Habitat International 105 (2020) 102266

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Habitat International
journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/habitatint

An improved consumer decision model for rural residential development: A

theoretical framework and empirical evidence from China
Ting Lou a, b, Wei Wang a, b, Yujie Lu c, d, e, *, Jianzhuang Xiao c, d, Xuwen Xiao d, f
a
State Key Laboratory of Disaster Reduction in Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200092, China
b
Department of Structural Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200092, China
c
Key Laboratory of Performance Evolution and Control for Engineering Structures of Ministry of Education, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200092, China
d
Department of Structural Engineering, College of Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200092, China
e
Shanghai Institute of Intelligent Science and Technology, Tongji University, 200092, China
f
China State Construction Engineering Corporation, Beijing, 100029, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: China has a considerable demand for the improvement of the rural residential environment. However, limited
Consumer decision model knowledge of the rural situation and insufficient consideration of residents’ demands impede development. To
Demand hierarchy improve the current living environment, it is essential to understand the current conditions of rural housings and
Path model
the decision-making process of residents on new residential construction. This study established an improved
Residential construction
Consumer Decision Model (CDM) that describes the decision-making process of rural residents on residential
Rural development
construction. Based on the CDM model, a questionnaire survey was conducted to understand the rural residential
situation and the expectations of residents on new construction. An in-depth analysis was carried out by logistic
regression to develop the impact paths of crucial factors that affect residential construction cost and duration. A
three-tier demand hierarchy was then established to depict the relationship between residents’ demands and
preferred decision. Policy suggestions for the improvement of the living environment in rural areas were also
proposed at the end of the study. The result extends the CDM theory to the application of credence goods (e.g.,
rural residences) and also provides an impact path model to understand the influencing mechanism in deter­
mining rural residential decisions on new construction.

1. Introduction
Rural resources, industries, and economic structures have been
gradually integrated into a global economy in globalization (Woods,
2013), while inevitably challenges also arise in such a broader structural
trend (Markey, Halseth, & Manson, 2008). There are problems in rural
areas such as deterioration of income inequality (Chen, Wang, Wen,
Fang, & Song, 2016) and poor digital connectivity (Salemink, Strijker, &
Bosworth, 2017), but beyond that, there are two major development
characteristics. First, the imbalanced allocation of development re­
sources (e.g., public goods and capital) between rural and urban areas
results that rural self-development ability is far from good (Long, Tu, Ge,
Li, & Liu, 2016). Second, with a migration of the highly educated
younger generation to urban areas, as well as few elderly residents in
rural areas have received a formal education, a talent shortage and a
lack of driving force of innovation impede rural development (Naldi,
Nilsson, Westlund, & Wixe, 2015). Problems of rural development are
more acute in developing countries, such as India (Fan, Hazell, & Thorat,
2000), Brazil (Branca et al., 2013), and Turkey (Yılmaz, Daşdemir,
Atmiş, & Lise, 2010). As one of the most populous countries in the world,
China is predicted to have 600 million rural population by 2030, and
rural areas will still be the primary habitation (Wang et al., 2016).
Therefore, rural development is in considerable demand and is
becoming a national strategy in China.
At the present stage, rural China is mainly faced with three problems.
First, limited knowledge of rural situation leads to insufficient devel­
opment planning. The understanding of the current rural situation does
not keep up with the dramatic changes during rapid development (Li,

