Navigating Paradoxes of Liveability: A Cross-Disciplinary Exploration of Urban Challenges in Jubail Industrial City

Abstract

Jubail Industrial City serves as a compelling case study for understanding the complexities of urban liveability within an industrial context. This paper investigates the intricate dynamics that define liveability in Jubail, employing a cross-disciplinary approach that integrates insights from architecture, sociology, public health, and environmental studies. As a city shaped by rapid industrialization, Jubail faces significant challenges, including housing affordability, environmental sustainability, and social equity. To address these issues, the research adopts a mixed-methods methodology that combines qualitative and quantitative techniques. It begins with a literature review to analyze existing research and identify gaps in knowledge. Surveys were conducted to gather quantitative data on the perception of liveability, housing conditions, and access to essential services. Open-ended questions provided qualitative insights into the social implications of industrial growth. The study examined specific initiatives aimed at enhancing liveability, such as public space redevelopment and community engagement programs, evaluating their impact on residents’ quality of life. Ultimately, this research aims to contribute to the broader Livable Cities initiative by offering actionable insights for policymakers and stakeholders, advocating for a comprehensive understanding of what constitutes a truly liveable urban space in industrial settings like Jubail.

1. Introduction

1.1. Background on Jubail Industrial City

Situated on the extreme east coast of Saudi Arabia, Jubail Industrial City is considered the largest and one of the most important industrial cities in the Middle East. Jubail was developed during the 1970s in line with the Kingdom’s plans to move beyond oil dependency and encourage industrialization [1]. The city’s location near the head of the Arabian Gulf makes it an important conduit for international shipping routes and trade.

The development was led by the Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu to build a world-class industrial center [2]. Jubail is one of the most populous cities today, housing many petrochemical companies, manufacturing, and heavy industries vital to Saudi Arabia’s economy and employment. Despite its industrial base, the planning of the city includes modern infrastructure, residential areas, and recreational facilities, all designed to ensure a liveable urban environment [3,4,5]. But rapid industrialization has come with challenges, with environmental concerns, housing affordability, and social equity issues being among them. Tackling these intricacies remains essential for improving urban liveability and for enabling sustainable development within this industrial landscape [6].

While this study focuses on the unique context of Jubail Industrial City, it also aligns with broader global frameworks addressing liveability in industrial urban environments. The UN-Habitat’s International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning emphasize integrated, inclusive, and sustainable planning approaches that are particularly relevant to industrial cities facing rapid urbanization and environmental pressures [7]. Additionally, OECD reports on just transitions in industrial zones highlight the importance of balancing economic competitiveness with social equity and environmental sustainability, especially in regions undergoing industrial transformation [8]. These frameworks provide valuable reference points for evaluating Jubail’s liveability challenges and guiding policy recommendations.

The Livable Cities initiative, as referenced in this study, draws on global frameworks, such as those promoted by UN-Habitat and the OECD, which advocate for urban environments that are economically productive, socially inclusive, and environmentally sustainable—particularly in contexts facing rapid industrialization and urban transformation [9].

This study builds on theories of planned urbanism and industrial transition, positioning Jubail as a critical case within the broader discourse of socio-technical urban systems. Scholars such as Hodson and Marvin [10] and Ponzini [11,12] have argued that planned industrial cities often reveal tensions between economic rationality and environmental or social imperatives. These tensions create what Kashef (2016) [13] calls “structural paradoxes of liveability,” where the pursuit of modernization simultaneously enhances and undermines urban well-being. By examining Jubail through this theoretical lens, the present study contributes to refining these frameworks, offering empirical insights into how industrial urbanism is negotiated in a rapidly transforming context.

1.2. Study Urban Liveability in the Industrial Context

There are several reasons why studying urban liveability in industrial contexts, such as the city of Jubail, is important:

The Challenge of Balancing Economic Development with Quality of Life: Industrial cities are often focused on economic development, with the downside of sacrificing their residents’ quality of life, although inhabitants are not at risk of significant health problems, as evidenced by Alzahrani et al. [14]. Knowing what liveability means can help flag the need to balance growth with community needs.

Tackling Environmental Issues: Industrial processes can threaten the natural environment, affecting air and water quality and human health. Several reasons contribute to this, including the country’s makeup and the sensitivity of its resources [15,16,17]. Research and policies related to liveability allow scholars and decision-makers to respond to these issues and advocate for sustainability.

Social Equity: The rapid pace of industrialization can deepen social inequity, resulting in a lack of access to housing, services, and opportunities. Studying this, in turn, allows a deeper understanding of such issues and the establishment of approaches that help further social equity.

Contributing to Policymaking: Liveability studies give needed information for city designers and policymakers, such as effective policies to enhance liveability and an understanding of resident needs and perceptions.

Building Resilience Within the Community: Industries are always at risk of being affected by economic depressions, and this may impact the people as well [15,18]. The study of liveability helps to create resilient communities, able to bend and not break, and able to thrive to the best of their ability amongst industrial pressures.

Urban Liveability Research Promotes Sustainable Development: Following the emerging concept of industrial ecology, a focus on urban liveability can strengthen the integration of sustainable development into industrial planning by considering economic, social, and environmental dimensions. Along with smart city assessments along six dimensions [19,20], more quantitative studies are needed to clarify these interconnections.

