IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i7p4067-d530989.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Samira Vakilipour

    (Geoinformation Tech. Center of Excellence, Faculty of Geodesy & Geomatics Engineering, K. N. Toosi University of Technology, Tehran 19697, Iran
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Abolghasem Sadeghi-Niaraki

    (Geoinformation Tech. Center of Excellence, Faculty of Geodesy & Geomatics Engineering, K. N. Toosi University of Technology, Tehran 19697, Iran
    Department of Computer Science and Engineering, and Convergence Engineering for Intelligent Drone, Sejong University, Seoul 143-747, Korea
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Mostafa Ghodousi

    (Geoinformation Tech. Center of Excellence, Faculty of Geodesy & Geomatics Engineering, K. N. Toosi University of Technology, Tehran 19697, Iran)

  • Soo-Mi Choi

    (Department of Computer Science and Engineering, and Convergence Engineering for Intelligent Drone, Sejong University, Seoul 143-747, Korea)

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Samira Vakilipour & Abolghasem Sadeghi-Niaraki & Mostafa Ghodousi & Soo-Mi Choi, 2021. "Comparison between Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods and Evaluating the Quality of Life at Different Spatial Levels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-36, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:7:p:4067-:d:530989
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/7/4067/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/7/4067/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Esfandiar Zebardast, 2009. "The Housing Domain of Quality of Life and Life Satisfaction in the Spontaneous Settlements on the Tehran Metropolitan Fringe," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 90(2), pages 307-324, January.
    2. Tolga, Ethem & Demircan, Murat Levent & Kahraman, Cengiz, 2005. "Operating system selection using fuzzy replacement analysis and analytic hierarchy process," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(1), pages 89-117, July.
    3. Daisy Das, 2008. "Urban Quality of Life: A Case Study of Guwahati," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 88(2), pages 297-310, September.
    4. JosÉ Figueira & Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrogott, 2005. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-0-387-23081-8, April.
    5. Andrii Shekhovtsov & Volodymyr Kozlov & Viktor Nosov & Wojciech Sałabun, 2020. "Efficiency of Methods for Determining the Relevance of Criteria in Sustainable Transport Problems: A Comparative Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-23, September.
    6. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2007. "Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(2), pages 514-529, April.
    7. Buket Özdemir Işık & Sara Demir, 2017. "Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods for the Sustainability of Historical–Cultural Structures on the Trabzon Coastline," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-19, November.
    8. Erbaş, Mehmet & Kabak, Mehmet & Özceylan, Eren & Çetinkaya, Cihan, 2018. "Optimal siting of electric vehicle charging stations: A GIS-based fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 1017-1031.
    9. Gokhan Ozkaya & Mehpare Timor & Ceren Erdin, 2021. "Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Indicators and Comparisons of Countries through a Hybrid Model of Data Mining and MCDM Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-49, January.
    10. Mulliner, Emma & Malys, Naglis & Maliene, Vida, 2016. "Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 59(PB), pages 146-156.
    11. Saad Saleem Bhatti & Nitin Kumar Tripathi & Masahiko Nagai & Vilas Nitivattananon, 2017. "Spatial Interrelationships of Quality of Life with Land Use/Land Cover, Demography and Urbanization," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 132(3), pages 1193-1216, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Agnieszka Bieda & Agnieszka Telega, 2021. "The Analysis of Research Hotspots in the Field of Urban Quality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-6, August.
    2. Mir Seyed Mohammad Mohsen Emamat & Caroline Maria de Miranda Mota & Mohammad Reza Mehregan & Mohammad Reza Sadeghi Moghadam & Philippe Nemery, 2022. "Using ELECTRE-TRI and FlowSort methods in a stock portfolio selection context," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 8(1), pages 1-35, December.
    3. Francesco Ciardiello & Andrea Genovese, 2023. "A comparison between TOPSIS and SAW methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 967-994, June.
    4. Das, Priyanka & Maitra, Swati, 2024. "Priority areas of intervention for improving pedestrian infrastructure and facilities at tourist destinations in India," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 126-136.
    5. Maria Julia Xavier Belem & Milton Vieira Junior & Giovanni Mummolo & Francesco Facchini, 2021. "An AHP-Based Procedure for Model Selection for Eco-Efficiency Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, November.
    6. Jana Coronicova Hurajova & Zuzana Hajduova, 2021. "Multiple-Criteria Decision Analysis Using TOPSIS and WSA Method for Quality of Life: The Case of Slovakia Regions," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(19), pages 1-11, October.
