Comparison between Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods and Evaluating the Quality of Life at Different Spatial Levels

Achieving a good urban form has been a problem since the formation of the earliest cities. The tendency of human populations toward living in urban environments and urbanization has made the quality of life more prominent. This article aimed to calculate the quality of life in an objective way. For...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Sustainability 2021-04, Vol.13 (7), p.4067
Hauptverfasser: Vakilipour, Samira, Sadeghi-Niaraki, Abolghasem, Ghodousi, Mostafa, Choi, Soo-Mi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 7
container_start_page 4067
container_title Sustainability
container_volume 13
creator Vakilipour, Samira
Sadeghi-Niaraki, Abolghasem
Ghodousi, Mostafa
Choi, Soo-Mi
description Achieving a good urban form has been a problem since the formation of the earliest cities. The tendency of human populations toward living in urban environments and urbanization has made the quality of life more prominent. This article aimed to calculate the quality of life in an objective way. For this purpose, the technique for order preferences by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS), vlseKriterijumsk optimizacija kompromisno resenje (VIKOR), simple additive weighted (SAW), and elimination and choice expressing reality (ELECTRE) have been utilized. Quality of life was assessed at three spatial levels. In this regard, socioeconomic, environmental, and accessibility dimensions were considered. As a result, in the first level of comparison, sub-districts in District 6 were ranked higher than that of District 13. On the second level, for District 6, vicinity sub-districts had higher rankings than the center, and for District 13, sub-districts near the center of the city had higher rankings. In the third level, District 6 had a higher quality of life. The results of the comparison between research methods showed that the SAW method performs better in terms of stability. Based on the results of correlation tables, there was a strong and direct relationship between each pair of methods at three spatial levels. In addition, as the study area became smaller, the similarity between the methods increased.
doi_str_mv 10.3390/su13074067
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2562195781</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2562195781</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c295t-ca469e729c51ef6d924d3a764251ae4dcc32403486203fb2dd18e5ad771f4913</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNkF1LwzAUhoMoOHQ3_oKAd0I1X22WS-nmB3SIuPuSNScus2tqkk73792YoOfmPbw8nAMPQleU3HKuyF0cKCdSkEKeoBEjkmaU5OT0336OxjGuyX44p4oWI_Rd-k2vg4u-w0tIXwAdng9tclkZXILgNJ5C46LzXTbXH657x3NIK28i1p3Bs61uB50OdVoBfh1069IOe4srZwHrhKfOWgjQJfzW70Hd4gq20MZLdGZ1G2H8mxdo8TBblE9Z9fL4XN5XWcNUnrJGi0KBZKrJKdjCKCYM17IQLKcahGkazgThYlIwwu2SGUMnkGsjJbVCUX6Bro9n--A_B4ipXvshdPuPNcsLRlUuJwfq5kg1wccYwNZ9cBsddjUl9cFt_eeW_wBLmmwd</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2562195781</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison between Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods and Evaluating the Quality of Life at Different Spatial Levels</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute</source><creator>Vakilipour, Samira ; Sadeghi-Niaraki, Abolghasem ; Ghodousi, Mostafa ; Choi, Soo-Mi</creator><creatorcontrib>Vakilipour, Samira ; Sadeghi-Niaraki, Abolghasem ; Ghodousi, Mostafa ; Choi, Soo-Mi</creatorcontrib><description>Achieving a good urban form has been a problem since the formation of the earliest cities. The tendency of human populations toward living in urban environments and urbanization has made the quality of life more prominent. This article aimed to calculate the quality of life in an objective way. For this purpose, the technique for order preferences by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS), vlseKriterijumsk optimizacija kompromisno resenje (VIKOR), simple additive weighted (SAW), and elimination and choice expressing reality (ELECTRE) have been utilized. Quality of life was assessed at three spatial levels. In this regard, socioeconomic, environmental, and accessibility dimensions were considered. As a result, in the first level of comparison, sub-districts in District 6 were ranked higher than that of District 13. On the second level, for District 6, vicinity sub-districts had higher rankings than the center, and for District 13, sub-districts near the center of the city had higher rankings. In the third level, District 6 had a higher quality of life. The results of the comparison between research methods showed that the SAW method performs better in terms of stability. Based on the results of correlation tables, there was a strong and direct relationship between each pair of methods at three spatial levels. In addition, as the study area became smaller, the similarity between the methods increased.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2071-1050</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2071-1050</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/su13074067</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Air pollution ; Data envelopment analysis ; Decision making ; Environmental quality ; Human populations ; Methods ; Multiple criterion ; Outdoor air quality ; Principal components analysis ; Quality assessment ; Quality of life ; Research methods ; Similarity ; Socioeconomic factors ; Sustainability ; Sustainable development ; Urban environments ; Urban planning ; Urban populations ; Urbanism ; Urbanization</subject><ispartof>Sustainability, 2021-04, Vol.13 (7), p.4067</ispartof><rights>2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c295t-ca469e729c51ef6d924d3a764251ae4dcc32403486203fb2dd18e5ad771f4913</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c295t-ca469e729c51ef6d924d3a764251ae4dcc32403486203fb2dd18e5ad771f4913</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-6710-1434 ; 0000-0002-0048-8216</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Vakilipour, Samira</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sadeghi-Niaraki, Abolghasem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghodousi, Mostafa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Choi, Soo-Mi</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison between Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods and Evaluating the Quality of Life at Different Spatial Levels</title><title>Sustainability</title><description>Achieving a good urban form has been a problem since the formation of the earliest cities. The tendency of human populations toward living in urban environments and urbanization has made the quality of life more prominent. This article aimed to calculate the quality of life in an objective way. For this purpose, the technique for order preferences by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS), vlseKriterijumsk optimizacija kompromisno resenje (VIKOR), simple additive weighted (SAW), and elimination and choice expressing reality (ELECTRE) have been utilized. Quality of life was assessed at three spatial levels. In this regard, socioeconomic, environmental, and accessibility dimensions were considered. As a result, in the first level of comparison, sub-districts in District 6 were ranked higher than that of District 13. On the second level, for District 6, vicinity sub-districts had higher rankings than the center, and for District 13, sub-districts near the center of the city had higher rankings. In the third level, District 6 had a higher quality of life. The results of the comparison between research methods showed that the SAW method performs better in terms of stability. Based on the results of correlation tables, there was a strong and direct relationship between each pair of methods at three spatial levels. In addition, as the study area became smaller, the similarity between the methods increased.</description><subject>Air pollution</subject><subject>Data envelopment analysis</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Environmental quality</subject><subject>Human populations</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Multiple criterion</subject><subject>Outdoor air quality</subject><subject>Principal components analysis</subject><subject>Quality assessment</subject><subject>Quality of life</subject><subject>Research methods</subject><subject>Similarity</subject><subject>Socioeconomic factors</subject><subject>Sustainability</subject><subject>Sustainable development</subject><subject>Urban environments</subject><subject>Urban planning</subject><subject>Urban populations</subject><subject>Urbanism</subject><subject>Urbanization</subject><issn>2071-1050</issn><issn>2071-1050</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNpNkF1LwzAUhoMoOHQ3_oKAd0I1X22WS-nmB3SIuPuSNScus2tqkk73792YoOfmPbw8nAMPQleU3HKuyF0cKCdSkEKeoBEjkmaU5OT0336OxjGuyX44p4oWI_Rd-k2vg4u-w0tIXwAdng9tclkZXILgNJ5C46LzXTbXH657x3NIK28i1p3Bs61uB50OdVoBfh1069IOe4srZwHrhKfOWgjQJfzW70Hd4gq20MZLdGZ1G2H8mxdo8TBblE9Z9fL4XN5XWcNUnrJGi0KBZKrJKdjCKCYM17IQLKcahGkazgThYlIwwu2SGUMnkGsjJbVCUX6Bro9n--A_B4ipXvshdPuPNcsLRlUuJwfq5kg1wccYwNZ9cBsddjUl9cFt_eeW_wBLmmwd</recordid><startdate>20210401</startdate><enddate>20210401</enddate><creator>Vakilipour, Samira</creator><creator>Sadeghi-Niaraki, Abolghasem</creator><creator>Ghodousi, Mostafa</creator><creator>Choi, Soo-Mi</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6710-1434</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0048-8216</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210401</creationdate><title>Comparison between Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods and Evaluating the Quality of Life at Different Spatial Levels</title><author>Vakilipour, Samira ; Sadeghi-Niaraki, Abolghasem ; Ghodousi, Mostafa ; Choi, Soo-Mi</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c295t-ca469e729c51ef6d924d3a764251ae4dcc32403486203fb2dd18e5ad771f4913</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Air pollution</topic><topic>Data envelopment analysis</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Environmental quality</topic><topic>Human populations</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Multiple criterion</topic><topic>Outdoor air quality</topic><topic>Principal components analysis</topic><topic>Quality assessment</topic><topic>Quality of life</topic><topic>Research methods</topic><topic>Similarity</topic><topic>Socioeconomic factors</topic><topic>Sustainability</topic><topic>Sustainable development</topic><topic>Urban environments</topic><topic>Urban planning</topic><topic>Urban populations</topic><topic>Urbanism</topic><topic>Urbanization</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Vakilipour, Samira</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sadeghi-Niaraki, Abolghasem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghodousi, Mostafa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Choi, Soo-Mi</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><jtitle>Sustainability</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Vakilipour, Samira</au><au>Sadeghi-Niaraki, Abolghasem</au><au>Ghodousi, Mostafa</au><au>Choi, Soo-Mi</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison between Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods and Evaluating the Quality of Life at Different Spatial Levels</atitle><jtitle>Sustainability</jtitle><date>2021-04-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>13</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>4067</spage><pages>4067-</pages><issn>2071-1050</issn><eissn>2071-1050</eissn><abstract>Achieving a good urban form has been a problem since the formation of the earliest cities. The tendency of human populations toward living in urban environments and urbanization has made the quality of life more prominent. This article aimed to calculate the quality of life in an objective way. For this purpose, the technique for order preferences by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS), vlseKriterijumsk optimizacija kompromisno resenje (VIKOR), simple additive weighted (SAW), and elimination and choice expressing reality (ELECTRE) have been utilized. Quality of life was assessed at three spatial levels. In this regard, socioeconomic, environmental, and accessibility dimensions were considered. As a result, in the first level of comparison, sub-districts in District 6 were ranked higher than that of District 13. On the second level, for District 6, vicinity sub-districts had higher rankings than the center, and for District 13, sub-districts near the center of the city had higher rankings. In the third level, District 6 had a higher quality of life. The results of the comparison between research methods showed that the SAW method performs better in terms of stability. Based on the results of correlation tables, there was a strong and direct relationship between each pair of methods at three spatial levels. In addition, as the study area became smaller, the similarity between the methods increased.</abstract><cop>Basel</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><doi>10.3390/su13074067</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6710-1434</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0048-8216</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2071-1050
ispartof Sustainability, 2021-04, Vol.13 (7), p.4067
issn 2071-1050
2071-1050
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2562195781
source Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute
subjects Air pollution
Data envelopment analysis
Decision making
Environmental quality
Human populations
Methods
Multiple criterion
Outdoor air quality
Principal components analysis
Quality assessment
Quality of life
Research methods
Similarity
Socioeconomic factors
Sustainability
Sustainable development
Urban environments
Urban planning
Urban populations
Urbanism
Urbanization
title Comparison between Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods and Evaluating the Quality of Life at Different Spatial Levels
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T02%3A11%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20between%20Multi-Criteria%20Decision-Making%20Methods%20and%20Evaluating%20the%20Quality%20of%20Life%20at%20Different%20Spatial%20Levels&rft.jtitle=Sustainability&rft.au=Vakilipour,%20Samira&rft.date=2021-04-01&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=4067&rft.pages=4067-&rft.issn=2071-1050&rft.eissn=2071-1050&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/su13074067&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2562195781%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2562195781&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true