* Corresponding author. Room 319A, Department of Structural Engineering, College of Civil Engineering, Tongji University, 1239 Siping Road, Shanghai, 200092,
China.
E-mail addresses: tinglou@tongji.edu.cn (T. Lou), weiwang@tongji.edu.cn (W. Wang), lu6@tongji.edu.cn (Y. Lu), jzx@tongji.edu.cn (J. Xiao), 18866@tongji.edu.
cn (X. Xiao).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2020.102266
Received 28 October 2019; Received in revised form 6 September 2020; Accepted 29 September 2020
Available online 12 October 2020
0197-3975/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
T. Lou et al.
Long, & Liu, 2015). It leads to a lack of scientific planning and proper
configuration (Long, Liu, Wu, & Dong, 2009), reflecting in poor in­
frastructures as well as insufficient public services (Manthorpe, Malin, &
Stubbs, 2004). Second, pollution in rural areas severely affects the
health and life quality of residents. Biomass and coal combustion are two
major threats to the health of residents for the lack of effective exhaust
(Yang, Jiang, Yang, & Shan, 2010), and inadequate waste treatment
results in a dirty living environment (Long et al., 2009). Third, resi­
dential performance in rural areas is not satisfying. For instance, poor
thermal performance of external walls is the most common problems to
rural housings, defective insulation results in that indoor temperature is
difficult to reach a comfortable level (Yang et al., 2010) and excessive
energy consumption in heating is required (He, Yang, & Ye, 2014).
To solve the problems mentioned above, the Chinese government has
stepped up efforts to build new countryside (Li et al., 2015), such as
providing public investments to build infrastructure in poor rural areas
(Park & Wang, 2010) and replacing traditional energy with renewable
for pollution abatement (Gan & Yu, 2008). Besides, as an essential
component of rural development, residential construction and renewal
have gained increasing attention. Previous studies mainly focused on
residential development in urban areas. For instance, determinants of
residential satisfaction and relocation intention were examined in
different types of urban neighborhoods in Guangzhou, China (Wang, He,
Webster, & Zhang, 2019). For another, critical barriers to inner-city old
residential neighborhood renewal were identified and their interactive
mechanism was unraveled (Zhu, Li, & Jiang, 2020). However, residen­
tial construction in rural areas was differentiated from urban issues due
to unequal property, resource, and development rights (Yu et al., 2015),
so development scheme and practical policies that specific to rural areas
are in urgent need (Lu et al., 2020).
Moreover, rural residents act as the dominant consumers of rural
housings, whose deep involvement is indispensable for the success of
residential construction (Fang, Shi, & Niu, 2016). Policy development
should be based on a thorough understanding of residents’ living
experience and sufficient consideration of their heterogeneous demands.
Otherwise, even though the economic strength and living conditions of
rural communities are improved, the residents may suffer from a pro­
found sense of loss and placelessness (Cook, Martin, Yearns, & Dam­
horst, 2007). Therefore, more emphasis has been put on “human
orientation” to promote policies from the will of the people (Ma, Cheng,
& Qi, 2018). Their requirements are gaining much more attention
(Wang et al., 2016).
This study mainly aims to understand the decision-making process of
rural people on residential construction so as to improve the living
environment in rural areas. Specific research objectives mainly include
1) to establish a decision-making framework for rural residential con­
struction, 2) to explore crucial factors and their interactive effects on
construction cost and duration, and 3) to provide policies for the
improvement of the rural residential environment. The findings of this
study unveil the influencing path that links residents’ individual char­
acteristics and their hierarchical demands with preferred choices for the
decision of the rural residence.
This study is structured as follows. An extensive literature review
was provided in Section 2. The research framework was established in
Section 3, followed by data collection by a questionnaire survey and
statistical analysis in Section 4. The results were presented in Section 5.
Discussion about corresponding effects and practical suggestions for
rural housing development were annotated in Section 6. A summary of
the study and the direction for future research were concluded in Section
7.
2. Literature review
2.1. Status quo of rural settlements
The environment of settlements in rural areas has been improved
2
Habitat International 105 (2020) 102266
over the past decades, but it is still faced with several challenges at the
present stage. First, the functionality of rural communities is limited.
The living needs of residents are not guaranteed because of the poor
infrastructures, insufficient services, and underdeveloped transportation
in rural areas (Manthorpe et al., 2004). Second, forms of rural residences
are homogenized. They are similar in appearance as well as internal
conditions so that the personalized needs of residents cannot be well
considered (Wang et al., 2016). Third, the effects of existing problems
have been further amplified with the trend of an aging population
(Winterton & Warburton, 2012). Due to the migration of young adults to
urban areas, while older adults move to rural areas in retirement (Kin­
sella, 2001), the proportion of the elderly in rural areas is higher than
that in urban. As a result, more needs of the elderly in rural areas should
be considered (Milbourne, 2012), such as their growing demands for
medical services and special requirements for assisted living facilities.
Based on the problems mentioned above, this study focuses on the
improvement of indoor functionality, as well as the personalized design
of the residential construction considering various indicators such as age
and income.
The policy implementation is crucial for the improvement of rural
settlements environment (Chambers, 2014), which requires a joint effort
of the government and the people. The government is often considered
as the centerpiece for the initiation, implementation, and supervision of
policies. Especially in rural communities, the local government is of
great importance to make the life of residents more manageable, such as
community planning and infrastructure maintenance (Douglas, 2005).
Besides, to obtain broad support and effectively guide the local devel­
opment, policies proposed by the government require full respect for the
intention of the rural residents and an in-depth understanding of their
decision-making mechanism.
2.2. Cognitive models of consumer behavior
Cognitive models are commonly used to explain consumer behavior
based on a comprehensive analysis of the mental process (Giere, 1988).
There are two major types of cognitive models, which are analytical
models and prescriptive models (Bray, 2008). Analytical models provide
a framework of all factors that are possible to affect the outcomes of
consumer behavior (Bray, 2008), while prescriptive models specify
certain causes to obtain a particular effect (Moital, 2006). In compari­
son, analytical models are more suitable for this study which aims to
explore potential factors affecting the decision-making of residential
construction rather than to confirm an existing result.
Two typical analytical models are the Theory of Buyer Behavior
(TBB) and the Consumer Decision Model (CDM). The TBB (Howard &
Sheth, 1969, p. 63) deals with various purchasing scenarios including
commercial purchases, where the purchaser may not be the product user
(Loudon & Della Bitta, 1993). The CDM (Nicosia, 1966) evaluates fac­
tors that affect the consumer’s pre-decision attitude, decision-making
process, and post-decision feedback. Both the TBB and CDM have
many similar elements, but the structural arrangements differ somewhat
(Bray, 2008). Compared with the TBB, the CDM has a more detailed
discussion on the post-consumption evaluation following the purchase
decision, so it forms a more continuous decision-making process on a
product (Moital, 2006). Since the post-occupancy evaluation of resi­
dence has a significant impact on the new residential purchase in a
continuous process, the CDM is more suitable for analysis in this study.
Since the first proposal, the CDM has experienced several times of
adjustments to become more realistic and flexible, such as the modifi­
cation to allow the decision-making process to be halted midway (Engel,
Kollat, & Blackwell, 1968). It is also suggested to be adjusted by
considering different application contexts and objects rather than using
a generalized model (Erasmus, Boshoff, & Rousseau, 2001). Followed by
that, Milner and Rosenstreich have proposed a specific CDM for
analyzing the decision-making process of credence goods (Milner &
Rosenstreich, 2013). Credence goods are products whose qualities and
T. Lou et al.
values are difficult to be determined after purchase (e.g., housings,
financial services), reflecting an information asymmetry between pro­
ducers and consumers (Darby & Karni, 1973). Since the residence is
considered as a kind of credence goods, this specific CDM can be used as
a prototype for analyzing the decision-making process of rural residents
on new residential construction.
2.3. Factors influencing residential decisions
Previous studies have been conducted to explore factors that affect
the residential decisions of consumers from different perspectives. De­
mographic factors represent the characteristics of consumers and can be
divided into three aspects. First is personal characteristics that include
not only basic indicators such as gender and age, but also individual
environmental awareness. For instance, due to the influential decision of
residents’ awareness, more green housings have been promoted in
recent years (Judge, Warren-Myers, & Paladino, 2019). Second, as the
residential construction is a co-decision of each family, household
characteristics such as family income and the composition of members
should also be investigated (Mirkatouli, Samadi, & Hosseini, 2018).
Third, social characteristics that reflect regional economic performance
(Zeng et al., 2019) such as GDP and expenditure per capita are also
significant to influence residential decisions.
The living experience of residents in current conditions stimulate the
demands for future residential decisions. Structural (Li, Long, & Chen,
2018) and facility conditions (Xu, Gao, & Huo, 2018) compose the living
environment, which has significant impacts on living comfort and
satisfaction of residents (Andargie & Azar, 2019). Thermal, wet, and
ventilated comfort of residents are three important perspectives of living
comfort (Yang, Yan, Xu, & Lam, 2013), and the preference for envi­
ronmental change is taken into account (Han et al., 2007). Satisfaction
with indoor environmental quality (IEQ) such as sound insulation and
air cleanliness is also regarded as an essential indicator to determine the
living experience of residents (USGBC, 2019). To improve the life
quality of residents, the pleasant living conditions should be maintained
while performance deficiencies of housings are expected to be
minimized.
The residents’ requirements for the building performance determine
the design objectives of residential construction, including weather
resistance of housings such as moisture protection (Ibem, Opoko, Ade­
boye, & Amole, 2013) and durability (Hovde, 1998), safety under di­
sasters like earthquake and wind (Lee, Je, & Byun, 2011), and other
objectives such as aesthetics (Ibem et al., 2013) and environmentally
friendly performance (Cheung, Suen, & Cheung, 2004).
Although the research of residential decisions has been conducted
from various perspectives, there are two gaps at the current stage. First,
plenty of studies emphasize the impact of one or several factors on
decision-making, but a comprehensive framework considering the col­
lective effect of these factors is still in lack. Second, the influencing
mechanism from essential factors to residential decisions remains un­
clear and is in need of quantitative analysis. To bridge these gaps, a
unified framework was established in this study for a systematic un­
derstanding to reveal the effects of factors on the residential construc­
tion decisions in rural areas with statistical analysis.
3. Research framework
3.1. Framework establishment
To understand the requirements and intentions of rural residents for
new residential construction, an improved CDM was proposed by
adapting from the framework developed by Milner & Rosenstreich,
2013, where the indicators were redefined in the context of residential
decisions as shown in Fig. 1. The framework consists of three modules,
which are “inputs,” “process,” and “outcomes,” respectively. The “in­
puts” module reflects the contextual conditions of the consumer, which
3
Habitat International 105 (2020) 102266
contain the current residential situation and the consumer characteris­
tics of different perspectives. The “process” module incorporates the
stimulation by the existing conditions and expectations for the future
design. Specifically, it includes the living experience of residents in the
current indoor environment, as well as the performance requirements
for new residential construction. The “outcomes” module consists of
final decisions for new residential construction.
3.2. Measurement of indicators
Combined with the established framework, crucial factors influ­
encing residential decisions mentioned in Section 2.3 were referred and
re-organized as indicators in different modules. “Residential situation”
consists of current indoor conditions and climatic conditions. The
former included structural (Li et al., 2018) and facility conditions (Xu
et al., 2018), which were specified into fifteen measurements, as shown
in Appendix A. The later was represented by two measurements, namely
average temperature and relative humidity outdoors.
“Consumer characteristics” are used to identify each consumer with
associated attributes. It can be measured from social-, family-, and
personal perspectives, reflecting regional (Zeng et al., 2019), household
(Mirkatouli et al., 2018), and individual characteristics (Judge et al.,
2019), which were assessed by two, three, and five specific measure­
ments, respectively.
“Need arousal” refers to whether the consumer realizes the need to
change the residential environment, and can be measured from per­
spectives of living comfort and satisfaction. Thermal, wet, and ventila­
tion comfort (Yang et al., 2013) reflect the sense of residents on indoor
temperature, humidity, and air mobility, respectively. Satisfaction can
be divided into various indexes to measure indoor environmental
quality (USGBC, 2019).
“Evaluation of solutions” represents the requirements of residents for
new residential construction. It can be measured from disaster resistance
(Lee et al., 2011), weather-ability (Hovde, 1998), construction perfor­
mance (Ali, Al-Sulaihi, & Al-Gahtani, 2013), and other indicators such as
architectural aesthetics (Ibem et al., 2013) and energy-saving perfor­
mance (Cheung et al., 2004).
“Decisions” are the final results of the whole procedure. The two
most essential parts of decisions are the identification of the preferred
construction cost (PCC) and the preferred construction duration (PCD).
Once the preference of the cost and duration are decided, the primary
residential design can be initially identified, such as the determination
of construction techniques and corresponding schedules. Moreover, the
choice of new-type structural systems is also considered as a part of the
decisions in this study. To scientifically promote new-type structures in
rural areas (e.g., steel, timber, and bamboo structures), it is necessary to
understand their acceptability among residents.
The remaining indicators of the original model were not included in
this study due to the following reasons. The diversity of “information
sources” was not considered, because rural residents obtain information
mainly from the word of mouth owing to poor digital connectivity
(Salemink et al., 2017). With such limited sources, the “information
utility” tends to be homogenous among rural residents so it was also
excluded. “Criteria development” was also weed out as it represents the
inherent judging process prior to the assessment (Hauser & Wernerfelt,
1990), while this study focused more on the final evaluation that can be
quantified with explicit indicators. Moreover, “purchase” and “post
decision evaluation” were out of scope of this study which mainly fo­
cuses on the stage of decision making.
The indicators considered in this study were measured in three
different ways. The climatic conditions were obtained from local climate
observatories, and social characteristics were gathered from local sta­
tistical yearbooks 2018. All the other indicators in the model were gained
from questionnaires. Essential indicators measured by different ques­
tions are shown in Tables 1–3 in Section 4, and the supplements such as
the meaning of each degree level can be found in the notes below.
T. Lou et al. Habitat International 105 (2020) 102266

Fig. 1. Framework of modified consumer decision-making(adapted from the framework developed by Milner & Rosenstreich, 2013)
Note: “P3” represents the No.3 impact path, and the superscript “C/D” of some paths represents the path for cost/duration. Sub-items in “need arousal” and
“evaluation of solutions” are collectively called “demands” here. Only the paths indicated by solid lines are numbered and analyzed, and dotted lines represent
theoretically logical but should be verified in future research.

