Resident Satisfaction in Eco-Friendly Housing: Informing Sustainable Decision-Making in Urban Development
Abstract
1. Introduction
- To ascertain consumer satisfaction levels in Shanghai green homes by considering factors such as energy efficiency, indoor air quality, overall design satisfaction, eco-friendly community actions, and their collective influences.
- To examine the impact of a sense of belonging on the relationship between independent variables and customer happiness, with the mediating role of community.
- To examine the moderating effect of eco-awareness on the relationships between independent variables and consumer satisfaction.
2. Literature Review
2.1. Sustainable Living and Customer Satisfaction
2.2. Eco-Friendly Community Initiatives and Sense of Community
2.3. Environmental Consciousness as a Moderating Factor
3. Methodology
3.1. Population of the Study
3.2. Sample of the Study: Characteristics and Demographic Considerations
- Gender: Assessing whether there are gender-based differences in satisfaction levels can provide insights into how eco-friendly housing initiatives cater to the diverse needs and preferences of both men and women.
- Age: Different age groups have varying expectations and priorities regarding green living. Understanding age-related patterns in satisfaction informs age-tailored strategies for sustainable housing.
- Income Level: Economic factors influence perceptions of satisfaction. Examining satisfaction across different income brackets helps identify any disparities in experiences and suggests adjustments for affordability.
- Occupation: Occupations shape individuals’ daily routines and interactions with the eco-friendly features of their homes. Examining satisfaction across different professions reveals occupation-specific needs and preferences.
- Educational Background: Education levels influence residents’ awareness and appreciation of eco-friendly initiatives. Analyzing satisfaction in relation to education offers insights into the role of environmental consciousness.
- Length of Residency: Residents who have lived in eco-friendly homes for varying durations have different perspectives. Assessing satisfaction based on the length of residency captures evolving perceptions over time.
3.3. Channels for Distributing Questionnaires and Sampling Methods
- Online Platforms: Questionnaires were circulated electronically via email through local and property management companies and disseminated on social media outlets and community platforms devoted to sustainable residences in Shanghai.
- In-Person Distribution: Hard copies of the questionnaire were disseminated at residents’ centres, regional housing offices, and during resident sessions in eco-friendly accommodation complexes. Qualified surveyors were available to help citizens in completing the survey.
- QR Code Flyers: Posters with QR codes linked to the online survey were posted in lobbies and standard rooms to encourage participation.
3.4. Data Collection Techniques and Response Rate
3.5. List of Variables
3.5.1. Dependent Variable: Customer Satisfaction (CS)
3.5.2. Independent Variables
- Energy Efficiency (EEF): The study employed the ‘energy efficiency scale’, originating from the research conducted by Uşma& Akıncı [51]. The research involved restructuring items, introducing a series of five questions specifically pertinent to the subject matter under investigation. These questions were meticulously crafted in alignment with the 5-point Likert scale items. The presented question is framed as follows: “I believe the energy-efficient features in my green home contribute to cost savings”.
- Indoor Air Quality (IAQ): The investigation used the ‘LEED 2.1 Green Building Rating System scale’, as seen in previous research from Hepner & Boser [52]. Here, included is a restructuring of items with a set of five questions relevant to the subject matter under examination. All of these questions were created carefully from the 5-pointLikert scale items. The presented question is formulated as follows: “The indoor air quality in my green home is better compared to traditional homes”.
- Eco-friendly Community Initiatives (EFCI): The research used the eco-friendly orientation scale introduced by previous work developed by Fraj-andres et al. [53]. A complete item restructuring was performed, consisting of a set of 5 questions for the specific focus of the investigation. The presentation of the provided question is as follows: “I am aware of the eco-friendly initiatives implemented in my residential community”.
- Overall Design Satisfaction (ODS): The research used the ‘Residential Environmental Satisfaction scale’ derived from research by Adriaanse [54]. Research methodology involved a set of five questions tailored to the subject of the investigation, and as a part of this research methodology, a restructuring of items was undertaken. The provided question is formulated as follows: “I am satisfied with the architectural design of my green home”.
3.5.3. Mediator—Sense of Community (SC)
3.5.4. Moderator-Environmental Consciousness (EC)
3.6. Comprehensive Evaluation of Measurement Model, Validity, and Structural Relationships
4. Results
5. Theoretical and Practical Contributions
6. Discussion
7. Conclusions and Policy Recommendations
- Short-Term Policy Implications: Policymakers and developers need to give precedence to immediate remedies in addressing pressing concerns and enhancing the first experiences of residents in eco-friendly residences. By prioritising steps that provide immediate outcomes, such as conducting thorough energy audits to identify and rectify inefficiencies, households may benefit from reduced power expenses and enhanced comfort. Two targeted community-building initiatives that may rapidly foster a sense of connection among members include organising introductory events and creating social spaces. Green housing projects may achieve greater short-term success by implementing prompt measures to address any emerging problems related to indoor air quality and by providing occupants with real-time feedback channels.
