model and answer the research questions, the mentioned relations between 
the variables should be tested in a real context. In this regard, Baghe Behesht residential complex locat-
ed in Saadatabad neighborhood of Tehran has been selected due to having a desirable level of indica-
tors related to the variables of the conceptual model. The level of occupancy in the complex is such that 
the dominance of open spaces over masses is evident, and the landscape design of this complex has 

Fig. 3
Conceptual model 

of the effects of 
the components of 

social sustainability 
on residential 

satisfaction 

Source: Authors

Field Study

Fig. 4
(1) Hierarchy in the 
open spaces of the 

complex. (2) Overview 
of the complex from the 

south side. (3) Semi-
public spaces for social 
interactions. (4) Forest 

parks on the south side 
of the complex

Source: Authors

Field study 
To verify the conceptual model and answer the research questions, the mentioned relations 

between the variables should be tested in a real context. In this regard, Baghe Behesht residential 
complex located in Saadatabad neighborhood of Tehran has been selected due to having a desirable 
level of indicators related to the variables of the conceptual model. The level of occupancy in the 
complex is such that the dominance of open spaces over masses is evident, and the landscape 
design of this complex has led to improving the quality of social interaction spaces between 
residents. 

The forest park on the south side of the complex, which is exclusively available to residents, is 
considered as a context for social interactions between them. The hierarchy of public, semi-public, 
and semi-private spaces in the level of the complex is customary observed, and the proper 
separation of pedestrian paths from vehicle paths has made it possible to form the context of 
interactions of different social groups from residents of a block to residents of a neighborhood unit 
and residents of the whole complex. The physical control of the interior spaces of the complex and 
the inclusion of active and passive surveillance in the open spaces has led to an increase in the 
quality of indicators of physical security. Also, the design of the site and locating of the masses 
have been done based on the climatic characteristics of Tehran, which leads to the provision of 
comfortable conditions to an acceptable level at the participatory spaces. 

 
Figure 4: (1) Hierarchy in the open spaces of the complex. (2) Overview of the complex from the south side. (3) Semi-public 

spaces for social interactions. (4) Forest parks on the south side of the complex. Source: Authors 
A questionnaire with the participation of 251 residents was used to measure the variables related 

to the conceptual model and explain the relationship between them. Data were collected and 
analyzed between January to April 2021. The questionnaire which was designed based on a 5-
point Likert scale, consists of 45 questions in four sections that directly measure the indicators 
presented in Tables 2, 3, and 4. Regarding the 12 indicators of table 2, in addition to the perceived 

Field study 
To verify the conceptual model and answer the research questions, the mentioned relations 

between the variables should be tested in a real context. In this regard, Baghe Behesht residential 
complex located in Saadatabad neighborhood of Tehran has been selected due to having a desirable 
level of indicators related to the variables of the conceptual model. The level of occupancy in the 
complex is such that the dominance of open spaces over masses is evident, and the landscape 
design of this complex has led to improving the quality of social interaction spaces between 
residents. 

The forest park on the south side of the complex, which is exclusively available to residents, is 
considered as a context for social interactions between them. The hierarchy of public, semi-public, 
and semi-private spaces in the level of the complex is customary observed, and the proper 
separation of pedestrian paths from vehicle paths has made it possible to form the context of 
interactions of different social groups from residents of a block to residents of a neighborhood unit 
and residents of the whole complex. The physical control of the interior spaces of the complex and 
the inclusion of active and passive surveillance in the open spaces has led to an increase in the 
quality of indicators of physical security. Also, the design of the site and locating of the masses 
have been done based on the climatic characteristics of Tehran, which leads to the provision of 
comfortable conditions to an acceptable level at the participatory spaces. 

