Analysis reveals that transportation quality and built environment enhance community life and individual satisfaction, suggesting integrated policies may improve overall well-being.
This study investigates the effects of transportation, specifically public transit, the built environment, and sociodemographic factors on community quality of life (QOL) and individuals’ overall life satisfaction (OLS) in the United States. Using data from the 2017 National Community Livability Survey (NCLS), which includes responses from 994 adults across all 50 states, structural equation modeling (SEM) was applied to examine four latent constructs: the built environment, access to amenities, transportation quality, and support for transit funding. Additional observed variables included perceived importance of public transit, public transit need, ease of travel, and key sociodemographic indicators. Results show that the built environment and transportation quality significantly enhance community QOL but do not have a direct effect on individual OLS. In contrast, support for transit funding has a significant positive effect on individual OLS but not on community QOL. Public transit and walking access to amenities such as parks and recreation facilities, grocery stores, healthcare services, etc., improve both the built environment’s perceptions and community QOL. Interestingly, the perceived importance of public transit negatively influences community QOL, while perceived transit need negatively impacts individual OLS. Ease of travel is the only factor with a significant positive effect on both outcomes. Sociodemographic factors such as gender, age, income, health, education, and race are also found to significantly influence individual life satisfaction. These findings suggest that enhancing perceptions of the built environment, improving transportation quality—particularly public and active transit—and ensuring ease of travel can contribute to improved quality of life. Policies that integrate transportation planning with broader livability and well-being goals may offer more inclusive benefits at both the community and individual levels.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Khan et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: