Population Levels of Well-Being In a Peri-Urban Area of a Metropolitan Region, A Case
Study of Selangor Northern Corridor, Malaysia
Y. Saleh*1, H. Mahat2, M. Hashim3, N. Nayan4, MKA Ghazali5
1,2,3,4,5Department of Geography and Environment, Faculty of Human Sciences, Sultan Idris Education
University, 35900 Tanjong Malim, Perak, Malaysia yazid@fsk.upsi.edu.my*1
Article History: Received: 10 November 2020; Revised: 12 January 2021; Accepted: 27 January 2021; Published online: 05 April 2021
Abstract: This article seeks to identify the levels of well-being of residents of Selangor Northern Corridor, Lembah
Klang-Langat Extended Metropolitan Region (EMR). The study involved 400 respondents consisting of the heads of household in peri-urban areas of Selangor Northern Corridor of Lembah Klang-Langat EMR. Respondents were selected via a simple random sampling method. A 1-5 Likert scale questionnaire was used as a research instrument. Based on the well-being index, a variety of variables involving well-being were listed, although the author of this study used four variables, namely housing, transportation, socioeconomic environment and land use. The housing variable consisted of three sub-variables, comprising area selection, safety and facilities. The transport variable included two sub-variables: public transportation and transportation network. The socioeconomic variables society and economy, while the sub-variables for land use were types of activities and property ownership. The study results indicate that the questionnaire’s reliability level was acceptable as the Cronbach’s alpha value of each variable exceeded 0.8. Transportation and socioeconomic environment stood at high levels, while housing and land use were at moderate levels. These findings demonstrate that the level of some of the community’s well-being was high or moderate due to urban sprawl. This means that humans will adapt to the environment in various ways so that it can accord with human needs.
Keywords: Extended Metroplitan Region, Socioecnomic Variables, Accord 1. Introduction
Peri-urban areas across the globe (and especially in Southeast Asian countries) are increasingly facing challenges of drastic development. Development is an important element of a country’s progress and is often associated with the process of transformation from one state to another, which may influence the aspect of a population’s well-being, such as through changes in land use from traditional to modern towards betterment by looking at the aspects of the industry, land use, economic growth and transportation system [1, 2, 3, 4]. In short, development is a change carried out to help facilitate human well-being and achieve higher standards of living. Based on the explanation, it appears that the development process is very important for a developing country for the survival of the population.
In essence, urban sprawl owes to saturated development density in major cities [5]. For many years, development and urbanization processes in
Malaysia have been heavily influenced by economic development in the manufacturing sector, while the rate of national economic growth (particularly through the industrial sector) slowed as a result of the financial crisis that hit the Asian region a decade ago [6]. Transformation in developing countries, and especially in less developed areas, has stimulated changes in those areas. For instance, in Malaysia, developments in rural areas were initially based on the agricultural sector. Rural areas relied heavily on firewood to cook, and used dry cells and kerosene for night-time lighting, indirectly preserving the environment [7]. After independence, the existing economy continued to grow with the increasingly vibrant mining sector followed by development in the services, infrastructure and new industrial sectors.
The development of peri-urban areas requires considerable attention because the processes that occur have significant influences on the well-being of the community. According to McGee [8], the urban development of developing countries differs from the developed countries. For example, European countries have transformed, beginning with the industrial revolution era at the end of the 18th century, in which the economy evolved from agriculture to manufacturing, producing various new technologies that were more productive and time-saving [9]. The development of peri-urban and rural areas has also brought positive changes to groups of people in the rural community.
2. The Well-Being of the Peri-Urban Population
Peri-urban communities are the village communities that enjoy various examples of modernisation, such as in terms of infrastructure resulting from rapid development in core areas. All utilities and facilities are easily provided due to accessibility to urban areas. Peri-urban communities undergo daily activities within their village surroundings while enjoying modern urban facilities [5] without the same hustle and bustle as their urban counterparts. Indeed, they can even participate in their favourite activities at any time. Hence, development in the peri-urban area is bound to undergo changes as a result of modernisation around the area. The sprawling process has both negative and positive impacts, but these can only be assessed by the locals who have resided in the peri-urban area both before and after urbanisation took place.