 
Figure 4: (1) Hierarchy in the open spaces of the complex. (2) Overview of the complex from the south side. (3) Semi-public 

spaces for social interactions. (4) Forest parks on the south side of the complex. Source: Authors 
A questionnaire with the participation of 251 residents was used to measure the variables related 

to the conceptual model and explain the relationship between them. Data were collected and 
analyzed between January to April 2021. The questionnaire which was designed based on a 5-
point Likert scale, consists of 45 questions in four sections that directly measure the indicators 
presented in Tables 2, 3, and 4. Regarding the 12 indicators of table 2, in addition to the perceived 

Field study 
To verify the conceptual model and answer the research questions, the mentioned relations 

between the variables should be tested in a real context. In this regard, Baghe Behesht residential 
complex located in Saadatabad neighborhood of Tehran has been selected due to having a desirable 
level of indicators related to the variables of the conceptual model. The level of occupancy in the 
complex is such that the dominance of open spaces over masses is evident, and the landscape 
design of this complex has led to improving the quality of social interaction spaces between 
residents. 

The forest park on the south side of the complex, which is exclusively available to residents, is 
considered as a context for social interactions between them. The hierarchy of public, semi-public, 
and semi-private spaces in the level of the complex is customary observed, and the proper 
separation of pedestrian paths from vehicle paths has made it possible to form the context of 
interactions of different social groups from residents of a block to residents of a neighborhood unit 
and residents of the whole complex. The physical control of the interior spaces of the complex and 
the inclusion of active and passive surveillance in the open spaces has led to an increase in the 
quality of indicators of physical security. Also, the design of the site and locating of the masses 
have been done based on the climatic characteristics of Tehran, which leads to the provision of 
comfortable conditions to an acceptable level at the participatory spaces. 

 
Figure 4: (1) Hierarchy in the open spaces of the complex. (2) Overview of the complex from the south side. (3) Semi-public 

spaces for social interactions. (4) Forest parks on the south side of the complex. Source: Authors 
A questionnaire with the participation of 251 residents was used to measure the variables related 

to the conceptual model and explain the relationship between them. Data were collected and 
analyzed between January to April 2021. The questionnaire which was designed based on a 5-
point Likert scale, consists of 45 questions in four sections that directly measure the indicators 
presented in Tables 2, 3, and 4. Regarding the 12 indicators of table 2, in addition to the perceived 

Field study 
To verify the conceptual model and answer the research questions, the mentioned relations 

between the variables should be tested in a real context. In this regard, Baghe Behesht residential 
complex located in Saadatabad neighborhood of Tehran has been selected due to having a desirable 
level of indicators related to the variables of the conceptual model. The level of occupancy in the 
complex is such that the dominance of open spaces over masses is evident, and the landscape 
design of this complex has led to improving the quality of social interaction spaces between 
residents. 

The forest park on the south side of the complex, which is exclusively available to residents, is 
considered as a context for social interactions between them. The hierarchy of public, semi-public, 
and semi-private spaces in the level of the complex is customary observed, and the proper 
separation of pedestrian paths from vehicle paths has made it possible to form the context of 
interactions of different social groups from residents of a block to residents of a neighborhood unit 
and residents of the whole complex. The physical control of the interior spaces of the complex and 
the inclusion of active and passive surveillance in the open spaces has led to an increase in the 
quality of indicators of physical security. Also, the design of the site and locating of the masses 
have been done based on the climatic characteristics of Tehran, which leads to the provision of 
comfortable conditions to an acceptable level at the participatory spaces. 

 
Figure 4: (1) Hierarchy in the open spaces of the complex. (2) Overview of the complex from the south side. (3) Semi-public 

spaces for social interactions. (4) Forest parks on the south side of the complex. Source: Authors 
A questionnaire with the participation of 251 residents was used to measure the variables related 

to the conceptual model and explain the relationship between them. Data were collected and 
analyzed between January to April 2021. The questionnaire which was designed based on a 5-
point Likert scale, consists of 45 questions in four sections that directly measure the indicators 
presented in Tables 2, 3, and 4. Regarding the 12 indicators of table 2, in addition to the perceived 

led to improving the quality 
of social interaction spaces 
between residents.