4
T. Lou et al. Habitat International 105 (2020) 102266

Table 1 Table 2
Descriptive results (choice questions). Descriptive results (scoring questions).
Classification Proportion Classification Mean Std.
Need Arousal
Economic division
Comfort and preference a
Northeast 15.9%
Thermal comfort 3.06 1.751
East 30.1%
Thermal preference 1.48 0.555
West 23.3%
Wet comfort 3.57 1.236
Central 30.7%
Wet preference 1.89 0.631
Building storey
Ventilated comfort 4.77 1.460
Single-storey 42.0%
Ventilated preference 1.90 0.498
Two-storey 33.6%
Satisfaction b
Three-storey 22.2%
Sound insulation 3.61 0.906
Four-storey 2.20%
Natural lighting 3.69 0.950
Building area
Artificial lighting 3.68 0.823
<50 square meters 4.00%
Temperature 3.21 0.942
50–100 square meters 21.0%
Humidity 3.32 0.856
100–150 square meters 29.5%
Air freshness 3.70 0.872
>150 square meters 45.5%
Air cleanliness 3.57 0.936
Room layout
Evaluation of Solutions c
in average 3.94 chambers,
Disaster resistance
1.73 parlors
Seismic performance 3.96 1.192
Structure type
Wind resistance 3.80 1.234
Stone 1.70%
Fire resistance 4.06 1.112
Adobe 3.41%
Weatherability
Brick concrete 54.6%
Moisture resistance 4.16 0.967
Brick timber 7.39%
Corrosion resistance 3.86 1.140
Reinforced concrete 33.0%
Durability 4.45 0.755
Constructors
Thermal insulation 4.07 1.056
include (not include)
Construction performance
Family members 48.3% (51.7%)
Construction duration 3.88 0.930
Professional teams 44.9% (55.1%)
Construction cost 4.63 0.611
Craftsmen 51.7% (48.3%)
Construction convenience 3.95 1.027
Villagers 22.2% (77.8%)
Others
Preferred construction cost
Aesthetics 4.18 0.973
<500 CNY/sq. m. 9.09%
Use of local materials 3.06 1.437
500–1000 CNY/sq. m. 27.8%
Energy saving 3.93 1.171
1000–2000 CNY/sq. m. 23.3%
Consumer characteristics
2000–3000 CNY/sq. m. 14.2%
Environmental awareness d
3000–4000 CNY/sq. m. 10.8%
Pro-environment habit 3.97 0.813
4000–5000 CNY/sq. m. 10.8%
Pro-environment pay 3.26 0.986
>5000 CNY/sq. m. 3.98%
Positive individual behavior 3.83 0.852
Past construction cost
Decision
<10,000 CNY 3.41%
New construction possibility e
10,000–20,000 CNY 5.11%
1.84 1.091
20,000–50,000 CNY 11.9% f
Choice of new structural system
50,000–100,000 CNY 27.3%
Steel structure 2.02 1.061
100,000–200,000 CNY 22.7%
Timber structure 1.40 0.836
200,000–300,000 CNY 13.6%
Bamboo structure 1.17 0.483
300,000–400,000 CNY 6.25%
Reinforced concrete 3.74 1.227
>400,000 CNY 9.66%
External wall insulation Note: Total sample size N = 176. Std. is the abbreviation of standard deviation.
Considered 18.2% a
Comfort includes seven degrees, among which degree 4 represents Neutral,
Not considered 81.8% while Preference only includes three degrees, among which degree 2 represents
Annual income
Neutral. As to Thermal comfort, degree 1 represents Cold and degree 7 repre­
<5,000 CNY 4.55%
5,000–10,000 CNY 6.25%
sents Hot, while degree 1 of Thermal preference represents warmer and 3 rep­
10,000–20,000 CNY 11.4% resents cooler. As to Wet comfort, degree 1 represents Very dry and degree 7
20,000–50,000 CNY 14.8% represents Very humid, while degree 1 of Wet preference represents more humid
50,000–100,000 CNY 36.4% and 3 represents drier. As to Ventilated comfort, degree 1 represents Very stuffy
100,000–200,000 CNY 19.9% and degree 7 represents Very breezy, while degree 1 of Ventilated preference
>200,000 CNY 6.82% represents breezier and 3 represents stuffier.
Income sources b
Degree 1–5 represents the extent of satisfaction, in ascending order they
include (not include)
represent Very dissatisfied, Dissatisfied, Neutral, Satisfied, Very satisfied,
Planting 39.8% (60.2%)
respectively.
Breeding 14.8% (85.2%) c
Employed working 58.0% (42.0%) Degree 1–5 represents the importance of various factors, in ascending order
Business 31.8% (68.2%) they represent Very unimportant, Unimportant, Neutral, Important, Very
Gender important, respectively.
d
Male 62.5% Degree 1–5 represents the extent of recognition, in ascending order they
Female 37.5% represent Strongly disagree, Disagree, Neutral, Agree, Strongly agree, respec­
Preferred construction duration tively. Pro-environment habit = Willing to change living habits for environ­
<1 month 1.70% mental protection. Pro-environment pay = Willing to pay more for
1–3 months 13.6%
environmental protection. Positive individual behavior = Considering that in­
3–6 months 30.1%
dividual behavior can contribute to environmental protection.
6–12 months 35.8% e
12–24 months 14.2% Degree 1–5 represents the possibility of new construction in 5 years, in
>24 months 4.55% ascending order they represent Completely impossible, Impossible, Neutral,
Possible, Fully possible, respectively.
Note: Total sample size N = 176.1 CNY = 0.15 USD.

5
T. Lou et al. Habitat International 105 (2020) 102266

f
Degree 1–5 represents the possibility of choice, defined the same as the Logistic regression has three classifications which are binary,
previous note. The NEW structural systems represent those that are rarely found multinomial, and ordinal logistic. Binary logistic is aimed at modeling a
in rural China. binary dependent variable with a logistic function. Multinomial logistic
regression sets one category of the dependent variable as the reference
item, and to reflect the relationship between other categories and this
Table 3
reference. Ordinal logistic is to divide the dependent variable, whose
Descriptive results (frequency questions).
categories are in an ordered arrangement, into several binary classifi­
Classification Proportion
cations and to reflect the difference between the lower level and the
commonly (rarely) used a
higher level of different combinations. In case when the relative pref­
Heating equipment erence between individual categories of the dependent variable is the
Kang 22.7% (77.3%)
main focus rather than the difference between ordered combinations of
Central heating 20.5% (79.5%)
Air conditioner 9.66% (90.3%) categories, the multinomial method is more suitable than ordinal for
Heating fan 7.95% (92.0%) analysis. For instance, multinomial logistic regression is preferred in
Energy structure medical research while the distinction between each level of severity is
Electricity 86.4% (13.6%)
the main focus of the study (Coghill et al., 2019), even though the
Liquefied petroleum gas 35.8% (64.2%)
Solar energy 33.0% (67.0%) severity of the disease is an ordinal variable. In this study, the categories
Coal 23.9% (76.1%) of the PCC and PCD were classified into three levels by following the rule
Timber 23.3% (76.7%) that the cost (or duration) selected by more than half of rural residents
Coal gas 22.2% (77.8%) was defined as the intermediate cost (or duration). In other words, in­
Natural gas 14.8% (85.2%)
termediate cost (or duration) is a common choice for the majority of
Straw 13.6% (86.4%)
Wind energy 5.68% (99.4%) residents. The lower or upper level of cost (or duration) is defined as less
or more than the intermediate level, respectively, as indicated follows.
Note.
a Multinomial logistic regression was then selected for the analysis of PCC
Commonly used = the frequency is greater than or equal to three times a
and PCD, where the intermediate level was set as the reference item.
week, rarely used = the frequency is less than three times a week.

● Low cost (<500 CNY/sq. m.), intermediate cost (500–2000 CNY/sq.

4. Data collection and analysis
m.), high cost (>2000 CNY/sq. m.).
● Short duration (<3 months), intermediate duration (3–12 months),
4.1. Questionnaire survey and response
long duration (>12 months).

After the preliminary design, the questionnaire was sent out to five
A hierarchical approach was used to add independent variables into
rural residents as a pilot study. Feedbacks of the pilot study led to further
the multinomial logistic model in two batches. The reason is that if all
refinement of the questionnaire, including the addition of possible
variables were put into the model at once, the complicated interaction
answer choices and the modification of question statements for effective
among the model would lead to poor robustness, making it difficult to
communication with rural residents.
filter unnecessary variables. First, all variables were divided into two
In February 2019, the questionnaire survey on a national scale was
groups by analyzing the correlation between each independent variable
conducted on an online platform. In results, a total of 330 questionnaires
and the dependent variable separately with a p-value of 0.1. Among
were collected, among which 176 valid questionnaires were used for
them, the analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied for continuous
analysis in this study. Though the valid sample size was relatively small,
independent variables, while the chi-square test for categorical ones.
the process of sample collection was strictly controlled to ensure the
Two groups of variables were obtained, including the first group con­
obtained data are reliable. Respondents came from 95 different rural
sisted of independent variables with p-value < 0.1, while the second
areas under the jurisdiction of 22 provinces in China, representing the
group consisted of the others. Second, the first group of independent
majority of rural populations. Survey working groups were deliberately
variables was integrated to obtain an initial logistic model. The p-value
set up to take due responsibility for each investigated area, where re­
of each variable in the model presents the relative importance consid­
spondents were requested to answer the survey after consulting with
ering the collective effects. It is well-known that a large sample size leads
family members with careful consideration. Finally, the collected re­
to small p-value, so that binary decision (e.g., p-value < vs. > 0.1) could
sponses were filtered by eliminating invalid questionnaires that con­
be different when the sample size changes. To reserve variables for final
tained incomplete or repeated answers, or mistakenly filled out by non-
model with a larger scale sample, trinary hypotheses were used in this
rural residents. The rigorous survey process with guaranteed data
study as classifier of variables: accept (p-value < 0.1), reject (p-value >
quality and representativeness, in addition to that similar sample size
0.2), and remain (0.1 < p-value < 0.2). Such a trinary decision is
survey was accepted by rural and housing studies in China such as Liu
considered as a rule for assessing p-values (Kim & Bang, 2016). Third,
and Xue (2016) and Yu et al. (2015), collectively ensure the reliability
variables in the second group were added into the initial model by
and validation of the survey result.
following the trinary hypotheses, so that the final model was obtained.
The whole process of statistical analysis was conducted by the use of IBM
4.2. Data analysis SPSS Statistics 25.