- Medium-Term Policy Implications: These include expanding on short-term initiatives and developing more comprehensive and enduring plans. Investing in environmental awareness education by policymakers has the potential to motivate individuals to embrace sustainable lifestyle choices in the long run. In the long term, laws should prioritise establishing new criteria for eco-friendly housing designs that cater to contemporary inhabitants’ requirements while maintaining aesthetic appeal and functionality. Enhancements to the medium-term profitability and viability of green housing projects may be accomplished by introducing performance-based incentives for developers and conducting regular reviews to assess the effectiveness of eco-friendly community initiatives.
- Long-Term Policy Implications: A sustainable framework and practices should be integrated into urban development to sustain long-term success. Legislators should pass stringent laws mandating that all new projects must incorporate greenconstruction standards in order to establish this as the new norm rather than the exception. This becomes especially important as it is essential to allocate resources for advancing research and development to make green homes more energy efficient and also to reduce their environmental impact as much as possible. In addition, school and community-based educational initiatives aimed at promoting a mindset of environmental accountability help create a foundation for the development of a population committed to environmental stewardship.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Questionnaire
Appendix A.1
Gender: | • Male • Female |
Age: | • >18–25 years • 26–33 years • 34–41 years • >41 years |
Academic Level: | • Undergraduate • Graduate |
Income Level: | • Below CNY 100,000 per year • CNY 100,000 to CNY 300,000 per year • CNY 300,000 to CNY 600,000 per year • More than CNY 600,000 per year |
Occupation: | • IT and Software Professionals • Healthcare and Medical Professionals • Business and Finance Executives |
Length of Residency: | • <1 year • 1 to 5 years • >5 years |
Appendix A.2
Item No. | Question |
---|---|
Customer Satisfaction (CS) | |
1 | The overall design of my green home meets my expectations. |
2 | The energy efficiency features in my home are effective. |
3 | I am satisfied with the indoor air quality in my green home. |
4 | The overall comfort level of my green home aligns with my preferences. |
5 | I am pleased with the eco-friendly initiatives in my residential community. |
Energy Efficiency (EEF) | |
1 | I believe the energy-efficient features in my green home contribute to cost savings. |
2 | The energy-saving technologies in my home are effective. |
3 | I feel that the energy efficiency of my green home positively impacts the environment. |
4 | The energy-efficient appliances in my home enhance my overall satisfaction. |
5 | I consider the energy efficiency of my green home as a significant benefit. |
Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) | |
1 | The indoor air quality in my green home is better compared to traditional homes. |
2 | I am satisfied with the ventilation systems contributing to indoor air quality. |
3 | The use of eco-friendly materials positively influences the air quality in my home. |
4 | I believe the indoor air quality affects my health and well-being. |
5 | The indoor air quality in my green home meets my expectations. |
Eco-Friendly Community Initiatives (ECI) | |
1 | I am aware of the eco-friendly initiatives implemented in my residential community. |
2 | The community’s commitment to sustainability positively influences my satisfaction. |
3 | I feel a sense of pride living in an environmentally conscious residential community. |
4 | The availability of green spaces in my community enhances my overall satisfaction. |
5 | I believe the community’s eco-friendly initiatives contribute to a better living environment. |
Overall Design Satisfaction (ODS) | |
1 | I am satisfied with the architectural design of my green home. |
2 | The layout and spatial arrangement of my home meet my expectations. |
3 | The aesthetic appeal of my green home adds to my overall satisfaction. |
4 | I find the design features of my home to be innovative and appealing. |
5 | The overall design of my green home aligns with my lifestyle preferences. |
Sense of Community (SC) | |
1 | I feel a sense of belonging to my residential community. |
2 | Interactions with neighbors contribute positively to my overall satisfaction. |
3 | The communal spaces in my green community foster a sense of togetherness. |
4 | I believe the community environment enhances my overall well-being. |
5 | The sense of community in my green home area positively influences my satisfaction. |
Environmental Consciousness (EC) | |
1 | I actively seek out environmentally friendly products and services. |
2 | Environmental sustainability is an essential factor in my decision-making. |