The forest park on the south 
side of the complex, which 
is exclusively available to 
residents, is considered as 
a context for social interac-
tions between them. The hi-
erarchy of public, semi-pub-
lic, and semi-private spaces 
in the level of the complex 
is customary observed, and 
the proper separation of pe-
destrian paths from vehicle 
paths has made it possible 
to form the context of in-
teractions of different so-
cial groups from residents 
of a block to residents of a 



57
Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2021/2/29

neighborhood unit and residents of 
the whole complex. The physical 
control of the interior spaces of the 
complex and the inclusion of active 
and passive surveillance in the open 
spaces has led to an increase in the 
quality of indicators of physical se-
curity. Also, the design of the site 
and locating of the masses have 
been done based on the climat-
ic characteristics of Tehran, which 
leads to the provision of comfort-
able conditions to an acceptable 
level at the participatory spaces.

A questionnaire with the participa-
tion of 251 residents was used to 
measure the variables related to 
the conceptual model and explain 
the relationship between them. 
Data were collected and analyzed 
between January to April 2021. 
The questionnaire which was de-
signed based on a 5-point Likert 
scale, consists of 45 questions in 
four sections that directly measure 
the indicators presented in Tables 
2, 3, and 4. Regarding the 12 in-
dicators of Table 2, in addition to 
the perceived quality, residential 
desires have also been measured. 
In addition to these 45 questions, 
demographic data including age, 
gender, marital status, ownership 
status, and length of residence in 
the complex were also collected. 
However, the study of the effects of 
demographic variables on concep-
tual model variables has not been 

Fig. 5
Average percentage 
of indicators related to 
research variables 

quality, residential desires have also been measured. In addition to these 45 questions, 
demographic data including age, gender, marital status, ownership status, and length of residence 
in the complex were also collected. However, the study of the effects of demographic variables on 
conceptual model variables has not been in the scope of this research and no strong statistical 
relationship was found in this regard. The average percentage of each of the indicators related to 
the research variables is shown in the figure 5. 

 
Figure 5: Average percentage of indicators related to research variables. Source: Authors 

Results 
Regarding the first research question, the results of regression analysis of the relationship 

between different components of the perceived quality of social sustainability with the residential 
satisfaction show that the role of the component of the standard of living in predicting changes of 
residential satisfaction variable was more than other components. In this model, R Square = 0.468. 

  
Table 5: Regression model of the relationship between perceived quality of the components of social sustainability and 

residential satisfaction. Source: Authors 
Coefficientsa 

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. 
B Std. Error Beta 

1

(Constant) .136 .031  4.336 .000 
Perceived quality of the justice component .147 .033 .277 4.374 .000 
Perceived quality of the security component .201 .042 .306 4.766 .000 
Perceived quality of the participation component .081 .040 .133 2.029 .044 
Perceived quality of the standard of living component .360 .057 .405 6.375 .000 

a. Dependent Variable: Residential satisfaction                                                         

Regarding the second question of the research, according to the results of the conceptual model 
test based on quantitative data, residential desires related to social sustainability components have 
had a reverse effect on the perceived quality of these components and residential satisfaction. 
There is also a direct relationship between the perceived quality of social sustainability 
components and the perceived quality of housing architecture and residential satisfaction. Amos-

quality, residential desires have also been measured. In addition to these 45 questions, 
demographic data including age, gender, marital status, ownership status, and length of residence 
in the complex were also collected. However, the study of the effects of demographic variables on 
conceptual model variables has not been in the scope of this research and no strong statistical 
relationship was found in this regard. The average percentage of each of the indicators related to 
the research variables is shown in the figure 5. 

 
Figure 5: Average percentage of indicators related to research variables. Source: Authors 

Results 
Regarding the first research question, the results of regression analysis of the relationship 

between different components of the perceived quality of social sustainability with the residential 
satisfaction show that the role of the component of the standard of living in predicting changes of 
residential satisfaction variable was more than other components. In this model, R Square = 0.468. 