Logistic regression was conducted in this study to explore the rela­
tionship between the crucial factors that affect the PCC and PCD of rural
residents. This method is applied to predict the probability of class
membership on a categorical dependent variable (Starkweather &
Moske, 2011), and to reflect the relative importance as well as the
correlation of each independent variable on the dependent variable. It
has been widely used in medical (Fei et al., 2017) and behavioral
research (Yeh, Tseng, Liu, & Tseng, 2015). Since both the PCC and PCD
were categorical dependent variables, logistic regression was suitable
for the analysis in this study.
5. Results
5.1. Descriptive results
The results obtained from the questionnaire survey are shown in
Tables 1–3 On average, each rural residence contained 3.94 bedrooms
and held 4.34 residents. Up to 45.5% of residences had a building area of
more than 150 square meters. Almost all residences (97.2%) had three
or fewer stories. Major structure types were brick concrete and rein­
forced concrete, accounting for 54.5% and 33.0%, respectively. Most

6
T. Lou et al. Habitat International 105 (2020) 102266

rural residences (81.8%) were built without thermal insulation treat­
ments. The construction cost of existing residences was concentrated at
the range of 50,000–100,000 CNY (1 CNY = 0.15 USD) (27.3%) and
100,000–200,000 CNY (22.7%). Less than half of the rural households
(44.9%) employed professional teams for construction. Even though the
survey was conducted in winter, the usage frequency of heating equip­
ment in rural areas was at a low level. The most common equipment in
northeast China, Kang (Chinese bed-stove), was used by only 22.7%
households of the total.
Most families (73.4%) had an annual income below 100,000 CNY,
and the sources of income included employed working and planting,
which accounted for 58.0% and 39.8%, respectively. In general, resi­
dents were inclined to change habits for environmental protection and
believed that individual behavior could make a difference (mean values
of recognition degree were 3.97 and 3.83, respectively). However, they
were less likely to increase the cost paying for environmental protection
(mean values of recognition degree was only 3.26).
Regarding building performance, moisture resistance, and thermal
insulation are two essential requirements of residents (mean value of
perceived importance scores were 4.16 and 4.07, respectively). How­
ever, the two most dissatisfying IEQ indexes were none other than
temperature and humidity (mean value of satisfaction were 3.21 and
3.32, respectively). In current residences, rural residents felt chilly and
dry (mean values of thermal and wet comfort were 3.06 and 3.57,
respectively), so that a warmer and more humid indoor environment is
in urgent need for future construction and renovation of residences.
Almost one-fifth of residents might consider new construction in the
next five years. The reinforced concrete structural system was ranked as
the most popular choice of new residences (mean value of possibility
was 3.74).
5.2. Statistical results
Multinomial logistic regression was conducted to explore the influ­
encing factors of the PCC and PCD, and the results are presented in
Tables 4 and 5. Among the values obtained from the analysis, the odds
ratio (OR) of each independent variable reflects its impacts on the
dependent variable between the treatment group and the comparison
group (Petrucci, 2009). The low, intermediate, and high cost were
indicated as LC, IC, and HC, respectively. Besides, the short, interme­
diate, and long duration were indicated as SD, ID, and LD, respectively.
Only items with a p-value of less than 0.1 were presented.
5.2.1. Residential situation
As to PCC, residents spent high cost on past construction were 91.681
times (OR = 91.681) more likely to choose LC versus IC, when compared
to those with intermediate past construction cost. For items with the
value of OR less than 1, since it is not intuitive to explain, the conclusion

Table 4
Preferred Construction Cost (PCC) logistic regression results.
Item Indicator Regression coefficient P-value Odds ratio

PCC = low PCC = high PCC = low PCC = high PCC = low PCC = high

Intercept -0.611 − 5.624 .917 .003*

Residential Situation
Past construction cost a
[ = low vs intermediate] − 2.323 .924 .231 .117 .098 2.519
[ = high vs intermediate] 4.518 -.712 .016* .187 91.681 .490
Constructors
[Professional teams = yes vs no] − 6.062 .596 .016* .157 .002 1.814
Energy structure
[Timber = used vs rarely] b 3.918 -.901 .027* .086+ 50.290 .406
Consumer characteristics
Expenditure per capita c (Covariate) d -.281 .002 .058+ .931 .755 1.002
Annual income e
[ = low vs intermediate] 3.205 -.571 .086+ .260 24.646 .565
[ = high vs intermediate] 4.021 .427 .189 .609 55.779 1.533
Income sources
[Business = yes vs no] − 2.282 .595 .293 .178 .102 1.814
Environmental awareness (Covariate)
[Positive individual behavior] f 1.469 .281 .130 .285 4.345 1.325
Need Arousal (All Covariates)
Thermal comfort -.618 .141 .099+ .257 .539 1.152
Sound insulation − 1.303 -.468 .058+ .084+ .272 .626
Artificial lighting .908 .673 .232 .031* 2.480 1.959
Evaluation of Solutions (All Covariates)
Thermal insulation 1.653 .486 .057+ .030* 5.224 1.626
Aesthetics − 1.675 .332 .029* .212 .187 1.393
Use of local materials .390 -.337 .556 .039* 1.478 .714
Decision
New construction possibility (Covariate) − 1.715 -.068 .149 .721 .180 .935
Choice of new structural system (Covariate)
[Steel structure] − 1.296 .365 .081+ .075+ .274 1.440
Preferred construction duration g
[ = short vs intermediate] − 1.525 − 2.223 .419 .002* .218 .108
[ = long vs intermediate] − 3.813 1.181 .093+ .028* .022 3.257

Note: p* < 0.05, p+ < 0.1. The dependent variable is Preferred Construction Cost (PCC), which includes three levels, low level represents < 500 CNY/square meter,
high level represents > 2000 CNY/square meter, intermediate level is between low and high.
a
Low level represents <50,000 CNY, high level represents >200,000 CNY, intermediate level is between low and high.
b
“Used” means commonly used, which represents the usage frequency is at least three times a week, “rarely” means the frequency is less than three times a week.
c
The unit of per capita expenditure here is 1,000 CNY.
d
Reference of a covariate is one level lower of itself, indicates every single level up of this independent variable will lead to what change of the dependent variable.
e
Low level represents <50,000 CNY per year, high level represents >200,000 CNY per year, intermediate level is between low and high.
f
Positive individual behavior is the logogram of “believe individual behavior can play a positive role in environmental change.”.
g
Short level represents <3 months, long level represents >12 months, intermediate level is between short and long.

7
T. Lou et al. Habitat International 105 (2020) 102266

statement is suggested to be transformed by taking the reciprocal of the
OR (Petrucci, 2009). For instance, residents employing professional
teams for construction were less likely to choose LC versus IC (p = 0.016,
OR = 0.002). In other words, they were more likely to choose IC versus
LC (OR = 1/0.002 = 500.000), and this statement form is more natural
to be accepted than the previous. Besides, residents using timber as
common energy preferred LC than IC (p = 0.027, OR = 50.290), and
they preferred IC than HC (p = 0.086, OR = 2.463).
PCD varied from the regions, structure types, and energy structures
of current residences. Residents in the northeast or west regions were
inclined to choose ID versus SD (p = 0.026, OR = 166.667; p = 0.020,
OR = 58.824), while ID was also preferred by residents in east or west
regions when compared with LD (p = 0.014, OR = 10.638; p = 0.099,
OR = 6.494). For different structure types, residents living in brick
concrete preferred a shorter duration (SD versus ID: p = 0.031, OR =
39.937; ID versus LD: p = 0.023, OR = 9.901). Besides, residents living
in self-built housings were more likely to choose ID versus SD (p =
0.061, OR = 25.000). Regarding energy structure, residents using timber
as major energy preferred ID than SD (p = 0.028, OR = 500.000), while
SD was preferred by those using straw commonly (p = 0.009, OR =
510053.330).
5.2.2. Consumer characteristics
Both the income and expenditure had an impact on PCC. Households
with a low annual income were inclined to choose LC (p = 0.086, OR =
24.646). Besides, with one unit increase (1000 CNY) in per capita
expenditure, rural residents were more likely to choose IC versus LC (p
= 0.058, OR = 1.325). The OR value herein of each co-variate refers to
the change of odds after each additional unit of the variable.
As to PCD, with the number of elders increasing, households were
inclined to shorten the duration (SD versus ID: p = 0.029, OR = 3.724;
ID versus LD: p = 0.049, OR = 3.135). PCD was also influenced by the
income level and the corresponding source. Households with a low
annual income were more likely to choose ID versus SD (p = 0.013, OR
= 76.923). For multiple income sources, breeding households were in­
clined to choose a longer duration (ID versus SD: p = 0.050, OR =
200.000; LD versus ID: p = 0.030, OR = 8.286), while merchants
preferred shorter (SD versus ID: p = 0.050, OR = 18.100; ID versus LD: p
= 0.004, OR = 27.027). Moreover, environmental awareness had an
impact on PCD. Specifically, residents who believed individual behavior
could contribute to environmental protection preferred ID than LD (p =
0.086, OR = 2.695).

