Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Multi-Criteria Decision Making to Measure Quality of Life: An Integrated Approach for Implementation in the Urban Area of Thessaloniki, Greece

  • Published:
Applied Research in Quality of Life Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 27 January 2015

Abstract

The purpose of this study is the examination of the concept of ‘Quality of Life’ as well as a thorough analysis of the relevant approaches for evaluation in an urban environment. It is a complex approach of the quality of life (Quality of Life) that is pursued, as it is combined with multi-criteria decision-making methods, for a full investigation of the urban lifestyle in the urban area of Thessaloniki. From the great variety of multi-criteria methods, the Analytical Hierarchy Process was chosen, which can easily be applied nowadays, as an indispensable tool in the decision making process. The model of Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP) is an effective way for an interactive exploration of decision-making strategies, with citizen participation, attempting to classify the aspects of quality of life. An integrated approach is proposed, combining the two approaches into a single model, able to be implemented as a planning tool to capture the conditions of living and the degree of residents’ prosperity, using both objective indicators and subjective criteria.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Cicerchia, A. (1996). “Indicators for the measurement of the quality of urban life: what is the appropriate territorial dimension”. Social Indicators Research, 39, 321–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cottam, H.R. (1941), “Methods of Measuring Level of Living, Social Participation and Adjustment of Ohio Farm People”, Methodological Supplement to the Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin No. 624, Columbus, Ohio

  • Daisy, D. (2007). “Urban quality of life: a case study of guwahati”. Social Indicators Research, 88, 297–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1997). “Measuring quality of life: economic, social and subjective indicators”. Social Indicators Research, 40, 189–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ΕΕΑ, Ensuring quality of life in Europe’s cities and towns, Tackling the environmental challenges driven by European and global change, 2009

  • Eurofound, European Foundation for the Improvement of the Living and Working Conditions, (2004).

  • Eurofound, European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, (2010), “Subjective well-being in Europe, second European Quality of Life Survey”, Luxemburg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities

  • Hagerty, M. R., Cummins, R. A., Ferriss, A. L., Land, K., Michalos, A. C., Peterson, M., et al. (2001). “Quality of life indexes for national policy: review and agenda for research”. Social Indicators Research, 55, 1–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IISD, Plan Winipeg, 1993. City of Winnipeg Quality of Life Indicators

  • Kamp, I. V., Leidelmeijer, K., Marsman, G., & Hollander, A. U. (2003). “Urban environmental quality and human well-being towards a conceptual framework and demarcation of concept; a literature study”. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65, 5–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kladivo, P., & Halás, M. (2012). “Quality of life in an urban envrironment: a typology of urban units of Olomouc”. Quaestiones Geographicae, 31(2).

  • Lampiri, D., Biangi, B., & Royuela, V. (2006). Quality of life in the economic and urban economic literature”. Social Indicators Research, 84, 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, G., & Weng, Q. (2007). “Measuring the quality of life in city of Indianapolis by integration of remote sensing and census data”. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 28(2), 249–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lo, C. P., & Faber, B. J. (1997). “Integration of landsat thematic mapper and census data for quality of life assessment”. Remote Sensing of Environment, 62, 143–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malczewski, J. (2006). “GIS‐based multicriteria decision analysis: a survey of the literature”. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 20(7), 703–726.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marans, R. W. (2012). “Quality of urban life studies: an overview and implications for environment-behaviour research”. Procedia Social Behavioral Sciences, 35, 9–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Multi-criteria analysis: a manual, Department for Communities and Local Government, 2009 http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/corporate/multicriteriaanalysismanual

  • Oktay, D., Rustemli, A., & Marans, R. (2009). “Neighborhood satisfaction, sense of community, and attachment: initial findings from Famagusta quality of urban life study”, ITU A|Z Vol 6 No1, 6-20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ordway, S. (1953). Resources and the american dream: including a theory of the limit of growth”. New York: Ronald Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborn, F. (1954). The limits of the earth”. Boston: Little, Brown and Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potter, J., Cantarero, R., & Wood, H. (2012). “The multi-dimensional nature of predicting quality of life”, ASEAN conference on environment-behaviour studies, Bangkok. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 50, 781–790.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Psatha Ε., Deffner Α., Psycharis Y. (2011), “Defining the quality of urban life: Which factors should be considered?”, Proceedings of the 51st European Congress of the RSAI: New Challenges for European Regions and Urban Areas in a Globalised World, Barcelona

  • Quality of life in Europe, first European quality of life survey 2003. Dublin www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2004/105/en/1/ef04105en.pdf

  • Quality of Life Project (2007), “Quality of life in Twelve of New Zealands Cities”. http://www.qualityoflifeproject.govt.nz/

  • Quality of Life Survey (2010), “Quality of Life Survey 2010 Eight Cities Report”

  • Rezvani, M., Mansourian, H., & Hossain, S. M. (2012). “Evaluating quality of life in urban areas case study noorabad City, Iran”. Sociology Indica Recovery, 112, 203–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process”. International: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L. (1990). “How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process”. European Journal of Operational Research, 48, 9–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L. (1992). “Highlights and critical points in the theory and application of the analytic hierarchy process”. European Journal of Operational Research, 74, 426–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santos, L. D., & Martins, I. (2006). “Monitoring urban quality of life: the Porto experience”. Social Indicators Research, 80, 411–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirgy, M. J., Michalos, A., Ferris, A., Easterlin, R., Patrick, D., & Pavot, W. (2005). “The quality of life research movement: past, present, and future”. Social Indicators Research, 76, 343–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tesfazghi, S., Martinez, J. A., & Verplanke, J. J. (2009). “Variability of quality of life at small scales: addis Ababa kirkos Sub-city”. Sociology Indica Recovery, 98, 73–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, C., & Hirsch, J. (1992). “Some urban measurements from SPOT data: urban life quality indices”. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 13, 3251–3261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our common future. United Nations. http://conspect.nl/pdf/Our_Common_Future-Brundtland_Report_1987.pdf

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Spatial Planning and Development School of Engineering, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece

    A.-M. Feneri, D. Vagiona & N. Karanikolas

Authors
  1. A.-M. Feneri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D. Vagiona
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. N. Karanikolas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A.-M. Feneri.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Feneri, AM., Vagiona, D. & Karanikolas, N. Multi-Criteria Decision Making to Measure Quality of Life: An Integrated Approach for Implementation in the Urban Area of Thessaloniki, Greece. Applied Research Quality Life 10, 573–587 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-014-9335-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-014-9335-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation