An Analysis of Quality of Life Satisfaction in Central areas Cities (Case Study: The Impacts of Individual Variables on the Quality of Life of Residents of Ardabil City Central Neighborhoods)

Document Type : Research Paper


university of Isfahan


Extended Abstract
Measuring the degree of satisfaction of Quality of Life in city or neighborhood is difficult and it depends on a lot of factors. Also, understanding the level of satisfaction from each person and in different personal, social, economic, cultural and physical conditions is different. Actually, Adding personal attributes to analyzes will increase predictive power. Some of the individual variables that affect satisfaction include: demographic factors, personality, values, expectations, comparisons with other settlements, and some personal and household characteristics (such as age, gender, education level, occupation, and even ownership).
The purpose of the research is Assessment of quality of life in Ardabil City Central Neighborhoods and is to show the effects of individual variables of urban residents on citizens' perception of quality of life (In four dimensions: social, physical, economic and environmental) is in the form of the geographical school of spatial behavior. Therefore, it has investigated the status of residents' satisfaction with the quality of life in the central neighborhoods of Ardabil City (the Aliqapu or Darvazeh, Sarcheshmeh, Tav, Gazaran, Ochidukan and Pirabd ol-Malek).The main questions of this research are:
1. How are Satisfaction of residents the quality of life in each dimension?
2. How is the quality of life of the residents in the central neighborhoods of Ardebil city?
3. How are the individual variables of the residents relate to the degree of satisfaction with the quality of life urban or neighborhood in different aspects of research?

The method of this research is descriptive and analytical based on the field study method. The data collection instrument was a researcher-made questionnaire prepared. Validity of the questionnaire has been confirmed by experts and its reliability was also measured by Cronbach's alpha, with a credit rating of 0.726. The statistical society of our research is all residents over the age of 12 who are in the six Central neighborhoods of Ardabil (Urban neighborhoods of the Aliqapu or Darvazeh, Sarcheshmeh, Tova, Gazaran, Ochdukan and Pir Abdol-Malek). The sample size is calculated using the Cochran formula and With a confidence level of 95% and with regard to the maximum heterogeneity hypothesis as (p=q=0.5) 384 participants. Each sample was randomly selected and interviewed. The results were analyzed by SPSS software. To analyze the relationship between the variables and the answers to the research questions, different tests (ANOVA and t-test) were used. Research indicators include
1. Indicators of physical-spatial sustainability: housing, neighborhood vitality, quality of neighborhood form and texture, accessibility and aesthetics;
2. Indicators of Social Sustainability: Individual Areas, Public and Social Areas, Neighborhood Units;
3. Indicators of environmental sustainability: efficiency, cleanliness of neighborhoods, quality of litter and natural environment of the neighborhood;
4. Indicators of Economic Sustainability: Neighborhood Sustainable Active Economy, Neighborhood Financial Costs;

Results and discussion
The mean satisfaction of all indicators (economic, environmental, social and physical) was 2.90, indicating a relative satisfaction with the overall quality of life of the residents in the neighborhoods. See the table below:
Table 1. Average residents' satisfaction with the status of each of the survey indicators by neighborhood
Average Neighborhood Economic Environmental Social Physical Urban Neighborhoods
3.29 2.79 3.66 3.49 3.2 Ochdukan
2.47 2.14 2.4 3.01 2.31 Tova
2.82 2.63 2.96 2.89 2.8 Gazaran
3.05 2.4 3.15 3.44 3.22 Aliqapu or Darvazeh
2.9 3.01 2.77 3.15 2.65 Sarcheshmeh
2.89 2.58 3.01 3.31 2.67 Pir Abdol-Malek
2.9 2.59 2.99 3.22 2.81 Average Index
Out of all indicators of quality of life, social sustainability index of residents is better than other indicators of quality of life, which is mainly due to the religious background of the studied neighborhoods. Investigating the relationship between total quality of life and its relationship with independent individual variables of residents, as shown in the table below, given the sig value obtained from T-test for independent variables of gender, age, education level, and resident status, Place of birth and residence time of residents is less than 0.05, so it can be said that the relationship between these variables and total quality of life is significant. Relationship mode for individual variables is marital status, and occupation of residents with quality of life vice versa.