Table 5
Preferred Construction Duration (PCD) logistic regression results.
Item Indicator Regression coefficient P-value Odds ratio

PCD = short PCD = long PCD = short PCD = long PCD = short PCD = long

Intercept − 7.541 − 5.553 .172 .179

Residential Situation
Economic division
[ = northeast vs central] − 5.169 − 31.591 .026* . .006 1.906E-14
[ = east vs central] − 2.155 − 2.369 .154 .014* .116 .094
[ = west vs central] − 4.062 − 1.869 .020* .099+ .017 .154
Structure type
[ = brick concrete vs reinforced concrete] 3.687 − 2.296 .031* .023* 39.937 .101
[ = others vs reinforced concrete] ^1 8.200 1.405 .001* .353 3642.611 4.074
Constructors
[Family members = yes vs no] − 3.229 -.539 .061+ .564 .040 .583
Energy structure
[Timber = used vs rarely] − 6.050 .291 .028* .770 .002 1.338
[Straw = used vs rarely] 13.142 1.739 .009* .392 510053.330 5.691
Consumer characteristics
Family members (Covariate)
[Amount of elders] 1.315 − 1.143 .029* .049* 3.724 .319
Annual income
[ = low vs intermediate] − 4.342 -.195 .013* .839 .013 .823
[ = high vs intermediate] − 34.329 − 1.356 . .473 1.233E-15 .258
Income sources
[Breeding = yes vs no] − 5.374 2.115 .054+ .030* .005 8.286
[Business = yes vs no] 2.896 − 3.309 .050* .004* 18.100 .037
Environmental awareness (Covariate)
[Pro-environment pay] ^2 -.839 1.251 .151 .037* .432 3.493
[Positive individual behavior] 1.391 -.991 .145 .086+ 4.019 .371
Need Arousal (All Covariates)
Thermal comfort -.849 .193 .031* .457 .428 1.212
Natural lighting .377 1.974 .520 .006* 1.457 7.202
Artificial lighting -.468 − 2.646 .588 .007* .626 .071
Air cleanliness − 2.085 2.568 .026* .003* .124 13.045
Evaluation of Solutions (All Covariates)
Fire resistance − 4.261 -.984 .005* .093+ .014 .374
Thermal insulation 1.763 1.925 .084+ .008* 5.828 6.853
Construction duration 5.896 .620 .005* .261 363.545 1.858
Aesthetics − 1.827 − 1.484 .012* .029* .161 .227
Decision
Choice of new structural system (Covariate)
[Steel structure] 2.877 − 1.003 .004* .106 17.768 .367
Preferred construction cost
[ = low vs intermediate] − 3.063 − 4.033 .253 .072+ .047 .018
[ = high vs intermediate] − 4.406 2.098 .013* .024* .012 8.153

Note: p* < 0.05, p+ < 0.1. The dependent variable is Preferred Construction Duration (PCD), which includes three levels, short level represents < 3 months, long level
represents > 12 months, intermediate level is between short and long. ^1 Others include stone, adobe, and brick timber structure. ^2 Pro-environment pay is the
logogram of “willingness to pay more for environmental protection.”

