IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/ecothe/v60y2022i2p259-280n7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development of the Multi-Criteria Model for the Quality of Life Assessment in Local Governments

Author

Listed:
  • Mijailović Snežana

    (Business College of Applied Studies “Radomir Bojković, PhD”, Kruševac)

  • Marković Sanja

    (Business College of Applied Studies “Radomir Bojković, PhD”, Kruševac)

Abstract

The perception of satisfaction with the quality of life by an individual in urban and rural areas includes a number of objective and subjective indicators, based on the analysis that could be performed. Measuring the preferences of individuals living in different environments, in terms of life goals, needs, moods, expectations, as well as personal satisfaction with the quality of life, requires more criteria to be included for its evaluation. The research was conducted on the basis of twenty indicators for measuring the quality of life in local governments depending on the preferences of individuals, and of different age, gender, education, social status, and satisfaction motives. The subject of this paper is the selection of criteria in a multi-criteria model for assessing the quality of life in local governments, using adequate statistical tools. In addition to descriptive statistics and testing the significance of differences, the authors of the paper used a modified PROMETHEE multi-criteria method for ranking local governments.

Suggested Citation

  • Mijailović Snežana & Marković Sanja, 2022. "Development of the Multi-Criteria Model for the Quality of Life Assessment in Local Governments," Economic Themes, Sciendo, vol. 60(2), pages 259-280, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:ecothe:v:60:y:2022:i:2:p:259-280:n:7
    DOI: 10.2478/ethemes-2022-0015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/ethemes-2022-0015
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/ethemes-2022-0015?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Kahneman & Peter P. Wakker & Rakesh Sarin, 1997. "Back to Bentham? Explorations of Experienced Utility," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 375-406.
    2. Ed Diener & Eunkook Suh, 1997. "Measuring Quality Of Life: Economic, Social, And Subjective Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 189-216, January.
    3. Mónica D. Oliveira & Inês Mataloto & Panos Kanavos, 2019. "Multi-criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment: addressing methodological challenges to improve the state of the art," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(6), pages 891-918, August.
    4. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, 2002. "What Can Economists Learn from Happiness Research?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 402-435, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Matthew D Rablen, 2012. "The promotion of local wellbeing: A primer for policymakers," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 27(3), pages 297-314, May.
    2. Ferreira, Susana & Moro, Mirko & Welsch, Heinz, 2024. "Using Life Satisfaction and Happiness Data for Environmental Valuation: An Experienced Preference Approach," IZA Discussion Papers 16718, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Ahmadiani, Mona & Ferreira, Susana, 2019. "Environmental amenities and quality of life across the United States," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    4. Binder, Martin & Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin, 2021. "Self-employment and subjective well-being," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 411, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    5. van den Berg, Bernard & Fiebig, Denzil G. & Hall, Jane, 2014. "Well-being losses due to care-giving," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 123-131.
    6. Senik, Claudia, 2009. "Direct evidence on income comparisons and their welfare effects," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 408-424, October.
    7. Guven, Cahit & Senik, Claudia & Stichnoth, Holger, 2012. "You can’t be happier than your wife. Happiness gaps and divorce," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 110-130.
    8. Thi Truong An Hoang & Andreas Knabe, 2021. "Time Use, Unemployment, and Well-Being: An Empirical Analysis Using British Time-Use Data," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 22(6), pages 2525-2548, August.
    9. Senik, Claudia, 2008. "Is man doomed to progress?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 140-152, October.
    10. Che-Yuan Liang, 2017. "Optimal inequality behind the veil of ignorance," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 83(3), pages 431-455, October.
    11. Drakopoulos, Stavros, 2011. "Hierarchical Needs, Income Comparisons and Happiness Levels," MPRA Paper 48343, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Gabriel Leite Mota, 2022. "Unsatisfying ordinalism: The breach through which happiness (re)entered economics," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(3), pages 513-528, June.
    13. Hajdu, Tamás & Hajdu, Gábor, 2011. "A hasznosság és a relatív jövedelem kapcsolatának vizsgálata magyar adatok segítségével [Examining the relation of utility and relative income using Hungarian data]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 56-73.
    14. Anand, Paul & Gray, Alastair & Liberini, Federica & Roope, Laurence & Smith, Ron & Thomas, Ranjeeta, 2015. "Wellbeing over 50," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 68-78.
    15. Ingebjørg Kristoffersen, 2010. "The Metrics of Subjective Wellbeing: Cardinality, Neutrality and Additivity," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 86(272), pages 98-123, March.
    16. Bertram, Christine & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2015. "The role of urban green space for human well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 139-152.
    17. Stutzer, Alois, 2004. "The role of income aspirations in individual happiness," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 89-109, May.
    18. Welsch, Heinz & Ferreira, Susana, 2014. "Environment, Well-Being, and Experienced Preference," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 7(3-4), pages 205-239, December.
    19. Koen Decancq & Marc Fleurbaey & Erik Schokkaert, 2015. "Happiness, Equivalent Incomes and Respect for Individual Preferences," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 82, pages 1082-1106, December.
    20. Pouliakas, Konstantinos & Theodossiou, Ioannis, 2010. "An Inquiry Into The Theory, Causes And Consequences Of Monitoring Indicators Of Health And Safety At Work," SIRE Discussion Papers 2010-120, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    quality of life assessment; local governments; multi-criteria model; quality of life indicators; preferences of individuals; Promethee method;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C44 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Operations Research; Statistical Decision Theory
    • C82 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Methodology for Collecting, Estimating, and Organizing Macroeconomic Data; Data Access
    • R58 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Regional Development Planning and Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:vrs:ecothe:v:60:y:2022:i:2:p:259-280:n:7. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.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.