3 | I am conscious of the environmental impact of my lifestyle choices. |
4 | I make efforts to reduce my ecological footprint. |
5 | I believe in the importance of protecting the environment for future generations. |
References
- Amoah, C.; Smith, J. Barriers to the green retrofitting of existing residential buildings. J. Facil. Manag. 2024, 22, 194–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abbas, M.K.; Dhuha, A.H.; Tabark, M.A. Promoting Sustainability in Housing Sector Using Eco-Friendly Materials. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2024, 1374, 012053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kwon, H.A.; Kim, S. Designing for Modern Living: The Strategic Evolution of Residential Spaces in Response to Improved Lifestyles. Teh. Glas. 2024, 18, 234–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abera, Y.A. Sustainable building materials: A comprehensive study on eco-friendly alternatives for construction. Compos. Adv. Mater. 2024, 33, 26349833241255957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, J.; Rani, G.; Rani, M.; Rani, V. Exploring sustainable pathways in the green housing market: An investigation of green housing purchase behavior by using PLS-SEM. Prop. Manag. 2025, 43, 288–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, X.; Zhou, Y.; Yuan, X.; Zhu, M. The coordination relationship between urban development and urban life satisfaction in Chinese cities-An empirical analysis based on multi-source data. Cities 2024, 150, 105016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haghani, M.; Sabri, S.; De Gruyter, C.; Ardeshiri, A.; Shahhoseini, Z.; Sanchez, T.W.; Acuto, M. The landscape and evolution of urban planning science. Cities 2023, 136, 104261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Papastergiou, E.; Latinopoulos, D.; Evdou, M.; Kalogeresis, A. Exploring Associations between Subjective Well-Being and Non-Market Values When Used in the Evaluation of Urban Green Spaces: A Scoping Review. Land 2023, 12, 700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, P.; Han, L.; Mei, R. An impact asymmetry analysis of small urban green space attributes to enhance visitor satisfaction. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 2922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, X.; Huang, Z.; Liu, Q.; Fang, Y.; Wan, W.; Cheng, J. Co-abatement of greenhouse gas and air pollutants in Shanghai, China: Spatial hotspots identification, effects assessment and policy implication. Sci. Total Environ. 2024, 951, 175569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, J.; Ying, X. Development trend of green residential buildings in China under the guidance of the low-carbon concept: A policy review and analysis. J. Urban Manag. 2024, 13, 246–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, Y.; Wu, Y.; Huang, L.; Aleksejeva, J.; Iossifova, D.; Dong, N.; Gasparatos, A. Assessing urban livability in Shanghai through an open source data-driven approach. NPJ Urban Sustain. 2024, 4, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cai, R.; He, S. Enacting urban entrepreneurialism through neighbourhood governance: A comparative study of Shanghai and Guangzhou, China. J. Urban Aff. 2024, 46, 477–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, G.; Zheng, Q.; Lin, X.; Yuan, K. Sustainability-Oriented Low-Carbon Innovation in SOEs: A Case Study of Shanghai Metro. Sustainability 2023, 15, 16216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Geng, L.; Xiong, X.; Liu, Z.; Wei, Y.; Lan, Z.; Hu, M.; Guo, M.; Xu, R.; Yuan, H.; Yang, Z.; et al. Evaluation of Smart Home Systems and Novel UV-Oriented Solution for Integration, Resilience, Inclusiveness & Sustainability. In Proceedings of the 2022 6th International Conference on Universal Village (UV), Boston, MA, USA, 22–25 October 2022; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2022; pp. 1–386. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Q.C.; Liu, X.; Jian, I.Y.; Zhang, E.J.; Hou, Y.T.; Siu, K.W.M.; Li, Y.B. Community resilience in city emergency: Exploring the roles of environmental perception, social justice and community attachment in subjective well-being of vulnerable residents. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2023, 97, 104745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nederhand, J.; Avelino, F.; Awad, I.; De Jong, P.; Duijn, M.; Edelenbos, J.; Engelbert, J.; Fransen, J.; Schiller, M.; Van Stapele, N. Reclaiming the city from an urban vitalism perspective: Critically reflecting smart, inclusive, resilient and sustainable just city labels. Cities 2023, 137, 104257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bungau, C.C.; Bungau, T.; Prada, I.F.; Prada, M.F. Green Buildings as a Necessity for Sustainable Environment Development: Dilemmas and Challenges. Sustainability 2022, 14, 13121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hashish, M.E.S.; Abdou, A.H.; Mohamed, S.A.K.; Elenain, A.S.A.; Salama, W. The nexus between green perceived quality, green satisfaction, green trust, and customers’ green behavioral intentions in eco-friendly hotels: A structural equation modeling approach. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 16195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taki, A.; Alsheglawi, B. Toward energy-efficient houses considering social cultural needs in bahrain: A new framework approach. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berger, J.; Essah, E.; Blanusa, T.; Beaman, C.P. The appearance of indoor plants and their effect on people’s perceptions of indoor air quality and subjective well-being. Build. Environ. 2022, 219, 109151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vergerio, G.; Becchio, C. Pursuing occupants’ health and well-being in building management: Definition of new metrics based on indoor air parameters. Build. Environ. 2022, 223, 109447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coggins, A.M.; Wemken, N.; Mishra, A.K.; Sharkey, M.; Horgan, L.; Cowie, H.; Bourdin, E.; McIntyre, B. Indoor air quality, thermal comfort and ventilation in deep energy retrofitted Irish dwellings. Build. Environ. 2022, 219, 109236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arar, M.; Jung, C. Analyzing the Perception of Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) from a Survey of New Townhouse Residents in Dubai. Sustainability 2022, 14, 15042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tseng, M.L.; Li, S.X.; Lin, C.W.R.; Chiu, A.S. Validating green building social sustainability indicators in China using the fuzzy delphi method. J. Ind. Prod. Eng. 2023, 40, 35–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meena, C.S.; Kumar, A.; Jain, S.; Rehman, A.U.; Mishra, S.; Sharma, N.K.; Bajaj, M.; Shafiq, M.; Eldin, E.T. Innovation in green building sector for sustainable future. Energies 2022, 15, 6631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Z.; Fort, J.M.; Mateu, L.G. Exploring the Potential of Artificial Intelligence as a Tool for Architectural Design: A Perception Study Using Gaudí’s Works. Buildings 2023, 13, 1863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ko, J.; Ennemoser, B.; Yoo, W.; Yan, W.; Clayton, M.J. Architectural Spatial Layout Planning Using Artificial Intelligence. Autom. Constr. 2023, 154, 105019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hansen, R.; Buizer, M.; Buijs, A.; Pauleit, S.; Mattijssen, T.; Fors, H.; van der Jagt, A.; Kabisch, N.; Cook, M.; Delshammar, T.; et al. Transformative or piecemeal? Changes in green space planning and governance in eleven European cities. Eur. Plan. Stud. 2023, 31, 2401–2424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abubakar, I.R.; Alshammari, M.S. Urban planning schemes for developing low-carbon cities in the Gulf Cooperation Council region. Habitat Int. 2023, 138, 102881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nesticò, A.; Passaro, R.; Maselli, G.; Somma, P. Multi-criteria methods for the optimal localization of urban green areas. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 374, 133690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, Y.; Zhen, F. The role of community service satisfaction in the influence of community social capital on the sense of community belonging: A case study of Nanjing, China. J. Hous. Built Environ. 2022, 37, 705–721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yılmaz, F.G.K.; Yılmaz, R. Exploring the role of sociability, sense of community and course satisfaction on students’ engagement in flipped classroom supported by Facebook groups. J. Comput. Educ. 2023, 10, 135–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johansson, K.; Borell, L.; Rosenberg, L. Qualities of the environment that support a sense of home and belonging in nursing homes for older people. Ageing Soc. 2022, 42, 157–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abed, A.; Al-Jokhadar, A. Common space as a tool for social sustainability. J. Hous. Built Environ. 2022, 37, 399–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oikonomaki, E.; Papadaki, I.; Kakderi, C. Promoting green transformations through smart engagement: An assessment of100 citizen-led urban greening projects. Land 2024, 13, 556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Riffat, S.; Ahmad, M.I.; Shakir, A. Eco-Cities: Sustainable Urban Living. In Sustainable Energy Technologies and Low Carbon Buildings; Lecture Notes in Energy; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2025; Volume 45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaulagain, S.; Li, J.; Pizam, A. The impact of sense of community on residents’ satisfaction, behavioral intentions, and life satisfaction in senior living communities. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2024, 121, 103822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Y.; Tang, S. Examining Residents’ Perceptions and Usage Preferences of Urban Public Green Spaces Through the Lens of Environmental Justice. Sustainability 2025, 17, 2627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duong, C.D.; Doan, X.H.; Vu, D.M.; Ha, N.T.; Dam, K.V. The role of perceived environmental responsibility and environmental concern on shaping green purchase intention. Vision 2022. online first. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, M.; Chen, H.; Long, R.; Yang, J. How does government regulation shape residents’ green consumption behavior? A multi-agent simulation considering environmental values and social interaction. J. Environ. Manag. 2023, 331, 117231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schindler, M.; Le Texier, M.; Caruso, G. How far do people travel to use urban green space? A comparison of three European cities. Appl. Geogr. 2022, 141, 102673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lolli, F.; Marinello, S.; Coruzzolo, A.M.; Butturi, M.A. Post-Occupancy Evaluation’s (POE) Applications for Improving Indoor Environment Quality (IEQ). Toxics 2022, 10, 626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- García-Lamarca, M.; Anguelovski, I.; Cole, H.V.; Connolly, J.J.; Pérez-Del-Pulgar, C.; Shokry, G.; Triguero-Mas, M. Urban green grabbing: Residential real estate developers discourse and practice in gentrifying Global North neighborhoods. Geoforum 2022, 128, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Türeli, I. Empowerment through design? Housing cooperatives for women in Montreal. Glob. Discourse 2022, 12, 374–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Almulhim, A.I.; Cobbinah, P.B. Can rapid urbanization be sustainable? The case of Saudi Arabian cities. Habitat Int. 2023, 139, 102884. [Google Scholar]
- Song, C. Application of nature-based measures in China’s sponge city initiative: Current trends and perspectives. Nat.-Based Solut. 2022, 2, 100010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jose, K.A.; Sia, S.K. Theory of planned behavior in predicting the construction of eco-friendly houses. Manag. Environ. Qual. Int. J. 2022, 33, 938–954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quagraine, V.K.; Asibey, M.O.; Mosner-Ansong, K.F. Factors that influence user patronage and satisfaction of urban parks in Ghanaian cities: Case of the Rattray Park in Nhyiaeso, Kumasi. Local Environ. 2023, 29, 224–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Danaher, P.J.; Haddrell, V. A comparison of question scales used for measuring customer satisfaction. Int. J. Serv. Ind. Manag. 1996, 7, 4–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uşma, G.; Akıncı, N.F. Developing a model for user satisfaction assessment in energy efficient dwellings. ACE Arquit. Ciudad. Entorno 2022, 17, 10515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hepner, C.M.; Boser, R.A. Architects’ perceptions of LEED indoor environmental quality checklist items on employee productivity. Int. J. Constr. Educ. Res. 2006, 2, 193–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fraj-Andrés, E.; Martínez-Salinas, E.; Matute-Vallejo, J. Factors affecting corporate environmental strategy in Spanish industrial firms. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2009, 18, 500–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adriaanse, C.C. M Measuring residential satisfaction: A residential environmental satisfaction scale (RESS). J. Hous. Built Environ. 2007, 22, 287–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prezza, M.; Amici, M.; Roberti, T.; Tedeschi, G. Sense of community referred to the whole town: Its relations with neighboring, loneliness, life satisfaction, and area of residence. J. Community Psychol. 2001, 29, 29–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mainieri, T.; Barnett, E.G.; Valdero, T.R.; Unipan, J.B.; Oskamp, S. Green buying: The influence of environmental concern on consumer behavior. J. Soc. Psychol. 1997, 137, 189–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nunnally, J.C.; Bernstein, I.H. Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed.; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E. Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed.; Prentice-Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bagozzi, R.P.; Yi, Y. On the evaluation of structural equation models. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 1988, 16, 74–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, L.T.; Bentler, P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. A Multidiscip. J. 1999, 6, 1–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abera, T. How Do Energy Efficiency Measures in Residential Housing Intersect with Housing Affordability for Low-Income Families? A Case of a Private Purpose-Driven Housing Developer. Master’s Thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Alhamed, M.M.; Yusoff, W.F.W. Investigating Mediation Effect of Innovation on the Relationship Between Project Management and Property Organizational Performance. Int. J. Sustain. Constr. Eng. Technol. 