2.1. Housing
Rapid population growth affects people’s well-being. This can be seen through the demand and supply of residential houses, especially in terms of supply, quantity and quality of the home required [10]. Housing areas have expanded considerably, especially following the launch of the New Economic Policy (NEP) [11], with housing areas used as a development indicator with human life as a place to live. In fact, according to Shaharudin, Abdul Samad, Abdul Hadi, & Ahmad Fariz [12], the facilities available around residential areas have become the focus of people and visitors, such as recreational parks as places for social interaction to foster racial unity in Malaysia. This is a result of the conducive housing environment that allows for better interaction between communities.
For this study, housing illustrates a visible physical structure and is deemed a place of residence for individuals and families. Besides, it functions as a shelter for humans from all threats and dangers. Researchers adopt housing indicators to view the well-being of peri-urban residents because housing development is closely related to the transformation process in Malaysia, regardless of core, rural and peri-urban areas [10, 11]. For example, Molly O’Meara, Kai and Peter [13] have explained that more than 50 million people worldwide move to urban and peri-urban areas each year to improve their well-being. This argument has been reinforced by McGee [14], who states that statistically, many residents have begun to break city boundaries and have expanded to peri-urban areas, leading to increased housing density in line with the enhancement of various function and safety facilities.
2.2. Transportation
For Katiman [15] and Christiaensen, Weerdt, and Todo [16], the development of peri-urban areas in terms of aspects of basic facilities, transportation and communication is an important process of population convergence to inhabit the area. Today, people prefer to settle in peri-urban areas because their access to economic and social spaces is superior to in the busy cities. In recent years, urban sprawl has taken place at a rapid rate. This will affect the development of rural and small-town areas located in metropolitan regions such as Banting, Salak Tinggi, Sungai Pelek, Tanjung Sepat, Jenjarum, Telok Panglima Garang, Semenyih, Dengkil, Sepang and Nilai in Selangor Southern Corridor, as well as Rawang, Serendah, Batang Berjuntai, Batang Kali and Rasa inSelangor Northern Corridor. The average population growth rate here exceeds 6.0 percent [17], far higher than in Kuala Lumpur over the same period.
In the context of this study, transportation is viewed in terms of the degree of accessibility and convenience. This is because the development of various modes of transportation today offers people greater options to choose according to their ability, comfort and safety. Transportation has also deemed a stimulus of economic development, in line with the goal of increasing the production of goods and services and generating employment and community development in general [18]. An example can be seen in the study conducted by Katiman et al. [19] in Bandar Baru Nusajaya, where the degree of accessibility and mobility of the population to carry out daily activities and obtain supplies improved with the presence of a good road network system. In addition, existing transportation facilities have enabled the flow of residents of peri-urban areas, who can commute in the core and rural areas [20, 21]. Improvements in public transportation and communication system facilities indicate that the degree of mobility and access to daily activities has also increased. Therefore, a considerable amount of travel time can be saved and used for other activities, such as spending time with family, indirectly improving the well-being of family relationships. For Katiman et al. [6] and Deden [22], efficient communication systems can enhance psychological and physiological being, leading to greater health well-being as well. Sengupta, Dipankar and Bhisma [23] have also concluded that the well-well-being of people in India was boosted with the development of a good road transportation system.
2.3. Socioeconomic environment
In considering changes pertaining to the lives of individuals and communities, the socioeconomic environment should be emphasised. According to Todaro [24], socioeconomic indicators are related to health, education, income and mentality, while James and David [25] have explained that social indicators are associated with demography, poverty, education, health and housing. In addition, socioeconomic differences can be distinguished by aggregate, composite or non-aggregate classifications. The use of socioeconomic indicators is more appropriate for measuring well-being than for comparing different indicators. Katiman et al. [19] have found that in the peri-urban area of Johor Baharu Metropolitan, immediate socioeconomic impacts occurred, such as people losing their traditional living atmosphere, resettlement to new urban areas, household employment changes and increases in monthly incomes. Other developments included improvements to residential homes and greater access to social service facilities. Most of the households involved with the project enjoyed a more comfortable life after living in the new town. The study also found that safety issues were yet to threaten lives, and neighbourhood relationships remained close. Even so, many felt that the level of religious practice, especially among teenagers, was on the decline. The majority practiced religion at a moderate level and many others were rather in different.