Table 2. Relationship Level and Relationship Type of Individual Variables of Respondents with Residents' Quality of Life
Describe the relationship sig T-test AS SS DF Variables
meaningful relationship 0.026 0.797 0.583 2.915 383 Gender
meaningful relationship 0.018 3.598 2.536 10.144 383 Age
meaningful relationship 0.003 5.211 3.178 12.71 383 Education
No meaningful relationship 0.272 1.358 0.524 2.017 383 Marital Status
meaningful relationship 0.002 13.111 0.814 2.438 383 Residential Status
meaningful relationship 0.003 3.004 1.244 3.733 383 Place of Birth
meaningful relationship 0.021 3.463 1.433 7.167 383 Duration of Residence
No meaningful relationship 0.318 1.234 0.446 2.676 383 Workplace

Ardebil city is in the process of transition to modernity and is influenced by the current and future changes of modern urbanization. Therefore, the quality of life in the central neighborhoods of Ardabil city is not satisfactory and due to being in transition phase this satisfaction can be improved with proper management. On the one hand, changes in urban areas in its various dimensions (economic, environmental, social, and physical) have been unquestionable in the light of community growth and the newly formed needs of residents, and on the other hand, the results of any field study in Behavioral geography, including the consideration of subjective indicators of citizens' quality of life, may be influenced by one another, depending on factors. In addition, individual variables of residents are among the important factors affecting the level of resident satisfaction in different areas of behavioral geography.
Therefore, considering the impact of individual variables of residents on their perception of the environment and the needs and expectations of urban plans, consider and measure the effects that urban plans can have on different groups of residents. Developing and reviewing their components is the major strategy that can be suggested to improve the satisfaction of subjective indicators of quality of life in the residents of each neighborhood and especially in central Ardabil.


Main Subjects

  1. امیدی، رضا، 1391، تحلیل برنامه‏های عمرانی و توسعة ایران از منظر مؤلفه‏های برنامه‏ریزی اجتماعی، فصل‏نامة برنامه‏ریزی و بودجه، س ۱۷، ش 4، صص 97-114.
  2. بوداغی، روجا و صارمی، حمیدرضا، 1393، سنجش کیفیت ابعاد زیست‏محیطی شهر مبتنی بر فضاهای شهری (مطالعة موردی: مقایسة محلة فردوسی در منطقة 12 و محلة شهرک بوعلی در منطقة 2 تهران)، فصل‏نامة مطالعات مدیریت شهری، س ۶، ش ۲۰، صص 35-43.
  3. جمشیدی‏ها، غلام‏رضا؛ پروایی هره‏دشت، شیوا؛ پیری، صدیقه و ادیب حاج‏باقری، ثریا، 1393، بررسی نقش احساس تعلق محله‏ای در افزایش مشارکت اجتماعی (مطالعة موردی: محلة قزل‏قلعة تهران)، فصل‏نامة مطالعات جامعهشناختی شهری، س 4، ش 12، صص 1-24.
  4. جمعه‏پور، محمود و مخلصیان، سپیده، 1396، سطح پایداری محله‏ای و رابطة آن با توسعة اجتماعی در محلة نازی‏آباد تهران، نشریة پژوهش‏های جغرافیای انسانی، دورة 49، ش 2، صص 411-425.
  5. چرخچیان، مریم، 1398، مقایسة رضایتمندی از فضاهای مسکونی در محلات (نمونة موردی: سه محلة فردوسی، دانشگاه و پونک در قزوین)، نشریة جغرافیا و برنامه‏ریزی، س 23، ش 67، صص 109-128.
  6. حسینی، سیدهادی، 1393، تحلیل و ارزیابی سطح پایداری اجتماعی در شهر نوشهر، فصل‏نامة جغرافیا و پایداری محیط، ش 12، صص 57-71.