  
Table 5: Regression model of the relationship between perceived quality of the components of social sustainability and 

residential satisfaction. Source: Authors 
Coefficientsa 

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. 
B Std. Error Beta 

1

(Constant) .136 .031  4.336 .000 
Perceived quality of the justice component .147 .033 .277 4.374 .000 
Perceived quality of the security component .201 .042 .306 4.766 .000 
Perceived quality of the participation component .081 .040 .133 2.029 .044 
Perceived quality of the standard of living component .360 .057 .405 6.375 .000 

a. Dependent Variable: Residential satisfaction                                                         

Regarding the second question of the research, according to the results of the conceptual model 
test based on quantitative data, residential desires related to social sustainability components have 
had a reverse effect on the perceived quality of these components and residential satisfaction. 
There is also a direct relationship between the perceived quality of social sustainability 
components and the perceived quality of housing architecture and residential satisfaction. Amos-

Source: Authors

in the scope of this research and no strong statistical relationship was found in this regard. The av-
erage percentage of each of the indicators related to the research variables is shown in the Fig. 5.

Regarding the first research question, the results of regression analysis of the relationship be-
tween different components of the perceived quality of social sustainability with the residential 
satisfaction show that the role of the component of the standard of living in predicting changes of 
residential satisfaction variable was more than other components. In this model, R Square = 0.468.

Regarding the second question of the research, according to the results of the conceptual model 
test based on quantitative data, residential desires related to social sustainability components have 
had a reverse effect on the perceived quality of these components and residential satisfaction. There 
is also a direct relationship between the perceived quality of social sustainability components and 

Results



Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2021/2/29
58

Table 5
Regression model of the 

relationship between 
perceived quality of 
the components of 

social sustainability and 
residential satisfaction

Source: Authors

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized 
Coefficients

Standardized 
Coefficients t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

1

(Constant) .136 .031 4.336 .000

Perceived quality of the justice component .147 .033 .277 4.374 .000

Perceived quality of the security component .201 .042 .306 4.766 .000

Perceived quality of the participation component .081 .040 .133 2.029 .044

Perceived quality of the standard of living component .360 .057 .405 6.375 .000

a. Dependent Variable: Residential satisfaction 

the perceived quality of housing architecture and residential satisfaction. Amos-Version 24 was 
used to determine the degree of these relations, which the results are shown in Fig. 6.

Fig. 6
The results of 

conceptual model 
path analysis

Version 24 was used to determine the degree of these relations, which the results are shown in 
Figure 6. 

 
Figure 6: The results of conceptual model path analysis. Source: Authors 

Discussion and conclusion 
According to the results of the analysis of the data obtained from the field study, the variable of 

residential satisfaction in the scale of the architectural quality of residential complexes is a function 
of the variables of perceived quality of housing architecture, perceived quality of application of 
the components of social sustainability and residential desires associated with these components. 
Beta coefficients in the model show that the variables of residential desires associated with the 
components of sustainability and perceived quality of housing architecture had a direct impact on 
residential satisfaction, but the perceived quality of sustainability components didn't have a 
significant impact on residential satisfaction and this variable has a significant effect on the 
residential satisfaction through the variable of housing architecture quality. As residential desires 
associated with the components of social sustainability increase, the perceived quality of these 
components and residential satisfaction will decrease equally due to the level of expectations 
increases. It can be interpreted that in proportion to the increase in the human desire for a particular 
aspect of the quality of a product, its shortcomings attract more human attention and lead to 
dissatisfaction with the performance of the product. Therefore, the quality deficiency in these 
components should be noted in interpreting the inverse relationship between the variables involved 
in the research model. In other words, in situations where the quality of the sustainability 
components is somewhat high, there will be no relationship between perceived quality, desires, 
and residential satisfaction, or this relationship will not necessarily be reversed. 

In addition, it is concluded that the perceived quality of the component of living standards, which 
is generally related to the housing response to human residential needs, has the greatest impact on 
improving the quality of housing and the level of residential satisfaction. Subsequently, residential 
satisfaction resulting from the application of the components of social sustainability in architecture 

Source: Authors

According to the results of the analysis of the data obtained from the field study, the variable of 
residential satisfaction in the scale of the architectural quality of residential complexes is a func-
tion of the variables of perceived quality of housing architecture, perceived quality of application of 
the components of social sustainability and residential desires associated with these components. 
Beta coefficients in the model show that the variables of residential desires associated with the 
components of sustainability and perceived quality of housing architecture had a direct impact on 
residential satisfaction, but the perceived quality of sustainability components didn't have a signif-
icant impact on residential satisfaction and this variable has a significant effect on the residential 
satisfaction through the variable of housing architecture quality. As residential desires associated 
with the components of social sustainability increase, the perceived quality of these components 
and residential satisfaction will decrease equally due to the level of expectations increases. It can 