Furthermore, the economic condition is the fundamental factor in measuring the socio-economic performance of an area. Populations’ income may change due to large-scale business activities such as Tesco and Giant, as well as medium-sized supermarkets such as Mydin, Warta and Econsave [26, 5]. Moreover, Yazid, Mohamad Suhaily Yusri, Mohmadisa, Nasir and Kamarul[27] found that changes in global supply functions such as hypermarkets, express delivery and an increased number of hotels have influenced the globalisation process. This situation illustrates that the greater the changes in the supply function (i.e. the shift from traditional to modern), the stronger the influence of globalisation. This situation has caused Lembah Klang-Langat EMR to begin spreading beyond peri-urban areas. In addition, these economic indicators are also closely related to poverty issues, and the level of poverty is important in the measurement of the well-being of peri-urban area communities, being connected with the ability of the household economy to meet basic needs.
2.4. Land Use
According to a study conducted by Rodinelli and Ruddle [28], the development transformation of peri-urban areas is more significantly focused on transforming areas into better places for local people by ensuring that all residents can attain basic infrastructure facilities and quality social services. In addition to the spatial expansion, an area should have at least basic goods and services such as hospitals, schools, public transportation and health clinics. A study on peri-urban areas not in the context of a metropolitan area by Haryati and Nurasyikin [29] (focusing on the development of Pekan Parit Raja, Johor) identified the transformation from a small traditional town to a city with various activities for residents, including aspects of education, society, economy, politics and infrastructure. In particular, the development transformation of Pekan Parit Raja owed to the existence of several educational institutions, especially Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM).
In this study, the researcher assessed land use as an indicator that may affect the well-being of residents in Lembah Klang-Langat EMR by considering the types of activities conducted as well as property ownership. As for the Lembah Langat area, the transformation that took place has contributed to economic growth. According to Shaharudin, Abdul Samad, Abdul Hadi and Ahmad Fariz [30], within four decades this could be seen through changes in land use that occurred from 1966 to 2002. A high level of economic growth in an area would result in an increase in population income. By referring to Nurasyikin [31], this situation simultaneously leads to an increase in both property ownership and types of activities, and can even be a sub-indicator of a population’s well-being. Studies by Katiman et al. [32] and Katiman, Mohd Fuad, and Aishah @ Ecah [33] have found that the three main categories of land use in Lembah Langat have grown rapidly, namely agriculture, forestry and built-up areas. This development has been driven by foreign direct investment from countries such as the United States of America (USA), the United Kingdom (UK), Australia, Japan, South Korea and Hong Kong.
3. Materials and Methods
This study adopted a quantitative research design, specifically a questionnaire as the research instrument. This method was selected because the study incorporated a large number of respondents [34].
3.1. Study Population and Samples
The study involved 400 respondents who were heads of households residing around peri-urban areas of the Selangor Northern Corridor of Lembah Klang-Langat EMR, namely Bukit Beruntung, Batang Kali, Rasa, Kuala Kubu Bar, Kerling, Kalumpang and Ulu Bernam.
Figure 1. Study areas along Selangor Northern Corridor 3.2. Study Instrument
A questionnaire was used as the research instrument in this study. Questionnaire items were broken down into two parts: respondents’ background and well-being constructs (Table 1). The item measurement scale for each variable used a 5-point Likert scale: 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Moderate, 4 = Agree and 5 = Strongly agree.
Table 1. Study instrument
Part Description Variable Source of Items
A Respondents' background
Gender Race
Constructed based on study requirements
B The aspects of well-being
B.1 Housing Area selection
Safety Facilities
Constructed with modifications by referring to Abdul Samad [1], Nurasyikin and Haryati [35], Samruhaizad & Azahan [5], Shaharudin et al. [11] and Yazid et al. [21]
Transportation Public transportation Transportation network
Constructed with modifications by referring to Katiman et al. [10] and Nurasyikin and Haryati [35]
Table 2 shows the Cronbach’s alpha reliability values for all four variables that exceed 0.7, which is an acceptable level according to Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, and Tatham [36].
Table 2. Reliability value of study items
Variable No. of items Cronbach's Alpha Value
Housing 18 0.904
Transportation 16 0.880
Socioeconomy 11 0.808
Land use 15 0.855
4. Results and Discussion
Discussion of the findings is divided here into two parts, namely respondents’ background and well-being. Respondents’ background includes gender and race, while findings for levels of well-being are divided into four study variables which are housing, transportation, socioeconomic environment and land use.
Table 3 reveals the backgrounds of 400 heads of households who live in the northern corridor of Lembah Klang-Langat EMR. A total of 230 persons (57.5%) were male and 170 (42.5%) were female.
