The Urban-Rural Well-Being Paradox in Sri Lanka: Differences in Subjective Well-Being Among Adults in Colombo District

Technical Summary: The Urban-Rural Well-Being Paradox in Sri Lanka

Problem Statement
While extensive literature links natural environments to improved psychological health, evidence regarding urban-rural differences in subjective well-being (SWB) within South Asian low- and middle-income country (LMIC) contexts remains sparse. Existing research often conflates the cognitive component of well-being (life satisfaction) with affective components (positive and negative affect), potentially obscuring divergent patterns. In high-income nations, urban residence is frequently associated with higher rates of mood and anxiety disorders. Conversely, in LMICs, urban areas often offer material advantages that elevate life satisfaction, even as urban stressors may erode affective well-being. This study investigates whether a "urban-rural subjective well-being paradox"—where urban environments confer a cognitive advantage but an affective disadvantage relative to rural settings—exists in the Colombo District of Sri Lanka, and whether psychological engagement with nature accounts for these differences.

Methodology

• Design and Setting: A quantitative, descriptive, analytical cross-sectional study was conducted between May and July 2025 in the Colombo District, Western Province, Sri Lanka.
• Sampling: The study employed disproportionate stratified random sampling from two Grama Niladhari (GN) divisions: Orugodawatta (urban, high density, built environment) and Thummodara (rural, semi-agricultural, natural vegetation). The final sample included 344 community-dwelling adults (219 urban, 125 rural), aged 18–70, who had resided in their current division for at least one year.
• Instruments:
  • Subjective Well-Being: Assessed via the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS), the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), and the validated Sinhalese Perceived Stress Scale (S-PSS-10).
  • Nature Engagement: Measured using the researcher-developed Nature Experience Scale (NES), a 13-item Sinhala instrument grounded in Attention Restoration Theory (ART) and Stress Reduction Theory (SRT). Exploratory factor analysis identified four subscales: Emotional Restoration, Sensory Engagement, Cognitive-Reflective Experience, and Connection and Stewardship.
  • Demographics: A structured questionnaire captured age, gender, marital status, education, employment, and residence duration.
• Analysis: Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics (v28). Procedures included independent samples t-tests (with Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate correction), Pearson correlations, and hierarchical multiple regression to determine the predictive utility of nature engagement on life satisfaction beyond sociodemographic covariates and residential area.

Key Results

• The Well-Being Paradox: Rural participants reported significantly higher positive affect ($p = .035$) and lower negative affect ($p = .039$) compared to urban participants. Conversely, urban participants reported significantly higher life satisfaction ($p = .043$). Perceived stress was lower in rural areas but did not reach statistical significance ($p = .060$). The authors note that while these differences were directionally consistent with the paradox hypothesis, they were small in magnitude ($d = 0.29–0.35$) and did not survive false discovery rate correction, suggesting they should be interpreted as preliminary evidence.
• Nature Engagement Differences: Rural participants scored significantly higher than urban participants on three of the four NES subscales: Sensory Engagement ($d=0.60$), Cognitive-Reflective Experience ($d=0.51$), and Connection and Stewardship ($d=0.85$). No significant difference was found for Emotional Restoration.
• Predictive Modeling: Hierarchical regression revealed that nature engagement explained an additional 18.3% of the variance in life satisfaction ($\Delta R^2 = .18, p < .001$) beyond sociodemographic factors and residential area. In the final model, Emotional Restoration ($\beta = .31, p < .001$) and Cognitive-Reflective Experience ($\beta = .24, p < .01$) were significant independent predictors of life satisfaction. Sensory Engagement and Connection & Stewardship were not significant independent predictors in the multivariate model.
• Attenuation of Residential Effect: Upon adding nature engagement variables, the regression coefficient for rural residential area (which was initially a significant negative predictor of life satisfaction) attenuated from $\beta = -0.16$ to $\beta = -0.05$ (non-significant), suggesting that differences in the quality of nature engagement partially account for the observed residential differences in cognitive well-being.

Key Contributions

1. Empirical Evidence of the Paradox in an LMIC Context: The study provides preliminary evidence that the urban-rural well-being paradox, previously theorized but rarely tested with simultaneous multi-component measures in South Asia, manifests in the Colombo District. It highlights that urban residents may report higher life satisfaction due to material conditions, while rural residents maintain superior affective well-being.
2. Development of the Nature Experience Scale (NES): The paper introduces a new, culturally adapted instrument for measuring multidimensional nature engagement in Sinhala-speaking populations. The scale distinguishes between restorative, reflective, sensory, and stewardship dimensions, with an exploratory factor analysis revealing a four-factor structure and high internal consistency, though the authors note the instrument remains exploratory pending confirmatory factor analysis and further psychometric validation.
3. Mechanistic Insight: The findings suggest that the depth and intentionality of nature engagement (specifically emotional restoration and cognitive reflection) are more critical for cognitive well-being (life satisfaction) than mere sensory contact or ecological orientation.
4. Methodological Rigor: The study utilizes a within-district design to control for national-level confounders (culture, policy, language) and employs disproportionate stratified random sampling from administrative registers, offering a more robust basis for inference than convenience sampling often used in the region.

Significance and Claims
The authors claim that their findings extend theoretical support for Attention Restoration Theory and Stress Reduction Theory to a South Asian LMIC context, demonstrating that the restorative functions of nature operate similarly across diverse cultural settings. They argue that the study challenges the exclusive reliance on life satisfaction as a primary indicator of psychological health, as doing so may obscure the affective disadvantages experienced by urban populations.

The paper posits that integrating psychologically accessible, well-designed natural environments into public health infrastructure is essential for rapidly urbanizing South Asian contexts. It suggests that urban planning should prioritize spaces that afford "psychologically restorative conditions" (immersion, visual complexity, opportunities for reflection) rather than treating green spaces merely as aesthetic amenities.

Limitations and Modesty of Claims
The authors explicitly acknowledge the study's limitations, noting that the cross-sectional design precludes causal inferences and that reverse causation cannot be ruled out. They emphasize that the observed well-being differences were small and did not survive multiple comparison corrections, framing the paradox findings as "directionally suggestive" rather than statistically robust. Furthermore, the NES is presented as an exploratory tool pending confirmatory factor analysis and test-retest reliability assessment. The study does not claim to have established causal pathways but rather identifies associations that warrant further investigation through longitudinal and experimental designs.