8
T. Lou et al.
5.2.3. Need arousal
As to PCC, residents with increased indoor thermal comfort were
more likely to choose IC (p = 0.099, OR = 1.855). With the higher
satisfaction of sound insulation, rural residents were always inclined to
choose IC. That is, IC was preferred than LC (p = 0.058, OR = 3.676) and
HC (p = 0.084, OR = 1.597). Besides, residents who were more satisfied
with artificial lighting were more inclined to choose HC (p = 0.031, OR
= 1.959).
As to PCD, residents with increased thermal comfort preferred ID
than SD (p = 0.031, OR = 2.336). With higher satisfaction of air
cleanliness, residents were inclined to extend the duration (ID versus SD:
p = 0.026, OR = 8.065; LD versus ID: p = 0.003, OR = 13.045).
Moreover, with higher satisfaction of natural lighting, residents were
more likely to choose LD versus ID (p = 0.006, OR = 7.202), while ID
was preferred than LD when residents were more satisfied with artificial
lighting (p = 0.007, OR = 14.085).
5.2.4. Evaluation of solutions
As to PCC, with the perceived importance of aesthetics increasing,
residents were more likely to choose IC versus LC (p = 0.029, OR =
5.348). Besides, residents were more likely to choose IC versus HC with
their increased requirement for the use of local materials (p = 0.039, OR
= 1.401).
As to PCD, residents with higher perceived importance of aesthetics
were always inclined to choose ID. That is, ID was preferred than SD (p
= 0.012, OR = 6.211) and LD (p = 0.029, OR = 4.405). Regarding the
increase in the requirement for fire resistance, residents also preferred
ID (ID versus SD: p = 0.005, OR = 71.429; ID versus LD: p = 0.093, OR
= 2.674).
5.2.5. Decision
Regarding residents with a higher tendency to choose steel structures
as new residences, they were more likely to increase the cost (IC versus
LC: p = 0.081, OR = 3.650; HC versus IC: p = 0.075, OR = 1.440) and to
choose the short duration (SD versus ID: p = 0.004, OR = 17.768).
However, other choices of structure systems investigated in this study (i.
e., timber, bamboo, and reinforced concrete structure) did not show a
distinct effect on the preferred cost or duration.
PCC and PCD interacted with each other. Residents who preferred
long construction duration were inclined to increase the cost (IC versus
LC: p = 0.093, OR = 45.455; HC versus IC: p = 0.028, OR = 3.257).
Besides, residents with short preferred construction duration were more
likely to choose IC versus HC (p = 0.002, OR = 9.259). Conversely,
residents who preferred high construction cost were inclined to extend
the duration (ID versus SD: p = 0.013, OR = 83.333; LD than ID: p =
0.024, OR = 8.153). Moreover, residents with low preferred construc­
tion cost were more likely to choose ID versus LD (p = 0.072, OR =
55.556).
6. Discussion
Based on the results above, an impact path model for rural residential
decisions is proposed, as shown in Fig. 2. The influencing paths are
discussed in detail with the most representative indicators, and policy
suggestions for residential construction in rural areas are proposed.
6.1. Influencing paths
Observation 1. The selection of constructors lead to different levels of
expectation for the PCC and PCD (Path 1).
Residents who select self-built housings require a longer construction
period, as they typically extend the duration from short to intermediate
level. It may result from that self-built residences are generally in lack of
scientific construction planning and their labor productivity is
depressing due to insufficient professional training (Kaming,
9
Habitat International 105 (2020) 102266
Fig. 2. The impact path model of rural residential decisions.
Olomolaiye, Holt, & Harris, 1997). Besides, employing professional
teams needs a higher cost than self-building because of the increased
salary of professional constructors and the additional cost of advanced
construction techniques. Self-built housings are typical of low quality
and limited facilities (Logan, Fang, & Zhang, 2009), while housings built
by professional teams are usually in high quality and standard because
of the detailed design and advanced functions. However, the higher cost
cannot be afforded by most rural residents at the current stage because
of their limited income. Therefore, the cost reduction of professional
teams and the cultivation of knowledgeable constructors are of consid­
erable significance for the improvement of rural living environment.
Observation 2. Family income and expenditure positively affect the
PCC with a diminishing marginal utility (Path 2C and Path 3).
Rural households tend to raise the construction cost with the annual
income increases from the low (<50,000 CNY) to the intermediate level
(<200,000 CNY), but no result indicates that households with a high
income (>200,000 CNY) are still inclined to choose high cost. In a word,
a diminishing marginal utility is found in the effects of income on the
construction cost. The diminishing marginal utility is a phenomenon
that the increment of output will decrease with the gradual increase of a
single factor while other factors stay constant (Marshall, 2009). It in­
dicates that high-cost residences are not necessities for the majority of
rural households. The objective of residential construction should
mainly focus on ensuring the basic needs of both low and intermediate
cost. Moreover, the diminishing marginal utility is also found in the
effects of regional expenditure per capita on the PCC.
Observation 3. PCD is significantly impacted by family composition
and income sources (Path 2D).
The amount of elders in each family is negatively correlated with the
required level of construction duration, as rural households with more
elders are more likely to shorten the duration. For one reason, the
elderly have fewer physical movements and smaller social networks
(Milbourne, 2012), thus leaving the familiar environment can lead to
discomfort and loneliness for them. For another, the elderly worry about
the relocation will result in a change of lifestyle, and further lead to an
increase in the cost of living (Fang et al., 2016). Therefore, the elderly
require a short construction duration to keep minimum stay elsewhere.
Besides, households whose major income sources include breeding are
inclined to extend the duration because they require a longer time to
renovate the breeding fields which are usually adjacent to the resi­
dences. In the future, customized residence considering different de­
mands is essential for achieving harmonious development of rural living
environment.
Observation 4. Residents’ demands on the PCC and PCD can be
classified into a three-tier hierarchy (Path 5).
T. Lou et al.
The effects of demands on both preferred construction cost and
duration have hierarchical distinctions. Based on that, the demands are
classified into three categories, namely primary demand, conservative
demand, and superior demand, respectively, and a three-tier demand
hierarchy is proposed as shown in Fig. 3.
Primary demand can be summarized as “demand and pay.” With
more desire for this kind of demand, residents are more likely to choose
the intermediate rather than the lower level of the PCC or PCD. For
instance, as indoor thermal comfort increases, rural residents are in­
clined to choose intermediate cost (or intermediate duration) rather
than low cost (or short duration). That is, they are willing to increase the
cost (or duration) to the intermediate level to ensure a pleasant indoor
thermal environment. Among the survey results of seven satisfaction
measurements, rural residents have the lowest satisfaction with the in­
door temperature, which reflects the importance of a comfortable
thermal environment and the urgency of improvement. At present, rural
residents still adopt inefficient measures to maintain indoor tempera­
ture, such as not opening windows or covering the wall surface with
plastic film. Therefore, more efficient and low-cost insulation measures
should be widely applied in rural areas.
Conservative demand can be summarized as “demand but no extra
pay.” With more desire for this kind of demand, residents are more in­
clined to avoid the highest level of the PCC or PCD, and there is no
apparent difference between the choice of the intermediate and the
lower level. For instance, as the desire for using local materials in resi­
dential construction increases, residents are more likely to keep the cost
down by choosing intermediate cost rather than high cost. That is, they
show environmental awareness by considering to use local materials for
construction but are reluctant to increase the cost, which echoes to the
survey result that rural residents have low intentions to pay more for
environmental protection.
Superior demand can be summarized as “demand and pay more.”
With more desire for this kind of demand, residents are willing to choose
the highest level of the PCC or PCD, and there is no apparent difference
between the choice of the intermediate and the lower level. For instance,
residents are more inclined to choose high cost with an increase in the
satisfaction of artificial lighting. That is, artificial lighting can be
prioritized for optimization than other performance indicators once the
construction cost exceeds the intermediate level. Based on the definition
of three demand categories, a complete classification of residents’ de­
mand indicators is provided in Table 6.
Fig. 3. Schematic of the three-tier demand hierarchy.
10
Habitat International 105 (2020) 102266
Observation 5. Strong effect of path dependence on traditional
choices creates a barrier to promoting new-type structures in rural areas
(Path 6).
Path dependence refers that the decision-making is subject to the
past behaviors of the decision-maker, and although there are better
choices, he/she is likely to continue past decisions (Sewell, 1990). That
is, rural residents prefer familiar systems and avoid new-type ones as
their residences. From the survey, brick concrete and reinforced con­
crete structures account for 87.6% of all residences in rural areas, while
new-type structures are in only a tiny proportion, among which steel
structures have a relatively higher acceptability. Although steel struc­
tural system has gradually developed a variety of advantages, such as
low-cost, high-efficiency, environmentally friendly (Hu et al., 2010),
ease of assembly, and industrialized prefabricated techniques that can
further reduce the life-cycle consumption (Aye, Ngo, Crawford, Gam­
mampila, & Mendis, 2012), rural residents are highly sensitive and
overly cautious to the construction cost and duration when choose it as
the new residence. It is difficult for residents to realize the advantages of
this kind of new-type structure in a short time due to the lack of access to
information. Therefore, for the promotion of new-type systems such as
steel structures in rural areas, wide-range publicity is needed for rural
residents to generate a more comprehensive understanding of these
systems so as to increase the adoption rate of innovative construction
technologies.
6.1.1. Observation of other paths
Besides the observations mentioned above, there are important
findings of other impact paths. As observed in Path 4, rural residents
with higher environmental awareness are inclined to shorten the con­
struction duration. It may result from that the environmental impact
such as construction dust is proportional to the duration of the con­
struction activities (Li, Zhu, & Zhang, 2010), so reducing construction
duration contributes to environmental protection. Path 7 shows an
interaction between the PCC and PCD. The inter-dependencies among
the duration and cost can be represented in a complex influence network
containing relationships among various factors which can be found in
corresponding research (e.g., Poh & Tah, 2006).
6.2. Policy suggestions
Based on the critical issues unveiled in the questionnaire survey and
the corresponding effects observed from key influencing paths
mentioned above, policies facilitating the improvement of the rural
living environment have been proposed as follows.
(1) Develop four types of residences to meet the hierarchical de­
mands of rural residents.
Based on the effects of different demands on residential construction,
four types of housings with different characteristics of cost or duration
can be developed. Type A: for low-cost residences (<2000 CNY/sq. m.),
performance indicators such as thermal comfort, sound isolation, and
aesthetics of the residence are the main focus of the construction.
Products such as multifunctional wall cladding in a thorough consider­
ation of these performances should be massively produced and widely
adopted. Type B: for high-cost residences (>2000 CNY/sq. m.), resi­
dents have a higher demand for the optimization of artificial lighting, so
advanced equipment such as using energy-efficient and intelligent
lighting systems should be adopted. Type C: for short-duration resi­
dences (<12 months), thermal comfort, air cleanliness, aesthetics, and
fire resistance are the main focus of construction. Type D: for long-
duration residences (>12 months), residents have a higher demand for
the optimization of natural lighting, so engineering practices such as
applying a skylight design should be adopted and incorporated into local
residential construction guidelines.
T. Lou et al.
Table 6
Indicators for different demand categories.
Demand Preferred Construction Cost
Indicator Preference
Primary Thermal comfort LC → IC
Sound insulation LC → IC
Aesthetics LC → IC
Conservative Use of local materials LC ∽ IC
Superior Artificial lighting LC ∽ IC
Note: ^1 The meaning of symbols: A→B, prefer B rather than A; A∽B, no difference in preference between A and B. ^2 There are two symbols in each continuous
preference formula, if the first one is “→”, then the indicator corresponding to this formula is defined as Primary Demand. Else if the first symbol is “∽”, the classi­
fication of the indicator is decided by the second symbol. If it is “←”, the indicator is a Conservative Demand. Else if it is “→”, the indicator is a Superior Demand.
(2) Increase the market penetration of professional construction in
rural areas.
Because of the unaffordable cost as well as the small scale of con­
struction teams, professional construction has not been widespread in
rural areas. Based on the survey, the adoption rate of professional con­
struction teams is less than 50%. A series of suggestions can be consid­
ered to increase the market penetration of professional construction.
First, economic incentives such as providing public subsidies should be
adopted to ease the cost burden of rural residents so as to close the gap
between the cost of professional and self-built construction. Second,
technical measures such as improving the professionalism and spe­
cialties of existing construction teams should be conducted to expedite
the transition of rural construction from informal to formal. Third,
institutional measures should be implemented to reduce the safety risk
of residential housings, such as stipulating the newly built residences of
more than two stories should be constructed by licensed construction
teams.
(3) Focus on the personalized housing requirements of rural
residents.
Requirements of different target groups should be satisfied with
flexible residential design. For households with a larger average age,
because of their higher demand for shortening the duration, innovative
techniques should be adopted to speed up the construction. For instance,
by using Prefabricated Prefinished Volumetric Construction (i.e., PPVC)
method, a low-rise steel residence can be constructed on-site in fairly
short time of a couple of days. Besides, for breeding households, due to
the consideration that their living environment has severe problems of
air and noise pollution, the enhancement of smell and sound insulation
between the residence and the breeding fields should be conducted to
improve the living satisfaction of residents. Besides, an evaluation sys­
tem for rural residential housings should be established to assess the
living experience of each individual.
(4) Promote the early adoption of new-type structural systems in
rural areas.
For non-traditional structural systems that are suitable to apply in
rural areas, publicity should be strengthened to improve their accept­
ability among rural residents and to reduce the effect of path depen­
dence on the choice of traditional structural systems. For instance, a
demonstration project of new-type structural systems (e.g., light steel
structures) should be developed close to residential areas. Opportunities
should be provided for rural residents to live in these new-type housings
so that they can better understand the benefits and feel the advantages of
new construction technologies. Another suggestion is to invite “folk
architects” as ambassadors of new-type structures because their pro­
fessional competence and popularity among rural residents can make
the promotion of new construction technologies in rural areas more
Habitat International 105 (2020) 102266
Preferred Construction Duration
Indicator Preference
∽ HC Thermal comfort SD → ID ∽ LD
← HC Air cleanliness SD → ID → LD
∽ HC Fire resistance SD → ID ← LD
Aesthetics SD → ID ← LD
← HC Artificial lighting SD ∽ ID ← LD
→ HC Natural lighting SD ∽ ID → LD
feasible. Moreover, not only the effort of policymakers but also the
consumers are indispensable for promoting new-type structural systems.
Rural residents are encouraged to be better informed about the new-type
structures and to fully utilize the opportunities provided by the gov­
ernment so as to get rid of their pre-existing stereotypes.
7. Conclusion
New residential construction is an essential part of rural develop­
ment and vitalization. To understand the decision-making behavior of
rural residents on residential construction, an improved consumer de­
cision model was established in this study. Based on the model, a
questionnaire survey was conducted to investigate the current residen­
tial situation of rural areas, the living experience of rural residents, and
their expectations for the new construction. Crucial factors that influ­
ence the preferred construction cost and duration were explored with
multinomial logistic regression. An impact path model was proposed to
sort out the corresponding effects among factors, and the internal
mechanism of representative observations was adequately explained.
The findings suggested that residents’ demands on the preferred con­
struction cost and duration could be categorized into a three-tier hier­
archy (i.e., primary, conservative, and superior demand) depending on
the level of demand and willingness to pay. The hierarchical framework
not only helps to understand heterogeneous requirements of residents
but also provides policy suggestions that highlight future endeavors of
improving the rural living environment.
The theoretical contribution of this study focuses on two aspects.
First, a consumer decision model that applies to new residential con­
struction in rural areas was proposed. This model provides an analytical
framework that contains potential factors for the decision-making pro­
cess related to the residential construction and it extends the consumer
decision model of credence goods. Second, an impact path model was
developed to reflect the relationship of the most critical factors influ­
encing residential construction decisions, supplemented by a three-tier
demand hierarchy. The path model reveals an interactive understand­
ing of residents’ demands on driving the continuous development of
residential housings in rural areas. The consumer decision model,
impact path model, and the demand hierarchy mentioned above can be
applied to reflect the decision-making process of rural residents and to
direct future construction in rural areas so as to actively respond to the
challenges in the process of globalization.
Moreover, although this study mainly focuses on rural residential
issues in China, the proposed framework can be implemented in other
regions with similar housing objectives. For instance, urban villages and
suburban communities may experience the slower development than
that of urban neighborhoods, and therefore are faced by the similar
problems of rural areas, including the aging population and unsatisfying
residential performance. Meanwhile, a large number of rural pop­
ulations are distributed across worldwide regions, which are also in
urgent need of scientific planning for rural development and revitali­
zation, particularly in developing countries. However, the framework
11
T. Lou et al. Habitat International 105 (2020) 102266