Table 3. Respondents’ background
Respondents' Background N % Gender Male Female Total 230 170 400 57.5 42.5 100.0 Race Malay Chinese Indian Total 277 58 65 400 69.3 14.5 16.3 100.0 4.1. Population Levels of Well-being
The study involved four well-being variables, namely housing, transportation, socioeconomic environment and land use. As regards housing, three sub-variables exist that include area selection, safety and facilities. For transportation, there are two sub-variables, namely transportation network and public transportation. In terms of socioeconomic environment, the sub-variables include the society and economy. Finally, for land use, there are two sub-variables, namely types of activities and land ownership.
The level of construct analysis of housing, transport, socioeconomic environment and land use indicators involvesthe descriptive analysis including the mean, percentage, standard deviation and overall level. The levels in this study are based on values that are divided into three levels which are low (score 1.00-2.33), moderate (score 2.34-3.66) and high (score 3.67-5.00). Analysis of the study variables involved (i) housing level, (ii) transport level, (iii) socioeconomic level and (iv) land-use level.
Based on Table 4, the level of the housing variable, in general, indicates that one person (0.3%) is at the low level, 234 persons (58.5%) are at the moderate level and 165 persons (41.3%) are at the high level. It is therefore evident that the level of housing construct in general for the respondents stands at high levels (mean=3.71 and SD=0.39). As for the sub-variables of the housing level, namely area selection, safety and facilities, the findings
Socioeconomy Social Economy
Constructed with modifications by referring to Samruhaizad and Azahan [5] and Yazid et al. [24] Land use Types of activities
Land ownership
Constructed with modifications by referring to Nurasyikin [31] and Katiman et al. [32]
show that respondents’ level is moderate. This finding is consistent with Katiman et al.’s [19] study, which states that people’s tendency to choose a housing area with basic amenities and safety can improve well-being.
Table 4. Levels of housing
Variable Low Level Moderate
Level
High Level Mean SD Average
Level N % N % N % Housing 1 0.3 234 58.5 165 41.3 3.71 0.39 High Area selection 6 1.5 202 50.5 192 48.0 3.70 0.56 High Safety 9 2.3 250 62.5 141 35.3 3.57 0.53 Moderate Facilities 5 1.3 147 36.8 248 62.0 3.85 0.45 High
Table 5 displays the findings of the transportation variables in general. Both the sub-variables of the transportation network and public transportation show high average levels. Moreover, the overall average level for this construct is high. This situation illustrates that transportation in the northern corridor of Lembah Klang-Langat EMR is in good condition. This is further evidenced by a study conducted by Dargay, Dermot and Martin [37], which found that transportation development in developing countries will grow rapidly in line with the country’s economic development, indirectly ensuring the well-being of the population. Wu and Sui [2] additionally clarifies that the key factor that contributes to the well-being of peri-urban people is advanced infrastructure, such as the transportation network at Lembah Klang-Langat EMR, which can enhance accessibility and facilitate residents’ daily activities.
Table 5. Levels of transportation
Variable Low Level Moderate
Level
High Level Mean SD Average
Level N % N % N % Transportation 3 0.8 9.3 18.0 360 90.0 3.99 0.40 High Public Transportation 12 3.0 239 59.8 149 37.3 3.64 0.51 High Transportation Network 2 0.5 29 7.3 369 92.3 4.28 0.42 High
Next is the socioeconomic environment construct. According to Table 6, the level of this variable is high. Moreover, the sub-variables of society and the economy are also at high levels. These findings parallel those of Katiman et al. [19]in peri-urban areas of Johor Baharu New Metropolitan, where an immediate socioeconomic impact was observed, including changes in household employment and monthly income increase. Furthermore, Yazid et al. [27] have suggested that changes in the socioeconomic functions that occur in the peri-urban area can improve people’s well-being and meet basic needs.
Table 6. Levels of socioeconomic environment construct
Variable Low Level Moderate
Level
High Level Mean SD Average
Level
N % N % N %
Socioeconomy 2 0.5 32 8.0 366 91.5 4.16 0.40 High
Social 2 0.5 41 10.3 357 89.3 4.20 0.46 High
Economy 3 0.8 71 17.8 326 81.5 4.13 0.48 High
The land use construct’s level is moderate. Based on Table 7, the activity sub-construct has a high average level and the land ownership sub-construct also displays a high level. These findings are consistent with those of Katiman et al. [32], who noted peri-urban land use becoming a small town and the physical environment of a residential area transforming from traditional to modern, including providing various activities that rendered it more attractive.