2023, 14, 438–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hui, C.X.; Dan, G.; Alamri, S.; Toghraie, D. Greening smart cities: An investigation of the integration of urban natural resources and smart city technologies for promoting environmental sustainability. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2023, 99, 104985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alzoubi, A. Machine learning for intelligent energy consumption in smart homes. Int. J. Comput. Inf. Manuf. (IJCIM) 2022, 2, 62–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rashed, Y.; Omrani, S.; Nilsson, D.; Drogemuller, R. Sustainability Information Provision (SIP) framework: A review of the promotion of sustainability in the residential sector. Build. Environ. 2023, 229, 109930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, S.; Underwood, S.H.; Masters, J.L.; Manley, N.A.; Konstantzos, I.; Lau, J.; Haller, R.; Wang, L.M. Ten questions concerning smart and healthy built environments for older adults. Build. Environ. 2023, 244, 110720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Niza, I.L.; Bueno, A.M.; Broday, E.E. Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Technological Advances, Impacts and Challenges in the Management of Healthy and Sustainable Environments. Urban Sci. 2023, 7, 96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhatia, M.S.; Kumar, S. Linking stakeholder and competitive pressure to Industry 4.0 and performance: Mediating effect of environmental commitment and green process innovation. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2022, 31, 1905–1918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koengkan, M.; Fuinhas, J.A.; Oliveira, F.P.; Ursavaş, U.; Moreno, N. Building a Sustainable Future: How Eco-Friendly Homes Are Driving Local Economic Development in Lisbon Metropolitan Area. Energies 2023, 16, 4855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Woo, J.; Moon, S.; Choi, H. Economic value and acceptability of advanced solar power systems for multi-unit residential buildings: The case of South Korea. Appl. Energy 2022, 324, 119671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Q.; Qian, T.; Wang, J.; Long, R.; Chen, H.; Sun, C. Social “win-win” promotion of green housing under the four-subject evolutionary game. Energy Econ. 2023, 127, 107117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Almusaed, A.; Yitmen, I.; Almssad, A. Reviewing and integrating aec practices into industry 6.0: Strategies for smart and sustainable future-built environments. Sustainability 2023, 15, 13464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nguyen, T.T.; Levasseur, M. How Does Community-Based Housing Foster Social Participation in Older Adults: Importance of Well-Designed Common Space, Proximity to Resources, Flexible Rules and Policies, and Benevolent Communities. J. Gerontol. Soc. Work. 2023, 66, 103–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mazutis, D.; Sweet, L. The business of accelerating sustainable urban development: A systematic review and synthesis. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 357, 131871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coskun, A.; Metta, J.; Bakırlıoğlu, Y.; Çay, D.; Bachus, K. Make it a circular city: Experiences and challenges from European cities striving for sustainability through promoting circular making. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2022, 185, 106495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Usman, M.; Rofcanin, Y.; Ali, M.; Ogbonnaya, C.; Babalola, M.T. Toward a more sustainable environment: Understanding why and when green training promotes employees’ eco-friendly behaviors outside of work. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2023, 62, 355–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ezell, D.; Bush, V.; Shaner, M.B.; Vitell, S.; Huang, J. Challenging the Good Life: An Institutional Theoretic Investigation of Consumers’ Transformational Process Toward Sustainable Living. J. Bus. Ethics 2023, 183, 783–804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bauwens, T.; Schraven, D.; Drewing, E.; Radtke, J.; Holstenkamp, L.; Gotchev, B.; Yildiz, Ö. Conceptualizing community in energy systems: A systematic review of183 definitions. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 156, 111999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hariram, N.P.; Mekha, K.B.; Suganthan, V.; Sudhakar, K. Sustainalism: An Integrated Socio-Economic-Environmental Model to Address Sustainable Development and Sustainability. Sustainability 2023, 15, 10682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gray, T.; Tracey, D.; Truong, S.; Ward, K. Community gardens as local learning environments in social housing contexts: Participant perceptions of enhanced wellbeing and community connection. Local Environ. 