While dominant liveability frameworks often reflect Western-centric priorities, such as walkability, cultural amenities, and aesthetic urban design, Jubail’s industrial context necessitates a broader interpretation that foregrounds environmental resilience, housing affordability, and socio-economic equity, challenging the universality of these models [9,21,22].

Moreover, this study can also inspire future research on liveability in an industrial context. This could help with learning lessons in planning for similar industrial settings elsewhere around the globe.

This can create environments that are economically productive, socially inclusive, and environmentally sustainable, therefore contributing to a high quality of life for all residents, focusing on urban liveability in industrial contexts.

1.3. Objectives of the Paper

The main aims of this paper are as follows:

Understand Liveability Dynamics: Explore the dimensions of liveability in Jubail, focusing on housing affordability, environmental sustainability, and social equity.

Identify Challenges: Clarify the top challenges that residents are experiencing due to the rapid industrialization, such as issues with public health and infrastructure.

Collect Empirical Evidence: Employ mixed-methods research to capture residents’ perceptions of liveability through surveys and open-ended questions.

Check Initiatives to Improve Liveability (public space redevelopment, community engagement, etc.)

Policy Recommendations: Suggest ways that policymakers can work to build sustainable cities.

Share Lessons for Other Industrial Cities (align findings with the Livable Cities initiative).

These aims are geared towards promoting a comprehensive understanding of liveability within industrial environments and promoting sustainable development for residents.

• Theoretical Framework

1.4. What is Urban Liveability?

Urban liveability is the measure of the quality of life of an individual or community in a developed environment [23]. It includes several elements, shown in Figure 1, that affect residents by, for example, contributing to their general well-being and satisfaction with their home environment. The key dimensions include the following:

Housing Affordability: Access to safe, affordable, and adequate housing is fundamental to liveability, taking into account space, quality, and cost relative to income [24].

Access to Services: The availability of essential services like healthcare, education, transport facilities, and recreational locations plays an important role. Cities that are liveable ensure that residents are able to access such services easily [25,26].

Environmental Quality: Clean air, water, and green space are key components of health and well-being; hence, a healthy environment is essential to ensure health both physically and mentally [27].

Social Equity: An equitable city prioritizes inclusion and is designed to offer all of its residents equal opportunities and resources [28,29].

Neighborhood and Community: Good social networks and other community involvement increase liveability, creating a sense of belonging and ownership [30,31].

The safety and security of an area can be another important factor in whether a resident feels secure; crime rates, along with the safety of public spaces, can contribute to a better overall quality of life [32,33,34].

Cultural and Recreational Opportunities: The availability of cultural and recreational activities that promote community engagement and enjoyment [35,36].

Overall, urban liveability is a mixture of these factors, which further reveals the interdependence of urban planning and policies aimed at improving the well-being of residents.

While several studies employ ecological and eco-economic modeling to simulate relationships between environmental and socio-economic factors [37,38,39], the present research follows a perception-based mixed-methods approach. Rather than modeling ecological processes, it focuses on how residents themselves perceive the balance between environmental quality, economic stability, and social well-being. This perspective complements ecological models by capturing the human and experiential dimensions of liveability, which are often underrepresented in quantitative simulations.

1.5. Dimensions of Liveability

Urban liveability is multidimensional, as it comprises several dimensions that interplay to determine holistic liveability in a city. Of these, housing, environment, and social equity, shown in Figure 2, are especially key [13,40,41].

1.5.1. Housing

Affordability: Housing costs need to be reasonable compared to residents’ incomes.

Quality: Housing must be of reasonable human health and safety standards and have adequate space and utility [42].

Diversity: A mix of housing types supports a mixed-income community [43].

Location: Proximity/access to jobs and critical services.

1.5.2. Environment

Air and Water Quality: Air quality and safe drinking water are prerequisites for public health [41].

More Specific Green Spaces: Access to parks and recreational areas provides opportunities for socializing and exposure to nature [5,44].

Urban Development Should Promote Sustainability: All good urban planning must consider climate resilience [45,46].

1.5.3. Social Equity

Equity Through Access to Services: Ensuring access to necessary services [47].

Community Engagement: Involving the community in the decision-making process [48].

Helping to Address Inequalities: Promoting the importance of diversity.

Inclusive Cultural Identity: When varied cultural traditions are honored, social bonds are created.

Housing, environment, and social equity can therefore serve as fundamental elements of liveability that can influence the experience of the city. To create vibrant, inclusive, and sustainable cities, it is important to look at these aspects in a holistic way.

1.6. Interdisciplinarity: Architecture, Sociology, Public Health, and Environmental Studies

The multidisciplinary approach shown in Figure 3, including architecture, sociology, public health, and environmental studies, is crucial for creating urban liveability solutions. The knowledge in each discipline is distinct and specific.

1.6.1. Architecture

Architects establish spaces that are both functional and well designed for the benefit of community. The use of sustainable materials and energy-efficient designs help in promoting health and saving the environment [49,50]. City planning is also essential in order to harmonize residential, commercial, and recreational spaces.

1.6.2. Sociology

Identifying Needs of Community Groups: Sociologists examine the needs and priorities of community groups.

Social Cohesion: Studies investigate how urban settings shape social engagement [51].

Equity and Justice: Sociological research illuminates policies advancing equity.

1.6.3. Public Health

Health Impact Assessments: Assessing health outcomes as they relate to urban design is critical.

Advocacy for Health Equity: Public health advocates work toward systemic changes that promote health equity [52].