Discussion 
and 

Conclusion



59
Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2021/2/29

be interpreted that in proportion to the increase in the human desire for a particular aspect of the 
quality of a product, its shortcomings attract more human attention and lead to dissatisfaction 
with the performance of the product. Therefore, the quality deficiency in these components should 
be noted in interpreting the inverse relationship between the variables involved in the research 
model. In other words, in situations where the quality of the sustainability components is some-
what high, there will be no relationship between perceived quality, desires, and residential satis-
faction, or this relationship will not necessarily be reversed.

In addition, it is concluded that the perceived quality of the component of living standards, which is 
generally related to the housing response to human residential needs, has the greatest impact on 
improving the quality of housing and the level of residential satisfaction. Subsequently, residential 
satisfaction resulting from the application of the components of social sustainability in architecture 
has been due to the improvement of living standards by improving the quality of housing architec-
ture. This result is consistent with Glaster's theory about the importance of housing architecture 
quality in improving residential satisfaction. Future researches based on the conceptual model of 
this research help refine it and in this regard, it is suggested that different case studies be inves-
tigated with different qualities of the components of social sustainability. It is also recommended 
that future studies focus on the impact of personal and cultural factors on research variables.

Abbaszadeh, S., Gohari, F., & Askari Rabori, A. 
(2017). Analysis of Environmental Quality towards 
Satisfaction of Users in Mashhad Housing Com-
plexes. Geographical Urban Planning Research, 
4(4), 653-671.

Altman, I. (1975). The environment and social be-
havior: Privacy, personal space, territory, crowding. 
Monterey (Cal): Brooks/Cole.

Amerigo, M., & Aragones, J. I. (1997). A THEORET-
ICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH TO THE 
STUDY OF RESIDENTIAL SATISFACTION. Journal of 
Environmental Psychology, 17, 47-57. https://doi.
org/10.1006/jevp.1996.0038

Azemati, H., Pourbagher, S., & Rostami, V. (2017). 
Evaluating the Satisfaction Rate in Affordable Hous-
ing Case Study: Ardabil Mehr Housing in Ardabil 
Province of Iran. Journal of Architectural Engineer-
ing Technology, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.4172/2168-
9717.1000199

Azimi, N., & Esmaeilzadeh, Y. (2017). Assessing the 
relationship between house types and residential 
satisfaction in Tabriz, Iran. International Journal of 
Urban Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1080/12265934
.2016.1273128

Azizibabani, M. H., & Bemanian, M. R. (2019). The 
Effects of Incremental Housing Approach on The 
Level of Residential Satisfaction. International 
Journal of Architecture & Planning, 7(1), 205-225. 
https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2019.73

Bemanian, M., & Zandi, M. (2018). Iranian housing 
and lifestyle. Tehran: Aval va Akhar.

Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., & Rodgers, W. L. 
(1976). The quality of American life Perceptions, 
evaluations, and satisfactions.. New York: Russell 
Sage Foundation.

Choudhury, I. (2005). A conceptual Model of Resi-
dential Satisfaction with Reference to Neighborhood 
Composition. Wirld Congress on Housing. Pretoria.

Colantonio, A., & Lane, G. (2007). Measuring social 
sustainability: best practice from urban renewal in 
the EU. London: Oxford Publication.

Cutter, S. (1982). Residential satisfaction and the 
suburban homeowner. Urban Geography, 3, 315-
327. https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.3.4.315

Dekker , K., de Vos, S., Musterd, S., & van Kempen, 
R. (2011). Residential satisfaction in housing estates 
in European cities: A multi-level research approach. 
Housing Studies, 26(4), 479-499. https://doi.org/10
.1080/02673037.2011.559751

Dieleman, F. M. (2001). Modelling residential mobil-
ity; a review of recent trends in research. Journal 
of Housing and the Built Environment, 16, 249-265. 
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012515709292

Fallahi, B., Hariza, A., Husniyah, H., & Abdul Rahim, B. 
(2015). Relationship between Background Character-
istics and Housing Satisfaction of Iranian Homeown-
ers in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Journal of Education-
al, Health and Community Psychology, 4(2).