should be adjusted properly for the future implementation according to Acknowledgments

local conditions and specific requirements. Future research can focus on
adjusting and expanding factors for various conditions, so a more
comprehensive and robust framework can be established for a broader
application to residential construction and rural development.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Ting Lou: Methodology, Data curation, Writing - original draft,
Writing - review & editing. Wei Wang: Investigation, Data curation,
Resources. Yujie Lu: Conceptualization, Methodology, Resources,
Writing - review & editing, Funding acquisition, Project administration.
Jianzhuang Xiao: Conceptualization, Data curation, Resources, Vali­
dation. Xuwen Xiao: Investigation, Resources, Funding acquisition.
This study was supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the
Central Universities of China (grant number 22120180624), the Chinese
Academy of Engineering (grant number 2020-XZ-16), the National So­
cial Science Foundation of China under Major Program (grant number
17ZDA062), the National Natural Science Foundation of China under
regular Program, (grant numbers 52078374, 51778459 and 52078366),
Open Projects Fund of Shanghai Key Laboratory of Urban Renewal and
Spatial Optimization Technology (2019010205), and the Sustainable
Structural Engineering Research Funds from Tongji Architectural Design
(Group) Company Limited.

Appendix AMeasurements and references

Modules Items Indicators Specific measurements Source Key references

Inputs Residential Current indoor conditions Economic division Q Li et al. (2018)

Situation Building storey Q Xu et al. (2018)
Building area Q
Room layout Q
Building orientation Q
Built year Q
Structure type Q
Foundation type Q
External wall material Q
External wall insulation Q
Door & windows material Q
Past Construction cost Q
Constructors Q
Heating equipment Q
Energy structure Q
Climatic conditions Average temperature O
Average relative humidity O
Consumer Characteristics Social characteristics GDP per capita Y Mirkatouli et al. (2018)
Expenditure per capita Y Zeng et al. (2019)
Family characteristics Family members Q Judge et al. (2019)
Annual income Q
Income sources Q
Personal characteristics Age Q
Gender Q
Living status Q
Routine time at home Q
Environmental awareness Q
Process Need Arousal Comfort and preference Thermal comfort Q Yang et al. (2013)
Thermal preference Q Han et al. (2007)
Wet comfort Q USGBC (2019)
Wet preference Q
Ventilated comfort Q
Ventilated preference Q
Satisfaction Sound insulation Q
Natural lighting Q
Artificial lighting Q
Temperature Q
Humidity Q
Air freshness Q
Air cleanliness Q
Evaluation of Solutions Disaster resistance Earthquake resistance Q Lee et al. (2011)
Wind resistance Q Ibem et al. (2013)
Fire resistance Q Hovde (1998)
Weatherability Moisture resistance Q Ali et al. (2013)
Corrosion resistance Q Cheung et al. (2004)
Durability Q
Thermal insulation Q
Construction performance Construction cost Q
Construction duration Q
Construction convenience Q
Others Aesthetics Q
Use of local materials Q
Energy-saving Q
Outcomes Decision New construction possibility Q
(continued on next page)

12
T. Lou et al. Habitat International 105 (2020) 102266

(continued )
Modules Items Indicators Specific measurements Source Key references

Choice of new structural system Q

Preferred construction cost Q
Preferred construction duration Q
Note: kinds of source include Q = Questionnaire, O = local climate observatories, Y = local statistical yearbooks 2018.

References Conservation and Recycling, 54(9), 591–600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