2022, 27, 570–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liang, X.; Lu, T.; Yishake, G. How to promote residents’ use of green space: An empirically grounded agent-based modeling approach. Urban For. Urban Green. 2022, 67, 127435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aruta, G.; Ascione, F.; Bianco, N.; Iovane, T.; Mastellone, M.; Mauro, G.M. Optimizing the energy transition of social housing to renewable nearly zero-energy community: The goal of sustainability. Energy Build. 2023, 282, 112798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chauhan, E. Residents’ motivations to participate in decision-making for cultural heritage tourism: Case study of New Delhi. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mao, Y.; Peng, C.; Liang, Y.; Yuan, G.; Ma, J.; Bonaiuto, M. The relationship between perceived residential environment quality (PREQ) and community identity: Flow and social capital as mediators. Soc. Indic. Res. 2022, 163, 771–797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kan, Z.; Kwan, M.P.; Ng, M.K.; Tieben, H. The impacts of housing characteristics and built-environment features on mental health. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 5143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Si, W.; Jiang, C.; Meng, L. The Relationship between Environmental Awareness, Habitat Quality, and Community Residents’ Pro-Environmental Behavior—Mediated Effects Model Analysis Based on Social Capital. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 13253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liu, G.; Ye, K.; Tan, Y.; Huang, Z.; Li, X. Factors influencing homeowners’ housing renovation decision-making: Towards a holistic understanding. Energy Build. 2022, 254, 111568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agusdinata, D.B. The role of universities in SDGs solution co-creation and implementation: A human-centered design and shared-action learning process. Sustain. Sci. 2022, 17, 1589–1604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lespagnard, M.; Galle, W.; De Temmerman, N. Visualizing Equitable Housing: A Prototype for a Framework. Sustainability 2023, 15, 4110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choi, S.; Kazakova, A.; Choi, K.; Choi, Y.S.; Kim, I. Effects of Residents’ Empowerment on Citizenship Behavior and Support for Convention Development: Moderation of Innovativeness. Sustainability 2023, 15, 13352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smol, M. Is the green deal a global strategy? Revision of the green deal definitions, strategies and importance in post-COVID recovery plans in various regions of the world. Energy Policy 2022, 169, 113152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adnan, N. Powering up minds: Exploring consumer responses to home energy efficiency. Energy Rep. 2024, 11, 2316–2332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abhijith, K.V.; Kumar, P.; Omidvarborna, H.; Emygdio, A.P.M.; McCallan, B.; Carpenter-Lomax, D. Improving air pollution awareness of the general public through citizen science approach. Sustain. Horiz. 2024, 10, 100086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manandhar, R.; Kim, J.H.; Kim, J.T. Environmental, Social and Economic Sustainability of Bamboo and Bamboo-Based Construction Materials in Buildings. J. Asian Archit. Build. Eng. 2019, 18, 49–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, Z.; Li, Y. Analysis of the Decisive Factors of Government Attracting Tourists in Public Management from the Perspective of Environmental Protection. Probl. Ekorozw. 2024, 19, 285–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gautam, V.; Bhalla, S. Exploring the relationships among tourism involvement, residents’ empowerment, quality of life and their support for sustainable tourism development. J. Clean. Prod. 2024, 434, 139770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kusumah, E.P. Sustainable tourism concept: Tourist satisfaction and destination loyalty. Int. J. Tour. Cities 2024, 10, 166–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Robina-Ramírez, R.; Roets, A.O. Green transitions for changing behaviour through environmental community engagement at religious schools. J. Sociol. Theory Relig. 2024, 16, 233–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Komalasari, R. Biospheric Reverie: Unraveling Indoor Air Quality through Bio-Inspired Textiles, Awareness, and Decision-Making. In Intelligent Decision Making Through Bio-Inspired Optimization; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2024; pp. 227–244. [Google Scholar]
- Nix, E.; Ibbetson, A.; Zhou, K.; Davies, M.; Wilkinson, P.; Ludolph, R.; Pineo, H. Getting to effective housing policy for health: A thematic synthesis of policy development and implementation. Cities Health 2024, 8, 486–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Demographic Variable | Number Count | Frequency |