Table 7. Levels of land use construct
Variable Low Level Moderate
Level
High Level Mean SD Average
Level
N % N % N %
Types of Activities 3 0.8 107 26.8 290 72.5 3.91 0.47 High Land Ownership 11 2.8 157 39.3 232 58.0 3.67 0.54 High
Overall, the findings show that the majority ofthe sub-variables are at high levels . This proves that the level of well-being of people in the northern corridor of the Lembah Klang-Langat EMR is positive.
5. Conclusion
This study has demonstrated that the population’s levels of well-being in terms of housing, transportation, socioeconomic environment and land use variables were at high levels in general, except for the housing sub-variable of safety, which was only at a moderate level. This situation clearly illustrates a positive reflection in parallel with the government’s initiative to transform peri-urban areas based on the Tenth Malaysian Plan, which seeks to bring development to rural areas by maintaining well-being. This scenario adds to the rapid development process of peri-urban areas, and consequently provides various positive impacts for households residing in peri-urban areas, such as increased employment opportunities, public facilities and greater accessibility.
6. Acknowledgement
The discussion in this article forms part of the findings of an investigation entitled ‘The Development of the Indicators for Rural Urban Transformation at the Peri Urban Areas of Klang-Langat Valley Extended Metropolitan Region’ sponsored by the Ministry of Higher Education Top-down Grant 2016 (2016-0238-106-41).
References
1. Abdul Samad, H. (2010). Urbanisasi di Malaysia: Mengaitkan Kepelbagaian Proses ke Bentuk Perbandaran. Malaysian Journal of Environmental Management, 11(2), 21–31.
2. Wu, B.S., W., & Sui, D.(2016). Modeling impacts of globalization on desakota regions: A case study of Taipei Metropolitan Area. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 43(2), 320–340.
3. Delik, H., Haryo, W., & Woltjer, J. (2007). Peri-Urbanisation in East Asia: A new challenge for planning? Journal International Development Planning Review, 29(4), 503–519.
4. Katiman, R. (2007). Transformasi desa-bandar di pinggiran Wilayah Metropolitan: Beberapa bukti di sekitar Dengkil, Malaysia. In Kertas Kerja yang dibentangkan di Seminar PKPPM (pp. 17–18). Sandy Beach Resort, Pulau Pinang: Universiti Sains Malaysia.
5. Samruhaizad, S., & Azahan, A. (2014). Isu perbandaran dan kualiti hidup penduduk pinggir bandar. International Journal of the Malay World and Civilisation, 2(1), 63–75.
6. Katiman, R. (2006a). Pembandaran dan perkembangan wilayah metropolitan lanjutan Lembah Klang-Langat, Malaysia. Jurnal E-Bangi, 1(1), 1–27.
7. Ivy, D. (2017). Principal component analysis of the determinants of spatial disparity between rural and urban localities of Ghana. International Journal of Social Economics, 44(6), 715–731.
8. McGee, T. G. (1991). The emergence of desakota regions in Asia: Expanding a hypothesis. The Extended Metropolis: Settlement Transition in Asia, 3–25.
9. Fatimah, D. (2005). Transformasi sosial: Evolusi atau revolusi. Kuala Lumpur: Universiti Malaya. 10. Katiman, R., Asmah, A., Sulong, M., Mohd Fuad, M. J., & Mohd Azlan, A. (2006). Transformasi
desa-bandar: Koridor Kemaman-Dungun, Terengganu. Bangi: Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
11. Shaharudin, I., Abdul Samad, H., Ruslan, R., & Abdul Hadi, H. S. (2016). Transformasi dan dayahuni perumahan di Malaysia. In M. J. Jamaluddin, H. Abdul Samad, M. Ahmad Fariz, & A. Kadaruddin (Eds.), Transformasi dan dayahuni habitat manusia(pp. 157–174). Malaysia: UKM.
12. Shaharudin, I., Abdul Samad, H., Abdul Hadi, H. S., & Ahmad Fariz, M. (2008). Spatial urban metabolism for liveable city. Blueprints for Sustainable Infrastructure Conference. In The New Zealand Society for Sustainability Engineering and Science (NZSSES). Auckland, New Zealand.
13. Molly O’Meara, S., Kai, L., & Peter, N. (2007). State of the World. Our Urban Future. London: Earthscan.
14. McGee, T. G. (2009). The spatiality of urbanization: The policy challenges of Mega-Urban and Desakota regions of Southeast Asia. Japan.
