Findings
As discussed in the ‘ Background ’ part, factors that influence the choice of living space are: travel time to the next region- and nationwide centre with public and individual transportation, the tranquility and the image of a municipality. The importance of these factors varies among different lifestyle groups, which shows in the spatial distribution of the index in the different maps.
The “Diversity map” shows a rather low level of diversity in the canton of Zurich regarding the LSQI. All municipalities with a mean index of 5 are located on the edge of the canton of Zurich, with one exception (Dättlikon). These municipalities are all characterized by a rural environment, suggesting that tranquility plays an important role in the choice of living space for all groups. The largest cluster of municipalities with a high and very high index can be found in the Northeast between Schaffhausen and Winterthur. These municipalities not only offer a tranquil environment but also have a low percentage of unemployed citizens. Additionally, these municipalities are situated near the city of Winterthur, which is a center of regional significance and can be easily accessed with both individual and public transportation. Urban areas like Zurich and Schlieren are preferred by user groups D, G, and H. The other user groups have a medium or lower index value in these areas. The municipalities around Hochfelden in the Northwest perform poorly in the mean index. This might be due to airplane noise that is significant in this area because of the Zurich Airport and because of the higher rate in unemployed citizens.
Policy makers and spatial planners can use the map to develop measures to balance out the mean index for all municipalities. This way, more diverse living spaces can be achieved by making them attractive for more user groups. The indications found in the map suggest that prioritising noise prevention measures in urban areas is crucial to enhance diversity, as it is an important aspect for all lifestyle groups. This could result in a greater diversity in urban areas like Zurich and Schlieren, making them more attractive to user groups A, B, C, E, F, and I. Improving areas with a lower index in terms of travel time to the nearest regional and national centres of significance is also an important aspect to consider. It is recommended to prioritise the provision of faster public transportation connections rather than investing in more individual transportation options. Public transportation produces less noise compared to individual transportation, aligning with the goal of enhancing tranquility in urban areas.
Finally, it can be said that the LSQI provides a general overview about the attractivity of municipalities in the canton of Zurich for different groups that can be used to get closer to the Goal 11 of the SDGs. It shows clear differences between user groups and spatial units. However, there are some important limitations to the index that have to be considered.
Limitations
One limitation of the representation of the different lifestyle groups is that the weights that were used are very generalised and can’t account for the large individual differences among all individuals. Furthermore, only the lifestyle and living situation were considered. Factors like the proximity of friends and family were not included. The results are also not fully applicable to reality because the financial aspects were not considered, which is one of the biggest factors influencing the decision of choosing a living space. Lastly, the definition of lifestyle was greatly influenced by political orientation, even though not all people with the same political orientation prefer the same lifestyle.