---|---|---|
- Gender | ||
Male | 386 | 52% |
Female | 356 | 48% |
- Age Group | ||
- >18–25 years | 148 | 20% |
- 26–33 years | 268 | 36% |
- 34–41 years | 192 | 26% |
- >41 years | 134 | 18% |
- Academic Level | ||
Undergraduate | 215 | 29% |
Graduate | 527 | 71% |
- Income Level | ||
Below CNY 100,000 per year | 89 | 12% |
CNY 100,000 to CNY 300,000 per year | 198 | 27% |
CNY 300,000 to CNY 600,000 per year | 297 | 40% |
More than CNY 600,000 per year | 158 | 21% |
- Occupation | ||
Information Technology (IT) and Software Professionals | 287 | 39% |
Healthcare and Medical Professionals | 195 | 26% |
Business and Finance Executives | 260 | 35% |
- Length of Residency | ||
<1 year | 142 | 19% |
1 to 5 year | 298 | 40% |
>5 years | 302 | 41% |
Variables | Mean | Std. Dev. | Chronbach’s Alpha (α) |
---|---|---|---|
Customer Satisfaction | 3.92 | 0.85 | 0.82 |
Energy Efficiency | 4.15 | 0.72 | 0.87 |
Indoor Air Quality | 3.98 | 0.78 | 0.82 |
Overall Design Satisfaction | 4.05 | 0.75 | 0.88 |
Eco-friendly Community Initiatives | 4.02 | 0.79 | 0.84 |
Sense of Community | 3.90 | 0.83 | 0.79 |
Environmental Consciousness | 4.20 | 0.68 | 0.91 |
Variables | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Customer Satisfaction | 1 | ||||||
2. Energy Efficiency | 0.75 | 1 | |||||
3. Indoor Air Quality | 0.80 | 0.60 | 1 | ||||
4. Overall Design Satisfaction | 0.70 | 0.70 | 0.75 | 1 | |||
5. Eco-friendly Community Initiatives | 0.65 | 0.45 | 0.55 | 0.60 | 1 | ||
6. Sense of Community | 0.60 | 0.40 | 0.50 | 0.55 | 0.75 | 1 | |
7. Environmental Consciousness | 0.85 | 0.55 | 0.70 | 0.80 | 0.65 | 0.60 | 1 |
Constructs | Indicator Constructs | Factor Loadings | CR | CA | AVE | CFI | RMSEA |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Customer Satisfaction (CS) | CS1 | 0.8 | 0.85 | 0.82 | 0.63 | 0.92 | 0.07 |
CS2 | 0.75 | ||||||
CS3 | 0.85 | ||||||
CS4 | 0.78 | ||||||
CS5 | 0.82 | ||||||
Energy Efficiency (EEF) | EEF1 | 0.88 | 0.89 | 0.87 | 0.67 | 0.94 | 0.06 |
EEF2 | 0.82 | ||||||
EEF3 | 0.9 | ||||||
EEF4 | 0.85 | ||||||
EEF5 | 0.87 | ||||||
Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) | IAQ1 | 0.75 | 0.8 | 0.78 | 0.57 | 0.91 | 0.08 |
IAQ2 | 0.78 | ||||||
IAQ3 | 0.80 | ||||||
IAQ4 | 0.76 | ||||||
IAQ5 | 0.79 | ||||||
Overall Design Satisfaction (ODS) | ODS1 | 0.82 | 0.87 | 0.84 | 0.62 | 0.93 | 0.07 |
ODS2 | 0.85 | ||||||
ODS3 | 0.80 | ||||||
ODS4 | 0.88 | ||||||
ODS5 | 0.86 | ||||||
Eco-friendly Community Initiatives (ECI) | ECI1 | 0.75 | 0.79 | 0.76 | 0.55 | 0.9 | 0.09 |
ECI2 | 0.80 | ||||||
ECI3 | 0.78 | ||||||
ECI4 | 0.82 | ||||||
ECI5 | 0.79 | ||||||
Sense of Community (SC) | SC1 | 0.85 | 0.88 | 0.86 | 0.66 | 0.92 | 0.08 |
SC2 | 0.88 | ||||||
SC3 | 0.90 | ||||||
SC4 | 0.86 | ||||||
SC5 | 0.82 | ||||||
Environmental Consciousness (ECO) | ECO1 | 0.90 | 0.91 | 0.89 | 0.70 | 0.95 | 0.05 |
ECO2 | 0.85 | ||||||
ECO3 | 0.88 | ||||||
ECO4 | 0.86 | ||||||
ECO5 | 0.82 |
Demographic Variable | F-Value | p-Value | Significance |
---|---|---|---|
Age | 4.25 | 0.01 | Significant |
Income Level | 5.6 | <0.001 | Significant |
Length of Residency | 2.15 | 0.1 | Not Significant |
Hypotheses | Path | Estimate | Std. Err. | p-Value | Decision |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1 | EEF → CS | 0.45 | 0.07 | 0.001 | Accept |
H1 | IAQ → CS | 0.28 | 0.06 | 0.001 | Accept |
H1 | ODS → CS | 0.36 | 0.08 | 0.001 | Accept |
H1 | ECI → CS | 0.19 | 0.05 | 0.003 | Accept |
H2 | SC → EEF | 0.15 | 0.04 | 0.011 | Accept |
H3 | ECO → CS | 0.25 | 0.09 | 0.008 | Accept |
Model | Predictor and Output Variable | Estimate | Std. Error | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 (Mediator) | SC & CS | 0.20 | 0.05 | 0.001 |
2 (Moderator) | EC & CS | 0.15 | 0.04 | 0.004 |
3 (Mediation andModeration Effect) | SC, EC, & CS | 0.18 | 0.03 | 0.000 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wang, D.; Zhang, Y.; Ismail, R.; Shafiei, M.W.M.; Khoo, T.J. Resident Satisfaction in Eco-Friendly Housing: Informing Sustainable Decision-Making in Urban Development. Buildings 2025, 15, 1966. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15121966
Wang D, Zhang Y, Ismail R, Shafiei MWM, Khoo TJ. Resident Satisfaction in Eco-Friendly Housing: Informing Sustainable Decision-Making in Urban Development. Buildings. 2025; 15(12):1966. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15121966
Chicago/Turabian StyleWang, Dan, Yunbo Zhang, Radzi Ismail, Mohd Wira Mohd Shafiei, and Terh Jing Khoo. 2025. "Resident Satisfaction in Eco-Friendly Housing: Informing Sustainable Decision-Making in Urban Development" Buildings 15, no. 12: 1966. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15121966
APA StyleWang, D., Zhang, Y., Ismail, R., Shafiei, M. W. M., & Khoo, T. J. (2025). Resident Satisfaction in Eco-Friendly Housing: Informing Sustainable Decision-Making in Urban Development. Buildings, 15(12), 1966. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15121966