15. Katiman, R. (2001). Dasar dan strategi petempatan dalam pembangunan negara. Bangi: Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
16. Christiaensen, L., Weerdt, J., & Todo, Y. (2013). Urbanization and poverty reduction: The role of rural diversification and secondary towns. Agricultural Economics, 44(4–5), 435–447.
17. Second National Urbanisation Policy. (2016). Kementerian perumahan dan kerajaan tempatan. Malaysia.
18. Abd Rahim, A. R. (2002). Pengajaran dan pembelajaran sains sosial : Teori dan amalan. Kuala Lumpur: Universiti Malaya.
19. Katiman, R., Abdul Rahim, M. N., Er, A. C., Aishah@Eshah, M., Zaini, S., Mohd Hasan, N., & Rosniza, A. (2011). Impak pembangunan Bandar Baru Nusajaya Wilayah Iskandar Malaysia terhadap kesejahteraan hidup penduduk asal setempat. Geografia: Malaysian Journal of Society and Space, 7(5), 14–28.
20. Abdul Rahman, E. (2011). Pembandaran dan Kehidupan Bandar di Semenanjung Malaysia. Akademika, 81(2), 23–39.
21. Yazid, S., Mohmadisa, H., Hanifah, M., & Nasir, N. (2017). Issues of rural-urban transformation on the fringe of metropolitan region: Several findings from the Selangor Northern Corridor, Malaysia. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(6), 913–924.
22. Deden, R. (2017). Rapid urbanization and the need for sustainable transportation policies in Jakarta. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 124, No. 1, p. 012017). IOP Publishing. 23. Sengupta, R., Dipankor, C., & Bhisma, R. (2007). Impact of a highway on the socio-economic well-being of rural households living in proximity. Contemporary Issues and Ideas in Social Sciences, 3(3). 24. Todaro, M. P. (1989). Development economic in the third world (4th ed.). New York, Longman. 25. James, M., & David, P. (1995). The fields and methods of social planning. Heinemen Educational
Book, London.
26. Katiman, R. (2006b). Migrasi ke kawasan pinggiran Wilayah Metropolitan Lembah Klang. Akademika, 68, 3–27.
27. Yazid, S., Mohamad Suhaily Yusri, C. N., Mohmadisa, H., Nasir, N., & Kamarul, I. (2014). Impak globalisasi terhadap perubahan fungsi bandar kecil: Beberapa penemuan di Batang Kali dan Bukit Beruntung, Selangor. Geografi, 2(2), 28–38.
28. Rodinelli, D. A., & Ruddle, K. (1978). Urbanization and rural development: A spatial policy for equitable growth. New York: Praeger Publisher.
29. Haryati, S., & Nurasyikin, M. (2013). Transformasi dan pembangunan luar bandar: Kesan ke atas penduduk dan persekitaran. International Journal of the Malay World and Civilisation(IMAN), 1(2), 71–81.
30. Shaharudin, I., Abdul Samad, H., Abdul Hadi, H. S., & Ahmad Fariz, M. (2007). Kerja lapangan berterusan: Merungkai pembandaran lestari. Akademika, 71, 3–30.
31. Nurasyikin, M. (2013). Transformasi Pekan Parit Raja: Kajian terhadap kesejahteraan hidup masyarakat. Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia.
32. Katiman, R., Mochamad, R., Choy, E. A., Abdul Rahim, M. N., Zaini, S., & Norazuan, Md. H. Aishah@Esah, H. M. (2010). Pembandaran dan rebakan bandar di pinggir Wilayah Metropolitan Klang-Langat. GEOGRAFIA OnlineTM Malaysian Journal of Society and Space, 6(2), 37–50.
33. Katiman, R., Mohd Fuad, M. J., & Aishah @ Ecah, M. (2010). Migrasi keluar dan rebakan bandar: Bukti di pinggiran wilayah Metropolitan Lembah Klang, Malaysia. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 5(2), 184–198.
34. Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Asghar, R. (2002). Introduction to Research in Education (6th ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth.
35. Nurasyikin, M., & Haryati, S. (2013). Transformasi pembangunan luar bandar: Kesan ke atas kesejahteraan hidup masyarakat. In Persidangan Geografi & Alam Sekitar, 5-6 Mei 2013. Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Perak.
36. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate Data Analysis (6th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
37. Dargay, J., Dermot, G., & Martin, S. (2007). Vehicle ownership and income growth, worldwide: 1960-2030. The Energy Journal, 28(4), 143–170.