    7. Marian Lubag & Joph Bonifacio & Jasper Matthew Tan & Ronnie Concepcion & Giolo Rei Mababangloob & Juan Gabriel Galang & Marla Maniquiz-Redillas, 2023. "Diversified Impacts of Enabling a Technology-Intensified Agricultural Supply Chain on the Quality of Life in Hinterland Communities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-26, August.
    8. Katerina Kabassi, 2021. "Comparing Multi-Criteria Decision Making Models for Evaluating Environmental Education Programs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-17, October.
    9. Ahmed M. A. Shohda & Mahrous A. M. Ali & Gaofeng Ren & Jong-Gwan Kim & Ahmed M. Abdo & Wael R. Abdellah & Abbas M. Hassan, 2022. "Sustainable Assignment of Egyptian Ornamental Stones for Interior and Exterior Building Finishes Using the AHP-TOPSIS Technique," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-17, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ioannis Sitaridis & Fotis Kitsios, 2020. "Competitiveness analysis and evaluation of entrepreneurial ecosystems: a multi-criteria approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 294(1), pages 377-399, November.
    2. Audrius Čereška & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Valentinas Podvezko & Ina Tetsman & Irina Grinbergienė, 2016. "Sustainable Assessment of Aerosol Pollution Decrease Applying Multiple Attribute Decision-Making Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-12, June.
    3. Mohammad Rezvani & Hossain Mansourian & Mohammad Sattari, 2013. "Evaluating Quality of Life in Urban Areas (Case Study: Noorabad City, Iran)," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 112(1), pages 203-220, May.
    4. Govindan, Kannan & Jepsen, Martin Brandt, 2016. "ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 1-29.
    5. Musa Pazhuhan & Saeed Zanganeh Shahraki & Niloofar Kaveerad & Sirio Cividino & Matteo Clemente & Luca Salvati, 2020. "Factors Underlying Life Quality in Urban Contexts: Evidence from an Industrial City (Arak, Iran)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-16, March.
    6. Ali Hosseini & Brandon Marc Finn & Seyed Aliakbar Sajjadi & Tahereh Mosavei, 2023. "Urban Disparities and Quality of Life Among Afghan Refugees Living in Informal Settlements in Mashhad, Iran," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 18(2), pages 1073-1097, April.
    7. Tuyen Quang Tran & Huong Vu, 2018. "A microeconometric analysis of housing and life satisfaction among the Vietnamese elderly," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 849-867, March.
    8. Samaneh Khaef & Esfandiar Zebardast, 2016. "Assessing Quality of Life Dimensions in Deteriorated Inner Areas: A case from Javadieh Neighborhood in Tehran Metropolis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 127(2), pages 761-775, June.
    9. Antonio Nesticò & Piera Somma, 2019. "Comparative Analysis of Multi-Criteria Methods for the Enhancement of Historical Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-19, August.
    10. Ateekh Ur Rehman & Syed Hammad Mian & Usama Umer & Yusuf Siraj Usmani, 2019. "Strategic Outcome Using Fuzzy-AHP-Based Decision Approach for Sustainable Manufacturing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-22, October.
    11. Tetsuya Tsurumi & Shunsuke Managi, 2017. "Monetary Valuations of Life Conditions in a Consistent Framework: The Life Satisfaction Approach," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 18(5), pages 1275-1303, October.
    12. Mir Seyed Mohammad Mohsen Emamat & Caroline Maria de Miranda Mota & Mohammad Reza Mehregan & Mohammad Reza Sadeghi Moghadam & Philippe Nemery, 2022. "Using ELECTRE-TRI and FlowSort methods in a stock portfolio selection context," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 8(1), pages 1-35, December.
    13. Behzadian, Majid & Kazemzadeh, R.B. & Albadvi, A. & Aghdasi, M., 2010. "PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 198-215, January.
    14. Elsa Tesfazghi & J. Martinez & J. Verplanke, 2010. "Variability of Quality of Life at Small Scales: Addis Ababa, Kirkos Sub-City," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 98(1), pages 73-88, August.
    15. Imane Ballouki & Mohammed Douimi & Latifa Ouzizi, 2018. "Decision Support Tool Selection for Eco-Design Integration into the Simultaneous Design of Product and its Supply Chain," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(02), pages 1-32, June.
    16. Kaynar, Nur & Karsu, Özlem, 2018. "Equitable decision making approaches over allocations of multiple benefits to multiple entities," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 85-98.
    17. Piotr Zielniewicz, 2017. "A Ranking Method Based on the Aggregate Distance Measure Function in the Value Space," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(03), pages 685-710, May.
    18. N. Aktaş & N. Demirel, 2021. "A hybrid framework for evaluating corporate sustainability using multi-criteria decision making," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(10), pages 15591-15618, October.
    19. Siu Ming Chan & Hung Wong, 2022. "Housing and Subjective Well-Being in Hong Kong: A Structural Equation Model," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 17(3), pages 1745-1766, June.
    20. Fancello, Giovanna & Tsoukiàs, Alexis, 2021. "Learning urban capabilities from behaviours. A focus on visitors values for urban planning," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:7:p:4067-:d:530989. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.