Galster, G. C., & Hesser, G. W. (1981). Residential 
satisfaction. Compositional and contextual cor-
relates. Environment and Behavior, 13, 735-758. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916581136006

References



Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2021/2/29
60

Garcia. (1994). Urban environment evaluation : A 
study of environmental satisfaction and preference. 
PhD Disertation Universidad de-Santiago de Com-
postela Spain.

Glaster, G. C. (1985). Evaluating indicators for 
housing policy: Residential satisfaction vs mar-
ginal improvement priorities. Social Indicators Re-
search, 16(4), 415-448. https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF00333289

Howley, P. Scott, M & Redmond, D. (2009). Sustain-
ability versus liveability: an investigation of neigh-
bourhood satisfaction, Journal of Environmen-
tal Planning and Management, 52:6. https://doi.
org/10.1080/09640560903083798

Karuppannan, S. and Sivam, A., (2011). Social sus-
tainability and neighbourhood design: an investiga-
tion of residents' satisfaction in Delhi. Local Environ-
ment, 16 (9), 849-870. https://doi.org/10.1080/1354
9839.2011.607159

Ibrahim, I.A. (2020). Sustainable housing develop-
ment: role and significance of satisfaction aspect. 
City Territ Archit 7, 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/
s40410-020-00130-x

Kim, J. J. (1998). Introduction to Sustainable Design. 
Michigan: National Pollution Prevention Center for 
Higher Education.

Lu, M. (1999). Determinants of residential Satisfac-
tion. Growth & Change, 30(2), 264-288. https://doi.
org/10.1111/0017-4815.00113

Marans, R. W., & Rodgers, S. W. (1975). Toward an 
understanding of community satisfaction. (A. Haw-
ley, & V. Rock, Eds.) New York: Halstead Press.

Maslow, A. H. (1958). A Dynamic Theory of Human 
Motivation. Cleveland USA: Howard Allen Publish-
ers.

McCrea, R. (2007). Urban quality of life: Linking ob-
jective dimensions and subjective evaluations of the 
urban environment. Unpublished PhD thesis, The 
University of Queensland, Brisbane.

McKenzie, S. (2004). SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY: TO-
WARDS SOME DEFINITIONS. Hawke Research Insti-
tute.

Morris, E. W., & Winter, M. (1975). A theory of fami-
ly housing adjustment. Journal of Marriage and the 
Family, 37(1), 79-88. https://doi.org/10.2307/351032

Murphy, K. (2012). The Social Pillar of Sustainable 
Development: A Literature Review and Framework 
for Policy Analysis. Sustainability: Science, Practice 
and Policy, 8(1), 15-29. https://doi.org/10.1080/154
87733.2012.11908081

Naghizadeh, M. (2012). Reflection on Understanding 
the Basics of Iranian Islamic Housing. Art Ketab-
mah, 170, 38-54.

Nazarpour, M. (2000). Values and development. 
Case Study: The Constitution of the Islamic Repub-
lic of Iran. Tehran: Research Institute of Culture and 
Thought.

Ogu, V. I. (2002). Urban Residential Satisfaction and 
the Planning Implications in a Developing World 
Context : The Example of Benin City, Nigeria. Inter-
national Planning Studies, 7(1), 37-53. https://doi.
org/10.1080/13563470220112599

Parkes, A., Kearns, A., & Atkinson, R. (2002). What 
makes people dissatisfied with their neighbour-
hoods? Urban Studies, 39(13), 2413-2438. https://
doi.org/10.1080/0042098022000027031

Pirnia, M. (1997). Stylistics of Iranian Architecture. 
(G. Memarian, Ed.) Tehran: Sorush Danesh.

Premius, H. (1986). Housing as a social adaptation pro-
cess. A conceptual scheme. Environment and behavior, 
18, 31-52. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916586181002

Qanbari, Y., & Farhadi, S. (2017). Social Sustainabil-
ity in resedential complex. Tehran: Simaye Danesh.