  7. خراسانی، محمدامین:رضوانی، محمدرضا و مولایی‏قلیچی، محمد، 1394، تحلیل تأثیر متغیرهای فردی بر ادراک از زیست‏پذیری در روستاهای پیرامون شهر (مطالعة موردی: شهرستان ورامین)، نشریة جغرافیا و توسعة ناحیه‏ای، س ۱۳، ش 2، صص 159-181.
  8. رسول‏پور، هژیر؛ اعتصام، ایرج و طهماسبی، ارسلان، 1397، ارزیابی تأثیر مؤلفه‏های کیفیت محیطی بر الگوهای رفتاری در فضاهای فیزیکی شهری، مطالعات محیطی هفت حصار، س ۷، ش 25، صص 19-34.
  9. رفیعیان، مجتبی؛ داداش‏پور، هاشم و فروزنده، محسن، 1392، تحقق‏پذیری برنامه‏ریزی محله‏محور در بافت‏های فرسودة شهری مطالعة موردی محلة سنگلج تهران، فصل‏نامة مطالعات و پژوهش‏های شهری و منطقه‏ای، ش 18، صص 89-106.
  10. صالحی، صادق و امام‏قلی، لقمان، 1391، مطالعة تجربی رابطة آگاهی و رفتارهای زیست‏محیطی (مطالعة مناطق شهری و روستایی شهرستان سنندج)، نشریة مسائل اجتماعی ایران، س ۳، ش 1، صص 121-147.
  11. قدیری، محمود و شهربابکی، صغری، 1395، تحلیل کیفیت کالبدی محیط مسکونی بازسازی‏شدة شهر بم، نشریة تحقیقات کاربردی در علوم جغرافیایی، س ۱۶، ش 40، صص 93-112.
  12. محمدی، جمال و علی‏زاده، جابر، 1399، تحلیلی بر وضعیت محلات شهری اردبیل از نگاه ساکنین با گریزی بر محلة مطلوب در شهر ایرانی- اسلامی، نشریة مطالعات ساختار و کارکرد شهری، س ۷، ش 22، صص 7-35.
  13. محمدی، جمال؛ علی‏زاده، جابر؛ رحیمی، حمزه؛ علی‏زاده، توحید و علی‏زاده، ناصر، 1396، بررسی متغیرهای فردی مؤثر بر رضایتمندی شهروندان از کیفیت محیط زندگی (مطالعة موردی: مقایسة مراکز تجاری- تاریخی کلان‏شهرهای اصفهان و تبریز)، نشریة فضای جغرافیایی، س ۱۷، ش 60، صص 287-306.
  14. منصورحسینی، ندا و جوان‏فروزنده، علی، 1397، نقش مؤلفه‏های کالبدی- معنایی مکان‏های عمومی مجتمع‏های مسکونی در حضورپذیری سالمندان (مطالعة موردی: شهرک اکباتان)، نشریة هویت شهر، س ۱۲، ش 33، صص 61-74.
  15. وصالی، سعید و توکل، محمدمهدی، 1391، بررسی تأثیر سرمایة اجتماعی بر کیفیت زندگی در شهر تهران، فصل‏نامة مطالعات شهری، س ۲، ش ۲، صص 197-220.
  16. Omidi, R., 2013, Analyzing Iran’s Development Plans from the Viewpoint of Social Planning Factors, The Journal of Planning and Budgeting, Vol. 17, No. 4, PP. 97-114.
  17. Boodaghi, R. and Saremi, H., 2014, Quality measurement-based environmental aspects of urban spaces (study compared the neighborhood of University Town neighborhood Bu-Ali District 12 and District 2 of Tehran), Journal of Urban Management Studies, 6, No. 20, PP. 36-43.
