The Effectiveness of Urban Areas on Citizens' Level of Satisfaction in Life Quality in Kouhdasht

جغرافیا و توسعه فضای شهری

Article 6, Volume 2, Issue 2 - Serial Number 3, March 2016, Pages 139-152   

Document Type: Scientific-Research

DOI: 10.22067/gusd.v2i2.40168

Authors

Aliakbar Anabestani^{* 1}; Samad Amrai²; Ahmad Roumiani¹

¹Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

²Islamic Azad University Malayer Branch

Abstract

Expanded Abstract
1. Introduction
Life quality is a transdisciplinary concept which has been recently explored in human fields. The concept has been proposed in social and economic analyses and emphasized the accessible resources in cities. According to the available statistics, nearly half of the world population is living in cities, which is expected to rise in the forthcoming decades. In general, this may be due to the efforts of many people to satisfy their needs and appropriate facilities in the urban life.

2. Theoretical framework
One of the indicators of sustainable urban development is the development of urban areas. Therefore, the development of urban areas indicates a process through which the capital obtained by the society can increase to improve the life quality of residents. Thus, it is safe to say that the development of urban areas includes all issues related to housing, economic development, citizens' participation, social welfare, sense of security, promotion of education, and environmental issues with which all these factors are interconnected. In this sense, the life quality issue is proposed. Personal life quality is presented as an understanding of person's life; on the other hand, the aim of using life quality is to help people use high life quality. Life quality is a complex and multidimensional concept influenced by some variables such as time, location, and personal and social values. In this study, four perspectives of Rajeb are discussed, including sociological perspective, social and geographic sciences, and urban planning. As for the life quality perspective, two approaches are used: 1) Scandinavian approach, 2) American approach.

3. Methodology
The research is done to evaluate the role of urban areas by emphasizing on life quality in Kouhdasht. Such research requires a perspective having a holistic view. The research is of the applied type and the methodology used is descriptive-analytic. Library and field methods (observations, questionnaires, & interviews) were used to collect the data. To analyze the data, the descriptive and inferential along with qualitative analysis statistical methods were used through the SPSS software. Likert questionnaire was used in order to evaluate the role of urban areas development in sustainable development while emphasizing on life quality in four indicators, including social, cultural, economic, and environmental indicators. In the current research, the population included 95 thousands urban residents. The sample size included the 322 questionnaires having 85 items each which were calculated with an error of 0.05. The questionnaires were then randomly distributed among the residents. To rank and rate the quality of the areas, the municipality heads’ opinions were used in a qualitative manner.

4. Discussion and Conclusion
Recently, life quality has become a conventional subject for sociologists and planners; therefore, life quality is a multidimensional concept in social sciences which is effective in most fields in society. It has also occupied a special place in literature regarding the development, whereas some researchers have considered it as a missing link. With urbanization boom and the issues arising from it, life quality and relaxation in the urban areas in recent decades has led to the development life standards in urban areas. The study area under investigation is within the city limits of Kouhdasht (Lorestan Province) in the south-western slopes of the Zagros Mountains with an age of over a hundred years which has faced great changes in terms of urban furniture. The city, like other cities of the country in the past three decades, life quality has been considerably increased since the start of with the prospect of planning process in the country. In this sense, on the one hand, people’s attitudes toward lifestyle and life quality in these areas have been considered. On the other hand, the infrastructures of the areas have attracted the urban managers and planners’ attention, which has provided the grounds for improving life quality in the city. In this study, thus, the geographic, natural, social, economic and skeletal areas are discussed. The participants were asked to state their level of satisfaction about the areas in question. The results indicated that most of the participants were satisfied with their geographic areas with the highest rank, whereas the skeletal area achieved the lowest rank. According to the responses, the urban areas were ranked, Kounaeiha was at the highest rank and Shiravand was at the lowest rank, whereas Kounaeiha in economic and skeletal areas was at the second rank. As this area was near the city center, it achieved the first rank. Since Shiravand was far from the city center, it achieved the lowest rank. The life quality in Kouhdasht has improved given the economic, social conditions and the feasibility of facilities, and the hypothesis is thuis confirmed.

Keywords

Urban areas; Sustainable development; Life quality; Kouhdasht

References

1. ابراهیم‌زاده، ع.، زارع‌محمدی، ف.، و اسماعیل‌زاده، ه. (1390). بررسی نقش و اهمیت سرمایۀ اجتماعی در پویایی اقتصاد شهری با تأکید بر حکمروایی خوب شهری؛ نمونۀ موردی: کلان‌شهر زاهدان. در اولین کنفرانس اقتصاد شهری ایران (به همت محمد صادق شاهدانی)، ص. 1-20. مشهد: دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد

2. احد نژاد، م.، و نجفی، س. (1393)، ارزیابی کیفیت زندگی محلات شهری در راستای عدالت اجتماعی (نمونه موردی:محلات اسلام آباد و کارمندان شهر زنجان)، کنفرانس بین المللی و آنلاین اقتصاد سبز، مازندران بابلسر، سیویلیکا ، شرکت پژوهشی طرود شمال، صص15-1

3. براتی، ن.، و یزدان‌پناه شاه‌آبادی، م. (1390). بررسی ارتباط مفهومی سرمایۀ اجتماعی و کیفیت زندگی در محیط شهر؛ نمونۀ موردی: شهر جدید پردیس. جامعۀ پژوهشی فرهنگی علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی، 2(3)، 25-49

4. جاجرمی، ک.، و کلته، ا. (1385). سنجش وضعیت شاخص‌های کیفیت زندگی در شهر از نظر شهروندان؛ مطالعۀ موردی: گنبد قابوس. مجلۀ جغرافیا و توسعه، 4(8)، 5-18

5. حاجی‌نژاد، ع.، و زمانی، ح. (1390). بررسی و رتبه‌بندی عوامل مؤثر بر میزان رضایتمندی شهروندان از کیفیت محیط زندگی، مطالعۀ موردی: مقایسۀ بافت قدیم و جدید شهر شیراز. پژوهش جغرافیای انسانی، 43(77)، 129-144

6. حاجی‌پور، خ. (1385). برنامه‌ریزی محلۀ مبنا، رهیافتی کارآمد در ایجاد مدیریت شهری پایدار. نشریۀ هنرهای زیبا، 26(37)، 37-46

7. خاکپور، ب.، مافی، ع. ا.، و باوان‌گوری، ع. (1388). نقش سرمایۀ اجتماعی در توسعۀ پایدار محله‌ای (نمونه: کوی سجاد مشهد). مجلۀ جغرافیا و توسعۀ ناحیه‌ای، 7(12)، 55-81

8. ذکایی، م.، و روشن‌فکر، پ. (1385). رابطۀ سرمایۀ اجتماعی و کیفیت زندگی در محلات شهری. فصلنامۀ علوم اجتماعی، 23(32)، 1-37

9. رهنما، م.، و عباس‌زاده، غ. (1387). اصول، مبانی و مدل‌های سنجش فرم کالبدی شهر. تهران، ایران: انتشارت جهاد دانشگاهی مشهد.

10. صرافی، م. (1377). مبانی برنامه‌ریزی توسعۀ منطقه‌ای.تهران، ایران. انتشارت سازمان برنامه و بودجه

11. علی‌اکبری، ا. (1388). دولتمداری در اقتصاد شهری ایران؛ مطالعۀ موردی: استان ایلام. فصلنامۀ تحقیقات اقتصادی دانشگاه تهران، 39(66)، 209-235

12. غیاثوند، ا. (1388). تأثیر سرمایۀ اجتماعی بر کیفیت زندگی ساکنان محلات شهری. فصلنامۀ مهندس مشاور ایران، 6(45) 22-28

13. لطفی، ص.، قیصری، ح.، آهار، ح.، و منوچهری، ا. (1391)، تحلیل تأثیر دسترسی به تسهیلات محله‌ای در کیفیت زندگی شهری؛ نمونۀ موردی: شهرمراغه. مقالۀ ارائه‌شده در اولین همایش ملی شهرسازی و معماری در گذر زمان، دانشگاه بین‌المللی امام‌خمینی‌(ره)

14. Allen, J. C., Vogt, R. J., & Cordes, S. (2002). Quality of life in rural Nebraska: Trends and change. Retrieved from

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1004&context=caripubs

15. Beumer, C., Valkering, P., & Ruelle, C. (2010). Envisioning a sustainable urban neighborhood. The Netherlands, Maastricht: Maastricht University ICIS

16. Cowan, R., & Hall, P. G. (2002). The dictionary of urbanism (Vol. 67). Tisbury: Streetwise Press

17. Epley, D. R., & Menon, M. (2008). A method of assembling cross-sectional indicators into a community quality of life. Social Indicators Research, 88(2), 281-296

18. Gold, J. & Kolb, W. (1997). A dictionary of the social sciences. (Z. Mazandarani, Trans.). Tehran: Maziyar Publications

19. Lee, H. Y. (2008). An analysis on the development capacity of an urbanized area for urban growth management. Journal of the Korean Urban Geographical Society, 11(1), 1-18

20. Levent, T. B., & Nijkamp, P. (2006). Quality of urban life: A taxonomic perspective. Journal of Studies in Regional Science, 36(2), 269-281

21. McMahon, S. K. (2002). The development of quality of life indicators: A case study from the City of Bristol, UK. Ecological Indicators, 2(1), 177-185

22. Moro, M., Brereton, F., Ferreira, S., & Clinch, J. P. (2008). Ranking quality of life using subjective well-being data. Ecological Economics, 65(3), 448-460

23. Pal, A. K., & Kumar, U. C. (2005). Quality of Life (QoL) concept for the evaluation of societal development of rural community in West Bangal, India. Asia-Pacific Journal of Rural Development, 15(2), 83-93

24. Phillips, ‌D.‌ (2006). Quality of life: Concept, policy and practice. London: Rutledge

25. Roback, J. (1982). Wages, rents and the quality of life. Journal of Political Economy, 90(6), 1257-1278

26. Roslan, A., Russayani, I., & Nor Azam, A. (2010). The impact of social capital on quality of life: Evidence from Malaysia. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences, 4(3), 113-122

27. Royuela, V., & Suriñach, J. (2005). Constituents of quality of life and urban size. Social Indicators Research, 74(3), 549-572

28. Schmit, R. (2002). Considering social capital in quality of life assessment: Concept and measurement, Social Indicators Research, 65(58), 403-428

29. Baycan levent, T., & Nijkamp, P. (2006). Quality of urban life a taxonomic perspective. Journal of Studies in Regional Science, 36(2), 1-5

30. Cowan, R. (2002(. Dictionary of Urbanism. London, England: Street Wise Press