Environmental Health: It is important to know how environmental factors can affect health.

1.6.4. Environmental Studies

Infrastructure: Pushing for minimal ecological impact in urban development.

Climate Resilience(s): Strategies such as green infrastructure to address climate challenges are critical [53].

Resource Management Process: The effective management of resources for a company to be sustainable.

In conclusion, a multi-faceted approach to studying urban liveability is integral to creating well-rounded spaces for diverse communities.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Research Design and Approach

This study employed a mixed-methods research design, integrating both quantitative and qualitative approaches to provide a comprehensive understanding of liveability in Jubail Industrial City. Jubail Industrial City was selected as a theoretically significant case. Jubail represents one of the world’s largest purpose-built industrial cities, making it an ideal site for examining the tensions between industrial growth, environmental sustainability, and social equity, the central dimensions of urban liveability paradoxes. The research addresses the following overarching question:

How do residents of an industrially planned city perceive and negotiate the paradoxes between economic prosperity, environmental sustainability, and social well-being? The mixed-methods framework was designed following a sequential explanatory model, in which quantitative data were collected and analyzed first to identify major patterns in residents’ perceptions of housing, environmental quality, and community engagement. Subsequently, qualitative data were gathered through open-ended questions to interpret and enrich these findings, enabling a more nuanced understanding of how industrial urbanization shapes lived experiences.

The rationale for this design rests on the premise that numerical data alone cannot fully capture the social, cultural, and environmental complexities of liveability. By combining statistical results with narrative accounts, the study ensures methodological triangulation, enhancing the validity and robustness of the conclusions drawn.

The study does not apply ecological or eco-economic simulation models, as its purpose is not to predict urban dynamics but to analyze perceptual and experiential dimensions of liveability. This approach provides empirical insight into how residents interpret and adapt to environmental and socio-economic conditions within a rapidly industrializing city.

2.2. Study Area

The research was conducted in Jubail Industrial City, located on the eastern coast of Saudi Arabia. As one of the world’s largest industrial complexes, Jubail provides a unique setting for examining the intersection between industrial growth and urban liveability. The city is administratively managed by the Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu (RCJY) and is home to a population exceeding 700,000 residents. Its spatial structure—comprising industrial zones, residential neighborhoods, and commercial centers—creates a distinctive context for analyzing liveability challenges such as housing affordability, environmental sustainability, and social equity.

2.3. Quantitative Component

2.3.1. Survey Design

The quantitative phase employed a structured bilingual questionnaire designed to capture residents’ perceptions of liveability dimensions. The instrument included closed-ended questions based on a five-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 = very dissatisfied to 5 = very satisfied). The survey covered six key domains:

• Overall quality of life.
• Housing affordability and quality.
• Environmental quality (air, water, and green spaces).
• Access to essential services (education, healthcare, and transport).
• Safety and neighborhood cohesion.
• Opportunities for community engagement and decision-making.

Prior to distribution, the questionnaire was reviewed by the Quality Department of Jubail Industrial College to ensure content validity and clarity. A pilot test with 30 participants led to minor revisions for linguistic consistency and contextual relevance. The internal reliability of the instrument was confirmed using Cronbach’s α = 0.804, indicating a high level of consistency across items.

2.3.2. Sampling and Data Collection

A stratified random sampling strategy was employed to ensure representation across Jubail’s diverse residential zones. Surveys were distributed electronically via institutional emails and public social media platforms between June and September 2025. This approach aimed to capture a broad cross-section of residents; however, the study acknowledges the potential for selection bias, particularly due to the transient nature of Jubail’s industrial labor population. This limitation is noted in the interpretation of results and suggests the need for future studies to incorporate targeted outreach to temporary and migrant worker groups.

The questionnaire was distributed widely, and 457 valid responses were received, resulting in a satisfactory response rate. Demographically, respondents were balanced and covered diverse age groups and residency durations, ensuring representativeness of the city’s population structure.

2.3.3. Data Analysis

Quantitative data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics 25. Descriptive statistics (means, frequencies, and standard deviations) summarized residents’ satisfaction across the six domains. Inferential analyses, including Spearman’s rank correlation and multiple regression, were used to examine relationships between quality-of-life indicators and predictors such as housing, air quality, and social participation. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

The results of this phase guided the development of the qualitative component by identifying thematic areas that required deeper exploration—particularly issues around housing affordability, community participation, and perceptions of environmental change.

2.4. Qualitative Component

2.4.1. Data Collection

To complement survey findings, qualitative data were gathered through semi-structured, open-ended questions appended to the survey. These questions explored residents’ personal experiences with housing, neighborhood interaction, green spaces, and perceptions of government engagement. This approach allowed for the capture of diverse voices and contextual nuances often omitted from closed-form responses.

2.4.2. Qualitative Data Analysis

Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis, following the six-phase process outlined by Braun and Clarke [54]: (1) familiarization, (2) initial coding, (3) theme generation, (4) theme review, (5) definition and naming, and (6) synthesis. Coding was conducted. Key emergent themes included housing pressures, environmental awareness, community identity, and perceptions of inclusivity.

To enhance analytical depth, the qualitative dataset was subjected to comparative thematic analysis, in which coded responses were examined across demographic categories to identify convergences and divergences in perceptions of liveability. This approach allowed for richer interpretation of group-specific experiences and policy implications.