Raeisi, M. (2019). Architecture and urbanism in ac-
cordance with Islamic lifestyle. Qom: Qom univer-
sity.

Rafieian, M., Aminsalehi, F., & Taghvaei, A. (2011). 
Assessing the quality of living environment in Ek-
batan town of Tehran. The Journal of Spatial Plan-
ning, 14(4), 63-85.

Reimer, S. (1943). Sociological theory of home ad-
justment. American Sociological Review, 8(3), 272-
278. https://doi.org/10.2307/2085080

Ríos, M. L., & Moreno-Jiménez, M. P. (2012). Place iden-
tity and residential satisfaction: Differences between 
native and immigrant populations. Psyecology, 3, 75-
86. https://doi.org/10.1174/217119712799240224

Rossi, P. H. (1955). Why families move: A study in 
the social psychology of urban residential Mobility. 
Free press.

Russell, N., & James, I. (2008). Investing in Hous-
ing Characteristics that Count: A Cross-Sectional 
and Longitudinal Analysis of Bathrooms, Bathroom 
Additions, and Residential Satisfaction. Housing and 
Society, 35(2), 67-82. https://doi.org/10.1080/0888
2746.2008.11430564

Separe, A. (1974). Residential satisfaction as an in-
tervening variable in residential mobility. Demogra-
phy, 11, 173-188. https://doi.org/10.2307/2060556

Theodori, G. L. (2001). Examining the effecty of com-
munity satisfaction and attachment on individual 
well being. Rural Sociology, 66(4), 618-628. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1549-0831.2001.tb00087.x

Thin, N., Lockhart, C., & Yaron, G. (2002). Conceptualising 
Socially Sustainable Development. New York: Mimeo.



61
Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2021/2/29

Varady, D. P., Preiser, & Wolfgang. (1998). Scattered 
site public housing and housing satisfaction. Journal 
of the American Planning Association, 64(2), 189-
208. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944369808975975

WCED. (1987). Report of the World Commission on 
Environment and Development: Our Common Fu-
ture. United Nations General Assembly.

Weingaertner, C., & Moberg, Å. (2011). Exploring 
Social Sustainability: Learning from Perspectives 
on Urban Development and Companies and Prod-

ucts. Sustainable Development, 22(2), 122-133. 
https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.536

 Wolpert, J. (1966). Migration as an adjustment to en-
vironmental stress. Journal of Social Issues, 22(4), 
92-102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1966.
tb00552.x 

Zabihi, H., Habib, F., & Rahbarimanesh, K. (2011). 
Relevance Between Acquiescence of Habitations 
and Impacts on Relationships (Case Study: Ekbatan 
and Behjatabad Tehran). Hoviatshahr, 5(8), 103-118.

MOHAMMADHOSSEIN 
AZIZIBABANI

Ph.D. 
Student in Architecture, Department 
of Architecture, Faculty of Art, Tarbiat 
Modares University, Tehran, Iran 

Main research area
Affordable Housing Design, 
Sustainable Design

Address 
Faculty of Art, Tarbiat Modares 
University, Tehran, Iran.
Tel.  +989120929844
E-mail: M.azizibabani@modares.ac.ir

MOHAMMADREZA 
BEMANIAN

Professor
Department of Architecture, 
Faculty of Art, Tarbiat Modares 
University, Tehran, Iran

Main research area
Iranian Islamic architecture, 
Architectural planning and 
management

Address 
Faculty of Art, Tarbiat Modares 
University, Tehran, Iran.
Tel.  +98(21)82883711
E-mail: Bemanian@modares.ac.ir

MANSOUR  
YEGANEH

Assistant Professor 
Department of Architecture, 
Faculty of Art, Tarbiat Modares 
University, Tehran, Iran

Main research area
Architecture and Converging 
Technologies, Behavioral 
and Cognitional Territories in 
Architecture, New Methods in 
Architectural Design, Modeling 
and Fabrication.  Architecture and 
Renewable and New Energies

Address
Tel.  +98(21)8288371108
E-mail: Yeganeh@modares.ac.ir

About the 
Authors

This article is an Open Access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative 
Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).