resconrec.2009.10.016
Ibem, E. O., Opoko, A. P., Adeboye, A. B., & Amole, D. (2013). Performance evaluation of
Ali, H. A. E. M., Al-Sulaihi, I. A., & Al-Gahtani, K. S. (2013). Indicators for measuring
residential buildings in public housing estates in Ogun State, Nigeria: Users’
performance of building construction companies in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
satisfaction perspective. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 2(2), 178–190. https://
Journal of King Saud University - Engineering Sciences, 25(2), 125–134. https://doi.
doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2013.02.001
org/10.1016/j.jksues.2012.03.002
Judge, M., Warren-Myers, G., & Paladino, A. (2019). Using the theory of planned
Andargie, M. S., & Azar, E. (2019). An applied framework to evaluate the impact of
behaviour to predict intentions to purchase sustainable housing. Journal of Cleaner
indoor office environmental factors on occupants’ comfort and working conditions.
Production, 215, 259–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.029
Sustainable Cities and Society, 46(January). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Kaming, P. F., Olomolaiye, P. O., Holt, G. D., & Harris, F. C. (1997). Factors influencing
scs.2019.101447, 101447.
construction time and cost overruns on high-rise projects in Indonesia. Construction
Aye, L., Ngo, T., Crawford, R. H., Gammampila, R., & Mendis, P. (2012). Life cycle
Management & Economics, 15(1), 83–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/
greenhouse gas emissions and energy analysis of prefabricated reusable building
014461997373132
modules. Energy and Buildings, 47, 159–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Kim, J., & Bang, H. (2016). Three common misuses of P values. Dental Hypotheses, 7(3),
enbuild.2011.11.049
73–80. https://doi.org/10.4103/2155-8213.190481
Branca, G., Hissa, H., Benez, M. C., Medeiros, K., Lipper, L., Tinlot, M., et al. (2013).
Kinsella, K. (2001). Urban and rural dimensions of global population aging: An overview.
Capturing synergies between rural development and agricultural mitigation in
The Journal of Rural Health, 17(4), 314–322.
Brazil. Land Use Policy, 30(1), 507–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Lee, J., Je, H., & Byun, J. (2011). Well-Being index of super tall residential buildings in
landusepol.2012.04.021
Korea. Building and Environment, 46(5), 1184–1194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Bray, J. P. (2008). Consumer Behaviour theory: Approaches and models (Vols. 1–33).
buildenv.2010.12.010
Retrieved from http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/10107/4/licence.txt.
Li, Q., Long, R., & Chen, H. (2018). Differences and influencing factors for Chinese urban
Chambers, R. (2014). Rural development: Putting the last first. Routledge.
resident willingness to pay for green housings: Evidence from five first-tier cities in
Chen, J., Wang, Y., Wen, J., Fang, F., & Song, M. (2016). The influences of aging
China. Applied Energy, 229(April), 299–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
population and economic growth on Chinese rural poverty. Journal of Rural Studies,
apenergy.2018.07.118
47, 665–676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2015.11.002
Li, Y., Long, H., & Liu, Y. (2015). Spatio-temporal pattern of China’s rural development:
Cheung, S. O., Suen, H. C. H., & Cheung, K. K. W. (2004). PPMS: A web-based
A rurality index perspective. Journal of Rural Studies, 38, 12–26. https://doi.org/
construction project performance monitoring system. Automation in Construction, 13
10.1016/j.jrurstud.2015.01.004
(3), 361–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2003.12.001
Liu, X., & Xue, C. Q. L. (2016). Exploring the challenges to housing design quality in
Coghill, A. E., Han, X., Suneja, G., Lin, C. C., Jemal, A., & Shiels, M. S. (2019). Advanced
China: An empirical study. Habitat International, 57, 242–249. https://doi.org/
stage at diagnosis and elevated mortality among US patients with cancer infected
10.1016/j.habitatint.2016.08.006
with HIV in the National Cancer Data Base. Cancer, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/
Li, X., Zhu, Y., & Zhang, Z. (2010). An LCA-based environmental impact assessment
cncr.32158
model for construction processes. Building and Environment, 45(3), 766–775. https://
Cook, C. C., Martin, P., Yearns, M., & Damhorst, M. L. (2007). Attachment to “place” and
doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2009.08.010
coping with losses in changed communities: A paradox for aging adults. Family and
Logan, J. R., Fang, Y., & Zhang, Z. (2009). Access to housing in urban China. International
Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 35(3), 201–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/
Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 33(4), 914–935.
1077727X06296794
Long, H., Liu, Y., Wu, X., & Dong, G. (2009). Spatio-temporal dynamic patterns of
Darby, M. R., & Karni, E. (1973). Free competition and the optimal amount of fraud. The
farmland and rural settlements in Su-Xi-Chang region: Implications for building a
Journal of Law and Economics, 16(1), 67–88. https://doi.org/10.1086/466756
new countryside in coastal China. Land Use Policy, 26(2), 322–333. https://doi.org/
Douglas, D. J. A. (2005). The restructuring of local government in rural regions: A rural
10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.04.001
development perspective. Journal of Rural Studies, 21(2), 231–246. https://doi.org/
Long, H., Tu, S., Ge, D., Li, T., & Liu, Y. (2016). The allocation and management of
10.1016/j.jrurstud.2005.01.003
critical resources in rural China under restructuring: Problems and prospects. Journal
Engel, J. F., Kollat, D. T., & Blackwell, R. D. (1968). Consumer behavior. NewYork: Holt,
of Rural Studies, 47, 392–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.03.011
Rinehart, and Winston.
Loudon, D. L., & Della Bitta, A. J. (1993). Consumer behavior : Concepts and applications
Erasmus, A. C., Boshoff, E., & Rousseau, G. G. (2001). Consumer decision-making models
(4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
within the discipline of consumer science: A critical approach. Journal of Consumer
Lu, M., Wei, L., Ge, D., Sun, D., Zhang, Z., & Lu, Y. (2020). Spatial optimization of rural
Sciences, 29(1).
settlements based on the perspective of appropriateness–domination: A case of Xinyi
Fan, S., Hazell, P., & Thorat, S. (2000). Government spending, growth and poverty in
city. Habitat International, 98(February). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rural India. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 82(4), 1038–1051. https://
habitatint.2020.102148, 102148.
doi.org/10.1111/0002-9092.00101
Ma, L., Cheng, W., & Qi, J. (2018). Coordinated evaluation and development model of
Fang, Y. G., Shi, K. J., & Niu, C. C. (2016). A comparison of the means and ends of rural
oasis urbanization from the perspective of new urbanization: A case study in
construction land consolidation: Case studies of villagers’ attitudes and behaviours
Shandan county of heixi corridor, China. Sustainable Cities and Society, 39(February),
in Changchun City, Jilin province, China. Journal of Rural Studies, 47(207), 459–473.
78–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2018.02.007
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.04.007
Manthorpe, J., Malin, N., & Stubbs, H. (2004). Older people’s views on rural life: A study
Fei, Y., Hu, J., Gao, K., Tu, J., Li, W. qin, & Wang, W. (2017). Predicting risk for portal
of three villages. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 13(s2), 97–104. https://doi.org/
vein thrombosis in acute pancreatitis patients: A comparison of radical basis function
10.1111/j.1365-2702.2004.01049.x
artificial neural network and logistic regression models. Journal of Critical Care, 39,
Markey, S., Halseth, G., & Manson, D. (2008). Challenging the inevitability of rural
115–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2017.02.032
decline: Advancing the policy of place in northern British Columbia. Journal of Rural
Gan, L., & Yu, J. (2008). Bioenergy transition in rural China: Policy options and co-
Studies, 24(4), 409–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2008.03.012
benefits. Energy Policy, 36(2), 531–540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Marshall, A. (2009). Principles of economics: Unabridged (8th ed.). Cosimo, Inc.
enpol.2007.10.005
Milbourne, P. (2012). Growing old in rural places. Journal of Rural Studies, 28(4),
Giere, R. N. (1988). Explaining science: A cognitive approach.
315–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.10.001
Han, J., Zhang, G., Zhang, Q., Zhang, J., Liu, J., Tian, L., et al. (2007). Field study on
Milner, T., & Rosenstreich, D. (2013). A review of consumer decision- making models
occupants’ thermal comfort and residential thermal environment in a hot-humid
and development of a new model for financial services. Journal of Financial Services
climate of China. Building and Environment, 42(12), 4043–4050. https://doi.org/
Marketing, 18(2), 106–120. https://doi.org/10.1057/fsm.2013.7
10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.06.028
Mirkatouli, J., Samadi, R., & Hosseini, A. (2018). Evaluating and analysis of socio-
Hauser, J. R., & Wernerfelt, B. (1990). An evaluation cost model of consideration sets.
economic variables on land and housing prices in Mashhad, Iran. Sustainable Cities
Journal of Consumer Research, 16(4), 393–408.
and Society, 41(September 2017), 695–705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
He, B. J., Yang, L., & Ye, M. (2014). Building energy efficiency in China rural areas:
scs.2018.06.022
Situation, drawbacks, challenges, corresponding measures and policies. Sustainable
Moital, M. (2006). An evaluation of the factors influencing the adoption of e-commerce in the
Cities and Society, 11, 7–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2013.11.005
purchasing of leisure travel by the residents of Cascais, Portugal. Bournemouth
Hovde, P. J. (1998). Evaluation of the factor method to estimate the service life of
University.
building components. Proceedings of the CIB World Building Congress, 1, 223–231,
Naldi, L., Nilsson, P., Westlund, H., & Wixe, S. (2015). What is smart rural development?
1998.
Journal of Rural Studies, 40, 90–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Howard, J. A., & Sheth, J. N. (1969). The theory of buyer behavior. New York.
jrurstud.2015.06.006
Hu, M., Pauliuk, S., Wang, T., Huppes, G., van der Voet, E., & Müller, D. B. (2010). Iron
Nicosia, F. M. (1966). Consumer decision processes; marketing and advertising implications.
and steel in Chinese residential buildings: A dynamic analysis. Resources,

13
T. Lou et al.
Park, A., & Wang, S. (2010). Community-based development and poverty alleviation: An
evaluation of China’s poor village investment program. Journal of Public Economics,
94(9–10), 790–799. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.06.005
Petrucci, C. J. (2009). A primer for social worker researchers on how to conduct a
multinomial logistic regression. Journal of Social Service Research, 35(2), 193–205.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01488370802678983
Poh, Y. P., & Tah, J. H. M. (2006). Integrated duration-cost influence network for
modelling risk impacts on construction tasks. Construction Management & Economics,
24(8), 861–868. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190600658891
Salemink, K., Strijker, D., & Bosworth, G. (2017). Rural development in the digital age: A
systematic literature review on unequal ICT availability, adoption, and use in rural
areas. Journal of Rural Studies, 54, 360–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jrurstud.2015.09.001
Sewell, W. H. (1990). Three temporalities - towards a sociology of the event. The Historic
Turn in the Human Sciences, (October), 245–280. https://doi.org/10.2307/657830
Starkweather, J., & Moske, A. K. (2011). Multinomial logistic regression. Consulted page
at september 10th, 29, 2825–2830 http://Www. Unt. Edu/Rss/Class/Jon/Bench
marks/MLR_JDS_Aug2011. Pdf.
USGBC. (2019). LEED v4 for BUILDING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION. Retrieved from
https://www.usgbc.org/resources/leed-v4-building-design-and-construction-c
urrent-version.
Wang, D., He, S., Webster, C., & Zhang, X. (2019). Unravelling residential satisfaction
and relocation intention in three urban neighborhood types in Guangzhou, China.
Habitat International, 85(January), 53–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
habitatint.2019.01.004
Wang, C., Huang, B., Deng, C., Wan, Q., Zhang, L., Fei, Z., et al. (2016). Rural settlement
restructuring based on analysis of the peasant household symbiotic system at village
level: A case study of Fengsi village in Chongqing, China. Journal of Rural Studies, 47,
485–495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.07.002
Winterton, R., & Warburton, J. (2012). Ageing in the bush: The role of rural places in
maintaining identity for long term rural residents and retirement migrants in north-
14
Habitat International 105 (2020) 102266
east Victoria, Australia. Journal of Rural Studies, 28(4), 329–337. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.01.005
Woods, M. (2013). Regions engaging globalization: A typology of regional responses in
rural Europe. Journal of Rural and Community Development, 8(3), 113–126. Retrieved
from http://journals.brandonu.ca/jrcd/article/view/1037.
Xu, J., Gao, W., & Huo, X. (2018). Analysis on energy consumption of rural building
based on survey in northern China. Energy for Sustainable Development, 47, 34–38.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2018.08.002
Yang, X., Jiang, Y., Yang, M., & Shan, M. (2010). Energy and environment in Chinese
rural housing: Current status and future perspective. Frontiers of Energy and Power
Engineering in China, 4(1), 35–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11708-010-0001-5
Yang, L., Yan, H., Xu, Y., & Lam, J. C. (2013). Residential thermal environment in cold
climates at high altitudes and building energy use implications. Energy and Buildings,
62, 139–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.02.058
Yeh, M. S., Tseng, C. M., Liu, H. H., & Tseng, L. S. (2015). The factors of female taxi
drivers’ speeding offenses in Taiwan. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic
Psychology and Behaviour, 32, 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2015.04.005
Yu, A. T. W., Wu, Y., Shen, J., Zhang, X., Shen, L., & Shan, L. (2015). The key causes of
urban-rural conflict in China. Habitat International, 49, 65–73. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.05.009
Yılmaz, B., Daşdemir, İ., Atmiş, E., & Lise, W. (2010). Factors affecting rural development
in Turkey: Bartın case study. Forest Policy and Economics, 12(4), 239–249. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2010.02.003
Zeng, C., Song, Y., Cai, D., Hu, P., Cui, H., Yang, J., et al. (2019). Exploration on the
spatial spillover effect of infrastructure network on urbanization: A case study in
Wuhan urban agglomeration. Sustainable Cities and Society, 47(December 2018),
101476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101476
Zhu, S., Li, D., & Jiang, Y. (2020). The impacts of relationships between critical barriers
on sustainable old residential neighborhood renewal in China. Habitat International,
103(August), 102232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2020.102232