1. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT Assessment of Perceptual and Objective Quality of Life Indicators in Calexico- Mexicali: Toward a Longitudinal Database for the U.S.- Mexican Border Region Subhrajit Guhathakurta David Pijawka Edward Sadalla Arizona State University Sergio Pena University of Texas at El Paso Kimberly Collins San Diego State University Judith Garcia Arturo Ranfla Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Southwest Consortium of Environmental Research and Policy Technical Conference Tucson, Arizona December 13, 2006

2. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT Project Goals and Rationale  Goals  Assist borderland decision-makers in finding ways to maintain a satisfactory quality of life and a healthy, sustainable natural environment  Provide critical analysis, currently unavailable, on objective and subjective indicators of quality of life (QoL) at several twin-city border communities on a periodic basis  Rationale  An accessible archive of QoL data could be used to guide policy and business decisions that would have a positive impact on sustainable development in the border region

3. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT Objectives  Monitor both objective and subjective QoL indicators  Collect longitudinal data (long-term monitoring)  Provide intuitive and real-time access to this data through web interfaces for decision-makers and scholars  Periodically present timely, intelligent analysis of trends

4. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT Accomplishments to Date  Compiled baseline objective data on the Calexico- Mexicali Region (2004-05); El Paso-Juarez (2005- 06); San Luis-Somerton (2006)  Surveyed a representative sample of households in four twin-city regions on U.S.-Mexico border on chosen quality of life indicators  Mexicali-Calexico (2005-06)  El-Paso-Juarez (2006-07)  San Luis, Rio Colorado-San Luis and Somerton, AZ (2006-07)  San Diego-Tijuana (San Diego completed 2006; Tijuana pending)  Results have been reported in SCERP report (several presentations and papers are in process)  Web site http://bop.caed.asu.edu established to provide data, results and analysishttp://bop.caed.asu.edu

5. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT Chosen QoL Indicators  Community Assets  Education  Economy, Income, and Jobs  Public Safety  Housing  Environment  Transportation  Public Services  Health Care  Emotional Well Being

6. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT

7. SCHEMATIC OF THE RESEARCH PROGRAM

8. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT HIGHLIGHTS OF El PASO-JUAREZ STUDY

9. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT Sample Size for El Paso-Juarez  Total Households in 2000 = 1,783,097  Juarez = 1,218,817; El Paso = 564,280  Total sample = 613 ( > required 384 for 5% significance)  Juarez sample = 417  El Paso sample = 196  All face-to-face interviews

10. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT Overall Satisfaction El Paso 2006Juarez 2006

11. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT ECONOMY Juarez El Paso Economic Profile for El Paso and Juarez El PasoJuarez Economic 1990200019902000 Annual median household income*$23,460.00$32,124.00$ 9,369.00 Annual per capita money income*$ 9,603.00$14,388.00 $ 3,030$ 5,540 Percent of families below poverty21.20%19.1%n/a

12. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT PUBLIC FINANCE Juarez El Paso Public Finance El Paso Juarez Local government revenue per capita $390.00 (2000) $110.00 (1994) $120.00 (2002) Percent of local government budget due to federal revenues 1.6%* 19.0% 29.0% Source: U.S. Census, 1990 and 2000 and INEGI, Censo 1990 and 2000. INEGI Estadistica de Ingreso y Egresos Municipales 1994, 2002. *Intergovernmental revenue (http://www.elpasotexas.gov/financial_services/_documents/FY%2005%20CAFR.pdf)

13. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT El Paso Juarez Similarities and Differences %EL PASO JUAREZ% LowMH ≠ QoL Attributes ≠ LowMH Community Assets 42571 Rating of overall quality of life 93457 51580 Satisfaction with place of residence 82567 41581 Is it a good place to rear children? 243442 0.52475.5 Are people friendly? 103456

14. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT El Paso Juarez Similarities and Differences EL PASO % JUAREZ% LowMH ≠ QoL attributes ≠ LowMH Economics 53659 Overall economic situation 84349 44650 Desired economic situation 94942 33166 Economic expectations 63064 195130 Availability of employment 103258 68311 Changes in cost of living 73261

15. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT El Paso Juarez Similarities and Differences EL PASO % JUAREZ % LowMH ≠ QoL Attributes ≠ LowMH Public Safety 121870 Crime in neighborhoods 5423 152065 Safety at night 472528 112663 Trust in local police 562915

16. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT El Paso Juarez Similarities and Differences % EL PASO JUAREZ% LowMH ≠ QoL Attributes ≠ LowMH Environm ent 164539 Air quality 424018 521929 Effect of air quality on health 6219 102664 Quality of drinking water 353728 451243 Effect of drinking water on health 551926 212851 Quality of parks & recreation 452926

17. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT OPPOSITE SOME DIFFERENCES SIMILAR EL PASO JUAREZ ≠ SIMILARITIES ≠ Community Assets Education Economics Public Safety Housing SOME DIFFERENCES SIMILAR

18. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT SIMILAR OPPOSITE EL PASO JUAREZ ≠ SIMILITUD ≠ Environment Transportation Public Services Health Care OPPOSITE

19. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT HIGHLIGHTS OF San Luis, Rio Colorado- San Luis, AZ and Somerton STUDY

20. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT Sample Size for El Paso-Juarez  Total Households in 2000 = 167,603  Somerton & San Luis, AZ = 22,597; San Luis, RC = 145,006  Total sample = 745 ( > required 384 for 5% significance)  Somerton & San Luis, AZ sample = 347  San Luis, RC sample = 398  All face-to-face interviews

21. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT San Luis Somerton Similarities and Differences SAN LUIS % SOMERTON % LowMH ≠ ATTRIBUTES of QoL ≠ LowMH 31582 Rating of overall quality of life 42175 4690 Satisfaction with place of residence 41284 3988 Is it a good place to rear children? 41383 31285 Are people friendly? 82171

22. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT San Luis Somerton Similarities and Differences % SAN LUIS SOMERTON % Education LowMH ≠ ATTRIBUTES of QoL ≠ LowMH 12673 Quality of high schools 132166 21286 Quality of primary schools 101872

23. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT SIMILAR OPPOSITE SOME DIFFERENCES SAN LUIS SOMERTON ≠ SIMILARITIES ≠ Community Assets Education Economics Public Safety Housing OPPOSITE SIMILAR

24. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT SIMILAR SOME DIFFERENCE SAN LUIS SOMERTON ≠ SIMILARITIES ≠ Environment Transportation Public Services Health Care OPPOSITE

25. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT SUMMARY HIGHLIGHTS  Global indices routinely indicate high levels of satisfaction with QoL  In areas of economic situation and prospects and local government services, cities on the U.S. side score fare better than their counterparts in the Mexican side  Crime is especially noted in the Mexican side as a serious issue in most surveys  People on both sides of the border have complaints about transportation  In the San Luis-Somerton-San Luis, RC survey although the overall Qol indicators were similar people in San Luis RC indicated that their life would be better on the other side of the border (while Yuma residents felt life would be worse on the other side of the border)

26. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT FUTURE OUTLOOK  Continue to develop the longitudinal data base for the entire border region (twin-city urban communities)  Next phase: Expand longitudinal depth for San Diego-Tijuana urban twin-city regions (first longitudinal data) and Calexico-Mexicali (2007-08)  Establish relationships with and feedback mechanisms from local officials and citizen groups, policy organizations and environmental agencies  Develop decision tools to inform policies with the help of QoL indicators  Reconcile objective and subjective indicators

27. B ORDER O BSERVATORY P ROJECT http://bop.caed.asu.edu For much more Information go to: COMMENTS? QUESTIONS?