  18. Jamshidiha, Gh.R.; Parvai Haredasht, Sh., Piri, S. and Adib Hajebagheri, S., 2015, The role of community sense-of-belonging in promoting social participation (Case of Study: Ghezel ghalea neighborhood of Tehran), Journal of Urban Sociological Studies, 4, No. 12, PP. 1-24.
  19. Jomepoor, M. and Mokhlesian, S., 2017, The level of neighborhood stability and Its relationship with social development in the Nazi Abad neighborhood, Tehran, Journal of Human Geography Research , 49, No. 2, PP. 411-425.
  20. Charkhchian, M., 2019, Comparative Study on Housing Satisfaction in Different Communities Case studies: Ferdosi, Daneshgah and Poonak communities in Qazvin, Journal of Geograohy & Planning, 23, No. 67, PP. 109-128.
  21. Hosseini, H., 2014, Analysis and Assessment of Urban Social Sustainability in Nowshahr City, Journal of Geograohy and Suatainability of Environment, 4, No. 12, PP. 57-71.
  22. Khorasani, M. A.; Rezvani, M. R. and Molaei Ghelichi, M., 2016, An Analysis of Individual Variables Affecting the Perception of Livability in Peri-urban Villages (Case Study: Varamin City), Journal of Geography and Regional Development, 13, No. 2, PP. 159-181.
  23. Rasulpur, H.; Etesam, I. and Tahmasebi, A., 2018, Crime Prevention in urban management using Environmental Design principles: CPTED localized checklist (case study Tehran Laleh Park), Haft Hesar Journal of Environmental Studies, Vol. 7, No. 25, PP. 19-34.
  24. Rafiyan, M.; Dadashpour, H. and Foruzandeh, M., 2013, Implementations of Community Oriented Planning in Urban Deteriorated Fabrics Case study of sanglaj district in Tehran, Journal of Urban Regional Studies and Resrarch, Vol. 5, Issue 18, PP. 89-106.
  25. Salehi, S. and Emamgholi, L., 2012, Experimental Study of the Relationship between Environmental Awareness and Behaviors (Study of Urban and Rural Areas of Sanandaj City), Journal of Social Problems of Iran, Vol. 3, No. 1, PP. 121-147.
  26. Ghadir, M. and Shahrbabaki, S., 2016, Analysing the Physical Quality of Reconstructed Residential Environment of Bam City, Journal of Researches in Geographical Sciences, 16(40), 93-112.
  27. Mohamadi, J. and Alizadeh, J., 2020, An analysis of the situation of the urban neighborhoods of Ardebil in terms of residents Looking at the a Desirable Neighborhood in the Iranian-Islamic City, Journal of Urban Structure and Function Studies, Vol. 7, No. 22, PP. 7-35.
  28. Mohamadi, J.; Alizadeh, J. and Rahimi, H., 2018, Assessment of individual variables which influence the citizens’ satisfaction of quality of living environment (Case Study: Comparison of business and historical centers in Isfahan and Tabriz metropolises), Journal of Geographic Space, Vol. 17, No. 60, PP. 287-304.
  29. Mansour Hosseini, N. and Javan Forouzande, A., 2018, The Role of Physical-semantic Components of Residential Public Spaces in Accommodating the Elderly (Case Study: Ekbatan Residential Complex), Journal of Hoviat shahr, Vol. 12, No. 1, PP. 61-74.
  30. Vesali, S. and Tavakkol, M. M., 2012, The Impact of Social Capital on Quality of Life in Tehran, Urban Studies Quarterly, Vol. 2, No. 2, PP. 197-220.
  31. Adewale, A.; Taiwo, A.; Izobo-Martins, O. and Ekhaese, N., 2015, Age of residents and satisfaction with the neighbourhood in Ibadan core area: a case study of Oke Foko, Global Journal of Arts Humanities and Social Sciences, Vol. 3, No. 2, PP. 52-61.
  32. Anne, C. K.; Matthias, A.; Katharina, H. S.; Jürgen, O. and Jobst, A., 2018, How Does the Urban Environment Affect Health and Well-Being? A Systematic Review. Urban science, No. 4, PP. 1-21.
  33. Arjmand, R., 2017, Public Urban Space, Gender and Segregation: Women-only urban parks in Iran, Routledge Taylor and Franis Group, London and Newyork.
  34. Brown, T. and Morgue, B., 2007, Off the Couch and the Move: Global public health and the medication of nature, Social Science &Medicine, No. 64, PP. 1343-1354.
  35. Camacho-Rivera, M.; Kawachi, I.; Bennet, G.G. and Subramanian, S. V., 2014, Associations of neighborhoodconcentrated poverty, neighborhood racial/ethnic composition, and indoor allergen exposures: A cross-sectional analysis of Los Angeles households, 2006–2008, Urban Health, No. 91, PP. 661-676.
  36. Das, D., 2008, Urban Quality of Life: A case study of Guwahati, Social Indicators Research, 88, No. 2, PP. 297-310.
  37. Davidson, A. B. and Kaznelson, H., 2010, Comparison of parents' and social workers' assessments of the quality of life of children at risk. Children and Youth Services Review, No. 32, PP. 711-719.
  38. Enrique, G. B.; John, C. S. and Kerry, R. M., 2005, Gender differences in perceived environmental correlates of physical activity, International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, Vol. 2, No. 12, PP. 1-9.
  39. European Union, 2018, IN-DEPTH REPORT: Indicators for Sustainable Cities, November 2015 (revised March 2018) Issue 12, PP. 1-24.
  40. Geelen, L.; Huijbregts, A. J. M.; Den Hollander, H. M. J.; Ragas, A. and Jaarsveld, Z. D., 2009, Confronting environmental pressure. environmental quality and human health impact indicators of priority air emissions, Atmospheric Environment, Vol. 43, Issue 9, PP. 1613 -1621.
  41. Gifford, R., 2007, Environmental psychology and sustainable development: Expansion, maturation, and challenges, Journal of Social, Issues, No. 63, PP. 199-212.
  42. Godefroid, S., 2001, Temporal analysis of the Brussels flora as indicator for changing environmental quality, Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 52, Issue 4, PP. 203-224.
  43. Hagen, B.; Nassar, C. and Pijawka, D., 2017, The Social Dimension of Sustainable Neighborhood Design: ComparingTwo Neighborhoods in Freiburg, Germany, Urban Planning (ISSN: 2183–7635), Vol. 2, Issue 4, PP. 64-80.
  44. IANWGE, 2015, WomenWatch: Gender Equality and Sustainable Urbanisation (fact sheet), Inter-Agency Network on Women and Gender Equality, accessed 6 February 2015-
  45. Jin, E.; Lee, W. and Kim, D., 2018, Does Resident Participation in an Urban Regeneration Project Improve Neighborhood Satisfaction: A Case Study of “Amichojang” in Busan, South Korea, Sustainability, 10(10), 1-13.
  46. Khosla, P., 2005, Gendered cities: built and physical environments, National Network on Environments and Women's Health.
  47. Kilimova, L., 2016, Quality of life as a human development determinant in the context of economic instability, Economic Annals-XXI, 157, PP. 59-62.
  48. Mason, M. W.; Valente, T.; Coatsworth, J. D.; Mennis, J.; Lawrence, F. and Zelenak, P., 2010, Place based social network quality and correlates of substance use among urban adolescents, Journal of Adolescence, Vol. 33, Issue 3, PP. 419-427.
  49. Mehan, A. and Soflaei, F., 2017, Social sustainability in urban context: Concepts, definitions, and principles. Architectural Research Addressing Societal Challenges, Taylor & Francis Group, ISBN 978-1-138-02966-8. PP. 293-29.
  50. Moser, G., 2009, Quality of life and sustainability: Toward person–environment congruity, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 29, Issue 3, PP. 351-357.
  51. Murgs, F. and Klobucnik, M., 2018, Quality of Life in the City Urban Life or Well-Being in the City: Conceptualization and case study. Ekológia (Bratislava), Vol. 37, No. 2, PP. 183-200.