The integration of qualitative insights with quantitative results provided a comprehensive explanatory model, demonstrating how objective indicators and subjective experiences interact to shape perceptions of liveability in an industrial urban context.

2.5. Ethical Considerations

Ethical approval for this research was obtained from the Jubail Industrial College Research Ethics Committee. All participants received detailed information about the study’s objectives, voluntary participation, and confidentiality assurances. Informed consent was obtained prior to data collection. No identifying information was recorded, and all responses were anonymized for analysis.

2.6. Methodological Integration

The study’s analytical framework integrates quantitative and qualitative results through convergent interpretation, comparing statistical patterns with narrative explanations. For instance, correlations between community engagement and satisfaction scores were substantiated by qualitative accounts describing residents’ desire for greater participation in local decision-making. This triangulated approach, explained in

Table 1. Summary of Methodological Framework.

Phase	Method	Sample Size	Instrument	Key Output
Phase 1	Quantitative survey	457 residents	Structured questionnaire (Likert scale)	Statistical assessment of liveability indicators
Phase 2	Qualitative responses	457 participants	Semi-structured questions	Thematic insights into lived experiences
Integration	Mixed-methods synthesis	—	Comparative triangulation	Comprehensive model of liveability determinants

, enhanced both internal validity and contextual depth, enabling a richer understanding of liveability determinants within Jubail’s industrial landscape.

2.7. Limitations

Although the mixed-methods design enhanced reliability, the study acknowledges certain limitations. The self-reported nature of surveys may introduce response bias, and the cross-sectional design restricts causal inference. Future research could employ longitudinal tracking or spatial mapping to assess liveability dynamics over time and across neighborhoods.

3. Results and Analysis

Despite falling within the world’s largest industrial area in Jubail Industrial City, the city of Jubail is beset by numerous urban liveability challenges and opportunities shown in Figure 4. These topics comprise housing affordability, environmental sustainability, social equity, and the impact of its industrial revolution.

3.1. Current Challenges in Jubail

3.1.1. Housing Affordability

As of 2025, the population of Jubail Industrial City in Saudi Arabia is estimated at 711,800 people [55]. There are a variety of factors that can influence this number, including the economy and migration patterns.

Housing affordability is a major concern in Jubail, influenced by multiple factors:

Increased Demand for Property: During the construction phase, workers came from beyond the city to work on the buildings, resulting in a demand for housing that the market could not match, resulting in the skyrocketing of property prices and rental costs.

Few Housing Options: Affordable housing for low- and middle-income families is still limited, causing many to look for substandard housing in nearby places, such as Jubail town.

Economic Disparities: Higher incomes are not evenly distributed across cities, while the cost of housing continues to rise, resulting in an affordability crisis for lower income workers.

3.1.2. Impact on Environmental Sustainability

Environmental sustainability is a second significant challenge for Jubail:

Pollution: Air and water pollution from industrial activities can be a concern for residents’ health.

Resource Management: Water and energy are intensively used resources and need to be effectively managed; otherwise, shortages would create a business continuity issue.

Green Spaces: The emphasis on industrial development frequently results in the loss of green areas, restricting recreational possibilities for the population.

3.1.3. Social Equity and Inclusion

Social equity and inclusion are essential for creating a unified community:

Inequitable Access to Services: Limited access to healthcare, education, and public transportation may exclude low-income residents from full participation in urban life.

The population is diverse, and there must be strategies to ensure inclusion and cohesion.

Lack of Access to Decision-Making Processes: Limited opportunities for participation in decision-making processes can lead to disenfranchisement.

3.1.4. Impacts of Rapid Industrialization

Jubail’s swift industrialization arguably offers both opportunities and challenges:

Urban Sprawl: Industrial facilities usually require large areas of land, leading to urban sprawl, which causes strain on existing infrastructure and services.

Economic Volatility: With industrial sector dependence, the local economy faces vulnerability to global market changes.

Health Implications: Higher rates of respiratory diseases and other pollution-related health problems could increase long-term public health costs.

3.2. What Residents Say About Liveability

To identify strengths and weaknesses in liveability, it is necessary to understand the residents’ point of view on liveability in Jubail. This portion details the survey results, housing conditions, service access, and qualitative relationships identified through open-ended questions.

3.2.1. Opinion Survey on Perceptions of Liveability

The survey was conducted among residents of Jubail, with 457 respondents; the demographic results in Figure 5 show the age group and the duration they have lived in Jubail. The results revealed a mixed but positive picture of liveability. Many residents enjoy economic options but have mixed feelings about the quality of their lives, with pollution and housing costs at the top of their concerns. The survey results revealed a mean satisfaction of 4.13 out of 5. This high satisfaction rate indicates that the quality-of-life level is promising and fulfills residents’ needs in different respects.

Housing affordability, air pollution, and access to parks can be common issues. The mean rating of the air quality decreased to 3.21 out of 5. This neutral feedback indicates the concerns residents have when living in an industrial area, despite having an average of 4.34 out of 5 when they evaluated the availability of green spaces (parks, gardens) in their areas.

Community Engagement: Residents want to be more engaged in community decision-making processes. They are also neutral, with a 3.07 out of 5 rating of their involvement and opportunities to participate in community decision-making.

3.2.2. Analysis of Housing Conditions and Access to Services

The analysis identifies key challenges:

High numbers of overcrowded households, housing quality, and affordability concerns persist. Access to critical services is highly reliant on where someone lives, and in some neighborhoods, it can degrade a person’s quality of life. Residents show a satisfaction rate of 4.02 out of 5 with the availability of essential services (healthcare, education, and transportation).

Table 2. Means of responses.

Area Evaluated	Satisfaction Mean
How satisfied are you with your overall quality of life in Jubail?	4.13
How would you describe the level of safety in your area?	4.70
How do you rate the air quality in Jubail?	3.21
Do you feel you have opportunities to participate in community decision-making?	3.07
How satisfied are you with the availability of essential services (healthcare, education, transportation) in your area?	4.02
How do you rate the availability of green spaces (parks, gardens) in your area?	4.34
How would you rate your social interaction with your neighbor?	3.18
How much does the surrounding environment affect your mental well-being?	3.74

shows the mean satisfaction for all responses.

3.2.3. Qualitative Insights from Open-Ended Questions

The open-ended questions provided a deeper look:

Residents referenced challenges like long commutes and difficulty knowing where to find affordable housing, especially those who lived in Jubail town. Additionally, several respondents cited community support networks and cultural diversity as positive features of living in Jubail. Moreover, respondents expressed a strong desire for environmental improvements and greater government transparency.

A more detailed thematic analysis was conducted to examine differences in liveability perceptions across resident sub-groups. Using an inductive coding process, responses were categorized by themes—housing and affordability, environmental quality, community engagement, and sense of belonging—and then cross-tabulated by demographic variables such as length of residence and age group.

The analysis revealed that long-term residents (over 10 years), many of whom also work within Jubail’s industrial sector, expressed stronger attachment to the city and a more pragmatic tolerance of environmental issues, reflecting their dual roles as residents and stakeholders. In contrast, newer residents tended to emphasize air quality and recreational opportunities as key determinants of liveability. Younger respondents highlighted social interaction and public space design, whereas older groups prioritized safety and healthcare access.

These contrasts suggest that liveability is perceived through multiple experiential lenses, shaped by both socio-demographic position and duration of residence. Recognizing such diversity can inform more differentiated policy strategies, aligning housing, environmental, and social interventions with the specific needs of varied community groups.

A notable example is how the city center, which has changed dramatically over the past few years, was evaluated with a sense of satisfaction. Recently, many entertainment facilities have opened, as shown in Figure 6 and Figure 7, such as coffee shops, malls, and shops. Consequently, people were able to interact more effectively, and services were of higher quality.

In Jubail, many projects have produced challenges, prioritization decisions, and engagement in public space redevelopment and liveability. The redevelopment of public space seeks to re-create areas with low congregation and traffic, turning them into bustling areas full of people. Park development and renovation initiatives give residents space for leisure and social interaction. This took place when many areas were renovated into a public community space to accommodate residents’ needs and aspirations, as shown in Figure 8 and Figure 9 below.

Community centers bring cultural activities and recreational activities, helping people to belong, while emphasizing walkability and access encourages walking and biking along the beach.

Community engagement programs aim to engage residents in decision-making. Initiatives enable residents to be part of urban planning dialogues, guaranteeing that diverse voices are considered. Programs support community service projects that improve local environments and build relationships, in addition to cultural festivals that demonstrate cultural diversity and help in building social inclusion.

The survey shows improved satisfaction with living conditions and community relationships. Parks and community centers with higher foot traffic indicate more socialization. Engagement programs help cultivate a stronger sense of belonging amongst residents. When it comes to the evidence, the correlation test between the satisfaction rate and the community engagement produces a p-value < 0.001, which indicates a very strong relationship between the rate of social interaction with neighbors and the rate of life satisfaction in general. However, this relationship should not be interpreted as evidence of program effectiveness, as the study’s cross-sectional design does not allow for causal inference. Longitudinal or controlled studies are needed to confirm the impact of engagement initiatives on life satisfaction.

3.3. Environmental Analysis

Jubail is an industrial city; thus, an environmental assessment of it is an urgent and pivotal necessity in terms of understanding the health effects of industrial activity on the people, as well as sustainability.

3.3.1. Impact of Industrial Activities on Public Health

Rapid industrialization has important consequences.

Table 3. Main Challenges in Jubail.

Area Evaluated	Not Exist %	Exist %
Housing affordability	37.5	62.5
Air quality	41.3	58.7
Access to services	63.5	36.5
Overcrowding	72.8	27.2
Lack of green spaces	87.3	12.7

outlines residents’ perceptions of the major challenges affecting quality of life in Jubail. The most frequently reported issues were housing affordability (62.5%) and air quality (58.7%), followed by limited access to services (36.5%) and overcrowding (27.2%). Despite this, only 12.7% of respondents reported a lack of green spaces as an existing issue.

These findings suggest that while environmental and infrastructural factors (e.g., housing and air quality) are of primary concern to residents, aspects related to green space availability are less frequently perceived as problematic. The distribution reveals a central tendency towards moderate satisfaction with air quality, highlighting a paradox typical of industrial cities—where infrastructural advancements coexist with environmental strain. This pattern underscores the need for continuous air monitoring and urban greening initiatives to sustain liveability in the city.

Although only 12.7% of respondents explicitly identified a lack of green spaces as a concern, this may reflect issues of uneven distribution or inadequate maintenance rather than absolute absence, suggesting that green space availability varies across neighborhoods and may still pose a significant liveability challenge in specific areas.

Industry, Environmental Pollution, and Vulnerable Populations: Children and the elderly are some of the vulnerable groups to the pollutants in industrial pollution.

