4.2 Article

Housing and subjective well-being of older adults in Europe

Journal

JOURNAL OF HOUSING AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT
Volume 32, Issue 3, Pages 533-558

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10901-016-9526-1

Keywords

Well-being; Ageing; Housing; Cross-national research; Housing tenure; Housing quality

Funding

  1. European Commission [QLK6-CT-2001-00360]
  2. 6th Framework Programme [SHARE-I3, RII-CT-2006-062193, CIT5-CT-2005-028857, CIT4-CT-2006-028812]
  3. US National Institute on Aging [U01 AG09740-13S2, P01 AG005842, P01 AG08291, P30 AG12815, R21 AG025169, Y1-AG-4553-01, IAG BSR06-11, OGHA 04-064]
  4. German Ministry of Education and Research
  5. Interreg [SHARE] Funding Source: Interreg

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Housing quality is known to be related to subjective well-being (SWB), but much less is known how this relationship varies with national contexts. This study addresses the association between housing tenure and housing quality on the one hand and the SWB of older Europeans on the other, given the differences in housing markets across Europe. Data from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe were used, and linear regression models of SWB were estimated for 16 European countries. The findings indicate that being a renter is negatively related to SWB, while having a large house is positively associated with it. The negative effect of being a renter on SWB is small in several countries with accessible and well-regulated rental markets. Moreover, the difference in SWB between older people with a small and a large dwelling is somewhat smaller in countries with a high level of housing quality than in countries with lower housing quality. For each of our housing indicators, however, we also found countries for which the findings deviated from the general pattern. The findings imply that housing-market characteristics matter to how housing relates to SWB and, therefore, that housing-market interventions might affect this relationship.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available