Employment status, social security coverage and income level are not statistically significant estimators of rural sample, contrary to urban sample and whole sample.Also, the perceived social pressure and positive expectations for the countrys future is not statistically significant for rural sample, while they are significant for urban sample.Finally, urban happiness is positively correlated with both satisfaction with central public services and local public services, while rural happiness has statistically significant association with those of just central government services.Individual welfare depends on social and psychological properties and <a href="http://www.targetmol.com/compound/Apixaban">buy
Apixaban</a> factors related to resourceusing beyond the material welfare.In this respect, the subjective wellbeing and the happiness as commonly accepted indicator of the SWB have drawn much attention especially in economics and psychology.A various dimensions of determinants of happiness such as material welfare, psychologic factors, and social interaction were widely examined in an enormous literature on happiness.However, the literature on geographical dimension of SWB is relatively limited and mostly on developed countries.Whereas, it can be accepted that rural and urban life produce the different social systems which affect residents welfare level directly.The SWB of individuals and of members of a community could be shaped by time and place and thus, the geographical context and the spatial differences are important to explain the SWB. Rural and urban context can affect happiness of residences due to various reasons such as labor market opportunities, access to public services, education opportunities, social solidaritysupport and environmental features.An interesting discussion has been on which life style would be better for individuals welfare.Thus, the study aims at contributing empirical literature on the geographic dimension of happiness by examining the differences in rural and urban determinants in the case of a developing country.This issue is especially important for most of the developing countries because of their rapid urbanization and their efforts to improve rural development, although they were rarely examined in empirical literature.The data concerned has been collected since and it includes variables which would allow considering a various demographic, social, economic and psychological determinants of happiness.Recently the spatial differences in SWB and happiness have been studies at the scale of international, national, interurban and neighborhood.However, the empirical evidence on the impact of geographic locations on the SWB is mixed and inconclusive due to both of theoretical difficulties in modelling and conceptualizing the relationship of geographical context to happiness, and of differences in research methods and data. On the other hand, the studies of SWB at local levels are relatively limited due to data issues, and existing studies on differences in SWB deal with the issue at international and regional levels. Thus, the literature on geographies of wellbeing needs to be extended by examining spatial variations and patterns such as between and within states, provinces, urbanrural continuum, cities, and intercity.In developing countries, the SWB tends to be higher for urban residents, while the disparity tends to disappear or even reverse at advanced level of development, due to convergence in urbanrural socioeconomic systems in terms of income levels, employment, education etc.However, they also found that the SWB is not significantly different between rural and urban areas and does not compensate for material disadvantages.