Health Tracking and Monitoring: Periodic health assessments are necessary to assess the immediate effects of industrialization.

Using the qualitative coding of open-ended responses revealed recurring themes. The most anticipated changes included improvements in transportation, expansion of green spaces, and initiatives to reduce pollution. These themes highlight residents’ priorities for enhancing the quality of life in Jubail.

3.3.2. Analysis of Air and Water Quality Data

There are important insights to be gathered from analyzing air and water quality data and using Spearman correlations, shown in

Table 4. Correlation of quality of life with different factors.

Area Evaluated		How Would You Describe the Level of Safety in Your Area? (Safety)	How do You Rate the Air Quality in Jubail? (Air Quality)	Do You Feel You Have Opportunities to Participate in Community Decision-Making? (Community Participation)	How Satisfied Are You with the Availability of Essential Services (Healthcare, Education, Transportation) in Your Area? (Services)
How satisfied are you with your overall quality of life in Jubail?	Correlation Coefficient	0.352 **	0.459 **	0.330 **	0.514 **
	Sig. (2-tailed)	0.000 (8.71 × 10−15)	0.000 (3.48 × 10−25)	0.000 (4.26 × 10−13)	0.000 (3.94 × 10−32)
	N	457	457	457	457

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

:

Air Quality Monitoring Report: Fluctuations in air quality are often tied to changes in industrial output, which is detrimental to human health, being the most influential factor.

Assessment of Services: Ongoing monitoring is needed to ensure levels are satisfactory.

Fostering Public Awareness: Air and water quality data must be transparent and made available to residents so they can take steps to protect themselves.

3.3.3. Sustainability Implications

Environmental challenges have wide-reaching implications for sustainability:

Resource Management: Unsustainable practices can lead to the depletion of natural resources, making management necessary. However, the construction and operation of industrial plants cause changes in the natural state of the environment, emitting greenhouse gases and even adding to the climate crisis, which calls for mitigation strategies in urban planning.

SDGs: Aligning industrial practices with SDGs fosters a balanced approach to economic growth and environmental protection.

The findings suggest that housing affordability, environmental quality, and social equity in Jubail are not isolated dimensions but mutually reinforcing factors. Residents experiencing economic constraints reported greater sensitivity to environmental issues, reflecting how resource inequalities can amplify perceptions of environmental risk. This interplay indicates that improving liveability requires integrated policies that address housing, environmental sustainability, and equity simultaneously.

4. Discussion

The findings from this study reveal a series of interrelated paradoxes that define liveability in Jubail Industrial City. Despite high satisfaction levels with safety, access to services, and community facilities, residents simultaneously express concern about environmental quality and housing affordability. This coexistence of positive urban infrastructure performance with persistent environmental and social challenges mirrors what has been described in the literature as the “industrial liveability paradox”, where economic advancement and modern planning coexist with ecological strain and uneven well-being [13].

4.1. The Economic–Environmental Paradox

Jubail’s rapid industrial growth has created strong employment opportunities and infrastructural development, reflected in high satisfaction with services (mean = 4.02) and safety (mean = 4.70). However, the same industrial activities contribute to air pollution and environmental stress, leading to a lower air quality satisfaction score (mean = 3.21). This pattern reflects global findings on industrial cities, where economic resilience often conflicts with environmental sustainability [3,17].

In Jubail, this paradox manifests through residents’ acceptance of environmental trade-offs in exchange for economic stability, underscoring the need for integrated policy approaches.

4.2. The Housing Equity Paradox

While modern infrastructure and services are widely accessible, housing affordability remains a core challenge. The concentration of higher-income professionals within newer residential areas has produced spatial disparities similar to patterns identified in other industrializing Gulf cities [16].

This housing equity paradox reveals that physical urban quality does not necessarily translate into equitable access. It further illustrates how urban liveability depends not only on the provision of services but also on the social distribution of opportunities.

4.3. The Community Participation Paradox

Survey and qualitative results indicate that residents desire greater engagement in urban decision-making, with a neutral mean score (3.07) for participation opportunities. Despite government-led urban renewal initiatives, community participation remains limited, reflecting what Al-Hathloul and Mughal (1999) [2] described as the “top-down urban governance” tendency in Saudi urban development. This paradox highlights that liveability cannot be sustained solely through infrastructure; it also depends on inclusive governance mechanisms that enable residents to co-shape their urban environment.

4.4. Synthesis and Implications

Together, these paradoxes underscore the complex trade-offs inherent in industrial urbanism. Jubail’s experience exemplifies how modern planning and economic productivity can enhance certain dimensions of liveability while undermining others. These findings resonate with broader literature emphasizing the need for balance between economic vitality, environmental integrity, and social equity [34,52].

These findings contribute to existing theoretical perspectives on urban sustainability transitions, demonstrating that the paradoxes identified in Jubail reflect a broader socio-technical dynamic. Rather than purely structural trade-offs, the results reveal adaptive negotiation processes where communities, institutions, and industries continuously recalibrate liveability priorities. This aligns with the notion of “transition management” within socio-technical systems theory, extending it to the industrial city context.

The paradoxes observed in Jubail can be further understood through established urban and sustainability transition theories. The framework developed in this study integrates three theoretical strands: adaptive governance, drawn from resilience and transition management theory [10,56]; socio-spatial balancing, informed by just city and urban political economy frameworks [57,58]; and technological mediation, rooted in socio-technical transition theory [59,60]. Together, these mechanisms provide a transferable conceptual lens for analyzing how industrial cities manage competing imperatives of growth, equity, and sustainability.

The study thus contributes to understanding how industrial cities can transition from reactive environmental management to proactive, people-centered sustainability.

While ecological modeling approaches quantify system-level interactions, the present framework provides a human-scale perspective, emphasizing how industrial urban residents perceive, interpret, and negotiate the trade-offs that such models abstractly represent. This synthesis reinforces the value of integrating quantitative perception analysis with qualitative lived experiences in understanding urban liveability.

5. Conclusions

The discussion of Jubail’s liveability reveals a set of intertwined paradoxes that characterize industrial urban life. Despite strong performance in infrastructure, safety, and service provision, challenges related to environmental quality, housing affordability, and community participation persist. These contradictions illustrate how economic prosperity can coexist with ecological vulnerability and social disparity, highlighting the complex trade-offs that shape residents’ lived experiences. The conclusion that follows draws together these findings, emphasizing the pathways through which Jubail can evolve toward a more balanced, inclusive, and sustainable urban future.

Findings from the study reveal a complex balance between satisfaction with urban systems and persistent environmental and social concerns. Most residents reported a relatively positive quality of life, particularly in relation to safety and access to essential services. However, perceptions of air quality and housing affordability emerged as significant challenges, with over half of respondents identifying them as existing issues. In contrast, issues such as overcrowding and lack of green spaces were reported less frequently, suggesting localized but significant spatial inequalities in liveability. These patterns illustrate the paradox of Jubail’s urban model: a city that achieves high standards of infrastructure and safety while grappling with the ecological pressures of industrial development. The results demonstrate how perceptions of liveability are shaped not only by physical amenities but also by environmental quality and affordability dimensions that require cross-disciplinary collaboration to sustain well-being in industrial cities.

The need of the hour is for policymakers to start implementing practical solutions towards the environmental adversities to make Jubail a more livable place.

In light of these findings, there is a clear need for translating the identified challenges into context-specific policy actions that align with national sustainability agendas. While the preceding discussion highlights broad directions, such as environmental regulation, housing improvement, and social inclusion, effective implementation in Jubail Industrial City requires tailored strategies that reflect its unique industrial structure, demographic composition, and governance under the Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu (RCJY).

Therefore, the following section outlines a set of pragmatic and locally grounded policy recommendations, developed in accordance with the objectives of Saudi Vision 2030, to guide policymakers and urban planners in enhancing liveability and achieving sustainable urban transformation in Jubail.

5.1. Policy Recommendations for Enhancing Liveability in Jubail

Building on the findings, several context-specific policy recommendations are proposed in

Table 5. Summary of Proposed Implementation Pathways.

Policy Area	Key Action	Lead Institution	Vision 2030 Alignment	Expected Outcome
Housing	Inclusionary zoning and subsidies	RCJY	Housing Program	Affordable, mixed-income communities
Environment	Industrial audits and green buffers	RCJY/Saudi Green Initiative	Environmental Sustainability	Cleaner air and improved public health
Environment	Integrated public bus network	RCJY/Transport Ministry	Quality of Life Program	Reduced congestion and emissions
Social Inclusion	Community engagement platforms	RCJY/NGOs *	Thriving Society	Greater civic participation
Monitoring	Integrated public bus network	RCJY/SDG Unit	Vision Realization Office	Measurable progress tracking

* NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations.

to guide sustainable urban development and improve liveability in Jubail Industrial City:

5.1.1. Housing Affordability and Land Use Policies

To mitigate rising housing costs and ensure social inclusivity, the Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu (RCJY) could implement inclusionary zoning policies mandating that a proportion (e.g., 15–20%) of new residential developments be designated as affordable housing. Additionally, public–private partnerships (PPPs) can be encouraged to expand mixed-income housing projects near employment centers.

Introducing rental subsidy programs and low-interest mortgage schemes for middle- and lower-income groups would support equitable access to adequate housing. These measures are expected to reduce commuting distances, strengthen community cohesion, and enhance economic resilience.

5.1.2. Environmental Quality and Green Infrastructure

To address environmental degradation, stricter industrial emissions monitoring and mandatory corporate environmental audits should be integrated into RCJY’s regulatory framework. Implementing green buffer zones between industrial and residential areas and expanding urban forestry initiatives can mitigate air pollution and heat stress.

Furthermore, introducing environmental tax incentives—such as rebates for companies adopting cleaner technologies or renewable energy sources—would foster private-sector participation in environmental stewardship.

5.1.3. Mobility and Public Transport Integration

Enhancing mobility requires a shift toward sustainable transport infrastructure. Developing a city-wide bus network connecting residential districts with industrial zones, alongside dedicated cycling and pedestrian corridors, would reduce traffic congestion and emissions.

A public transport subsidy scheme could encourage modal shifts from private cars to collective transport, contributing to lower carbon footprints and improved air quality.

5.1.4. Social Equity and Community Engagement

Institutionalizing community consultation mechanisms—such as participatory planning forums or digital feedback platforms—would ensure that residents’ voices are integrated into urban decision-making. Targeted investment in community centers, cultural programs, and recreational facilities can foster social inclusion, particularly among migrant and younger populations. These initiatives are expected to strengthen civic engagement and shared urban identity.

