This study intends to elaborate on the urban population’s capability to achieve a good quality of life (QoL) in an urban environment that is frequently changing and increasingly becoming complex. In order to achieve this objective, a literature reviews was initiated for examining the debate on several theories related to assessing the QoL such as the Homeostatic Assessment, Urbanism and Social Judgement Theory. This study had discussed the need for combining the capability and urban ecosystem approaches to determine the actual ability of the UV population to achieve an appreciable QoL through self and social readiness as well as environmental adaptation. The three indicators play a very important role in exposing the lifestyle experienced by the urban village (UV) population so that it remains that way in the urban development context, which is becoming more complex and ever changing.
Shah, A. H. H. (2004). Membentuk pesekitaran untuk kemampanan budaya setempat. Dlm. Jamaluddin Md Jahi, Mohd jailani Mohd Nor, Kadir Arifin & Azahan Awang (pnyt.). Alam Sekitar Dan Kesejahteraan Masyarakat Malaysia, 29-34. Bangi: Pusat Pengurusan Persekitaran, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Embong, A. R. (2011). Pembandaran dan kehidupan bandar di semenanjung Malaysia. Akademika, 81 (2), 23-39
Alberti, M. (2005). The effects of urban patterns on ecosystem function. International Regional Science Review, 28, 168-192.
Alberti, M. (2010). Maintaining ecological integrity and sustaining ecosystem function in urban areas. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 2, 178–184
Awang, A. (2004). Kearah penilaian kualiti hidup mampan masyarakat bandar di Malaysia. Dlm. Jamaluddin Md Jahi, Mohd Jailani Mohd Nor, Kadir Arifin & Azahan Awang (pnyt.). Alam Sekitar Dan Kesejahteraan Masyarakat Malaysia. Bangi: Pusat Pengurusan Persekitaran, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 244-255.
Bellancaa, N., Biggeria, M., & Marchettab, F. (2011). An extension of the capability approach: Towards a theoryof dis-capability. ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research, 5, 158–176
Bolund, P. & Hunhammarm, S. (1996). Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecologi Economy, 29, 293–301.
Brown, N. (2012). Robert Park and Ernest Burgess: Urban Ecology Studies 1925. Retrieved from http://www.csiss.org/classics/content/26/html.
Carey, D.I. (1993). Development based on carrying capacity. Global Environmental Change, 3, 114-140.
Clark, D.A. (2008). The capability approach: its development, critiques and recent advances. Dlm. Ghosh, R., Gupta, K.R., & Maiti, P. (pynt.). Development Studies, Band, 2. Delhi: Nice Printing Press, 105-127.
Cummins, A.R. (1996). The domains of life satisfaction: an attempt to order chaos. Social Indicators Research, 38, 303–328.
Cummins, A.R. (2000). Objective and subjective quality of life: an interactive model. Social Indicator Research, 52, 55-72
Cummins, A.R. (2005). Caregivers as managers of subjective wellbeing: a homeostatic perspective. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 18 (4), 335–344.
Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Naeem, S., Limburg, K., Paruelo, J., O’Neill, R.V., Raskin, R., Sutton, P., & van den Belt, M. (1997). The value of the world’s ecosystem service and natural capital. Journal of Nature, 387, 253–260.
Darity, W. (2008). Social Judgment Theory. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA.
Dissart, J.C., & Deller, S.C. (2000). Quality of Life in planning literature. Journal of Planning Literature, 15 (1), 135-161.
Ekblad, S. (1993). Stressful environments and their effects on quality of life in third world cities. Journal of Environment and Urbanization, 5 (2), 125-134.
Gasper, D., & Staveren, I.V. (2003). Development as freedom - and as what else?. Feminist Economics, 9 (2/3), 137-161.
Gaston, K.J. (2010). Urban Ecology: Ecological Reviews. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gomez-Baggethun, E., De Groot, R., Lomas, P.L., & Montes, C. (2010). The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes. Ecological Economics, 69, 1209-1218.
Griffin, Em. (2012). A First Look at Communication Theory. New York: Mc Graw-Hill.
Holland, B. (2008). Ecology and the limits of justice: establishing capability ceilling in Nussbaum’s capability approach. Journal of Human Development, 9 (3), 401-425.
Jax, K. (2010). Ecosystem Functioning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Katiman Rostam. (2001). Dasar dan Strategi Petempatan dalam Pembangunan Negara. Bangi: Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Kotan, M. (2010). Freedom or happiness? Agency and subjective well-being in the capability approach. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 39, 369–375.
Kowarik, I. (2011). Novel urban ecosystems, biodiversity, and conservation. Environmental Poll
In-Text Citation: (Samsurijan, Badaruddin, Leng, Singh, & Rahmat, 2018)
To Cite this Article: Samsurijan, M. S., Badaruddin, R. F. R., Leng, K. S., Singh, P. S. J., & Rahmat, S. R. (2018). Urban Village Inhabitant in Malaysia: A Reassessment of the Quality of Life Theory and the Needs to Combine the Capability and Urban Ecosystem Approaches. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 8(9), 1288–1308.
Copyright: © 2018 The Author(s)
Published by Human Resource Management Academic Research Society (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
