1. Planning Quality of Life in Urban-Rural Regions – Seven Approaches in the Baltic Sea Region Petri Kahila, Stefanie Lange & Peter Schmitt Nordregio Managing the Urban Rural Interference Copenhagen October Session topic: (7) Locally adapted strategies for rural-urban regions: from understanding of issues to finding of solutions

2. Interest to Quality of Life
Motivated much research during last decades
Taken a strong position on various policy agendas
Inevitable connection to sustainability, equity and social cohesion
People’s interest besides wealth to everyday environment became more important than wealth
Twofold meaning of quality of life
Provided opportunities to meet human needs
Quality of life become “proper” goal of public policy

3. What is Quality of Life?
Generally relates to overall well-being in society
People’s possibilities to achieve their goals and to choose their ideal lifestyle
Quality of life has three characteristics
QL is a micro concept, i.e. focuses on individual life situation and perception
QL is multi-faceted concept, i.e. comprises multiple life domains and relationships between them
QL is subjective concept, i.e. includes individual goals and orientations as objective perceptions are relatedto living conditions

4. Quality of Life in Planning
There is a contradiction between macro-level and micro-level
Requirement to pay closer attention to quality of life
Managing quality of life in the frameworks of urban- rural interaction have been rather limited
However, wide range of objectives and strategies include approaches to quality of life
But, individual aspects tend to be drowned under broader headings

5. Quality of Life in Urban-Rural Interference
(II) Quality of life
(IV) Quality of life
Urban
Rural
(I) Quality of life
(III) Quality of life
Individual preferences

6. Approach in the NEW BRIDGES-project
Conceptualisation of the quality of life approach
Positioning macro (planning) level and micro (individual) level
Meaningful definitions and approaches of quality of life in various urban-rural contexts
Progressive approaches to quality of life cannot be based on hierarchical policy initiatives
If individuals and stakeholders involved regions are able to generate own approach to quality of life

8. Priority Challenges
Long-term provision of private and public (commercial) services
Provision of well-functioning public transport connecting urban-rural
Improved management, integrated planning, cooperation and communication
Conservation of natural and cultural landscape
Social issues (e.g. Crime, alcohol)
Better understanding of quality of life

9. Reasoning Declining population, especially in rural areas
Increasing number of elderly (less mobile) people
Decreasing provision of local services in rural areas
Non-existing or ineffective (planning) structures and networks between city and surrounding areas
Lack of awareness regarding social demands among authority members
Lack of cooperation/communication with inhabitants on quality of life related issues

10. Responses Individual perspective included
Cross sectoral involvement of local stakeholders
New partnerships
Implementation of Pilot Actions in the city-regions
Integration into ongoing decision making processes and strategies

11. Discussion
Common approaches to quality of life are lacking in urban-rural interference
There is a need for a common management approach involving urban and rural areas
Involvement phase confirm necessity to engage individual aspects and preferences
Important is to distinguish lifestyle choices that actually enhance quality of life
Process will not only create opportunities but also reduce contraints

12. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION
Questions & Comments
Petri Kahila