5.1.5. Monitoring and Evaluation Framework

To assess policy effectiveness, a Liveability Performance Index (LPI) [61,62,63,64] tailored to Jubail could be developed, combining indicators of housing, environment, and social well-being. This evidence-based monitoring tool would enable the RCJY and local planners to track progress toward Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 3, 11, and 13, ensuring continuous policy refinement.

5.2. Expected Policy Impact

Implementing these recommendations would enable Jubail to transition from a primarily industrial hub to a model of sustainable urban–industrial coexistence. By integrating housing, environmental, and mobility strategies under Vision 2030′s umbrella, Jubail could demonstrate how industrial cities in the Gulf region can balance economic productivity with social inclusivity and environmental stewardship

In addition to the above strategies, other recommendations can be implemented for all industrial cities as follows:

Regulatory Frameworks: More stringent environmental regulations on industrial emissions should be a priority.

Health Impact Assessments: Notifying and/or requiring health assessments for new industrial projects can reveal potential threats to public health.

Green Infrastructure: Sustainable practices lead to reduced environmental footprints and improved resource conservation.

Everyone can work towards a lower carbon footprint, such as by reducing one’s private transportation emissions. Working on Public Transportation Projects: Recommendations to reduce private transportation emissions have been refined to reflect Jubail’s car-dependent urban form and industrial logistics demands, emphasizing the need for improved public transport connectivity between residential and industrial zones, and the adoption of low-emission fleets for industrial operations.

Community Engagement: Getting residents and businesses involved in decision-making builds trust and deepens relationships.

Education and Awareness Campaigns: Keeping residents informed about environmental problems can enable communities to become a part of the solution.

Housing Affordability Struggles: Increasing real estate prices and a shortage of affordable housing present major obstacles.

Environmental Development: Industrialization creates worries for air and water quality.

Social Equity and Inclusion: Policies ensuring access to services for all, as there are differences in access.

Community Initiatives: Redevelopment and engagement programs have improved residents’ quality of life.

A systematic mapping of liveability factors in Jubail is needed, as part of this study indicates. This study contributes to the Livable Cities initiative by developing an extensive analysis of liveability factors in Jubail. These findings can guide policymakers and urban planners in developing strategies to improve quality of life. Through responsiveness to housing, environmental, and social issues, Jubail can become a model for other industrial cities.

While this study provides an in-depth examination of liveability dynamics in Jubail Industrial City, its single-case focus inherently limits the extent to which the findings can be generalized to other industrial contexts. Industrial cities differ widely in socio-cultural composition, economic diversification, governance structures, and environmental pressures, all of which shape the lived experiences of residents and their perceptions of urban quality of life. Consequently, the results presented here should be viewed as context-specific insights that illuminate key relationships rather than universal patterns.

Nevertheless, the analytical framework and mixed-methods approach developed in this research can serve as a conceptual model for comparative studies in other industrial cities, both within Saudi Arabia and internationally. By adapting the framework to different socio-economic and ecological conditions, future research can assess how contextual variations influence liveability outcomes, thereby contributing to a more generalizable understanding of sustainable urban–industrial development.

Beyond its empirical insights, this study offers a conceptual framework for understanding and managing liveability paradoxes in industrial cities. The framework identifies three interconnected mechanisms:

• Adaptive Governance—The capacity of institutions to respond flexibly to social and environmental change.
• Socio-Spatial Balancing—Planning interventions that align industrial productivity with residential well-being.
• Technological Mediation—Leveraging green and digital technologies to mitigate industrial externalities.

Together, these mechanisms provide a transferable model for policymakers and planners seeking to enhance liveability in other planned or industrial urban contexts. This contributes to a growing theoretical understanding of how industrial cities can evolve toward sustainable urban futures.

To translate these insights into a transferable analytical model,

Table 6. Conceptual framework illustrating the mechanisms for managing liveability paradoxes in industrial cities, derived from the case of Jubail.

Mechanism	Definition	Practical Application in Jubail
Adaptive Governance	Institutional capacity to respond to socio-environmental challenges through flexible policy mechanisms.	RCJY’s regulatory adaptability in environmental monitoring and social housing provision.
Socio-Spatial Balancing	Aligning industrial, residential, and environmental planning to reduce inequalities and enhance accessibility.	Strategic zoning and inclusionary housing policies linking residential areas to employment hubs.
Technological Mediation	Use of digital and green technologies to mitigate industrial externalities and improve quality of life.	Adoption of emission monitoring, renewable energy systems, and smart mobility pilots.

presents a conceptual framework for managing liveability paradoxes in industrial cities. The framework positions industrial urban systems as arenas where economic, environmental, and social dynamics intersect, generating inherent tensions between growth and sustainability. Drawing on the empirical findings from Jubail, three interrelated mechanisms—adaptive governance, socio-spatial balancing, and technological mediation—are identified as key strategies through which such paradoxes can be managed. These mechanisms offer a replicable foundation for future comparative research and practical policymaking in other planned industrial cities globally.

This framework synthesizes empirical insights from Jubail with established theoretical perspectives on urban resilience, spatial justice, and socio-technical transitions, positioning the case as a reference model for understanding liveability paradoxes in planned industrial cities.

Future research agendas should include longitudinal studies to explore the long-term effects of industrialization on health and environmental quality, other industrial cities as comparative analysis, and community-based research that involves residents as partners in participatory programs to inform community-responsive policymaking.