  52. Noor, S. R.; Mohamed Osman, M.; Bachok, S.; Rosli, N. F. and Abdullah, M. F., 2018, Perceptual Sudy on Conventional Quality of Life (Indicators), Planning Malaysia, Journal of the Malaysian Institute of Planners, Vol. 16, Issue 1, PP. 303-313.
  53. Paloma, C.; Marta, G.; María, S.; Julia, D.; Luisa, N. B.; Jesús, R. N. and Manuel F., 2018, Changing Neighborhoods and Residents’Health Perceptions: The Heart Healthy HoodsQualitative Study, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (ISSN 1660-4601; CODEN: IJERGQ; ISSN 1661-7827 for printed edition), PP. 1-12.
  54. Ribeiro, C.G.; Ferretti, F. and Antonio, C., 2017, Quality of life based on level of physical activity among elderly residents of urban and rural areas, bras. geriatr. gerontol, Vol. 20, No. 3, PP. 330-339.
  55. Shieh, E.; Sharifi, A. and Rafieian, M., 2011, Identification of factors that assure quality of residentialenvironments, using environmental assessment indices: a comparative study of Two of Tehran’s neighborhoods (Zafaranieh & Khaniabad), International Journal of Architectural Engineering & Urban Planning, Vol. 21, No. 2, PP. 119-132.
  56. Soltes, V.; Novakova, B. and Szabo, Z. K., 2018, A Comparative Study on Satisfaction with Current Standard of Living and its Effects on Overall Life Satisfaction: Case of Romania, V4 and EU-15, Quality Innovation Prospererity, Kvalitnovacia Prosperita, Vol. 22, No. 1, PP. 58- 72.
  57. Streimikiene, D., 2014, Natural and built environments and quality of lifein EU member states, Journal of International Studies, Vol. 7, No 3, PP. 9-19.
  58. Szemik, S.; Kowalska, M. and Kulik, H., 2019, Quality of Life and Health among People Living in an Industrial Area of Poland, Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16, 1221; doi:10.3390, PP. 1-11.
  59. Taeeb Rashid, S.; Bin Ngah, I. and Eluwa, S. E., 2013, Neighbourhood Choice Factors And Residents Satisfaction In Old And New Neighbourhoods Of Slemani City, Kurdistan-Iraq, Journal of Environment and Earth Science, Vol. 3, No. 2, PP. 72-80.
  60. Wang, B.; Li, X.; Stanton, B. and Fang, X., 2010, The influence of social stigma and discriminatory experience on psychological distress and quality of life among rural-to-urban migrants in China, Social Science & Medicine, Vol. 71, Issue 1, PP. 1-9.
  61. Westaway, M. S., 2006, A longitudinal investigation of satisfaction with personal and environmental quality of life in an informal South African housing settlement. Doornkop. Soweto, Habitat International, Vol. 30, Issue 1, PP. 175-189.
  62. Whitehead, T.; Simmonds, D. and Preston, J., 2006, The effect of urban quality improvements on economic activity, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 80, Issue 1, PP. 1-12.
  63. Wong, C., 2001, The Relationship Between Quality of Life and Local Economic Development: An Empirical Study of Local Authority Areas in England, Cities, Vol. 18, Issue 1, PP. 25-32.
  64. Yilmazi, H.; Surat, H.; Özhanci, E. and Yesil, M., 2015, Urban Living Area Satisfaction And Public Preference, Journal of Forestry Faculty, 15(2), 319-329.
  65. Zuk, M.; Bierbaum, A. H.; Chapple, K.; Gorska, K.; Loukaitou-Sideris, A.; Ong, P. and Thomas, T., 2018, Gentrification, Displacement and the Role of Public Investment: A Literature Review, Journal of Planning Literature, 33(1), 31-44.
Volume 53, Issue 3
October 2021
Pages 1049-1072
  • Receive Date: 22 September 2019
  • Revise Date: 27 July 2020
  • Accept Date: 27 July 2020
  • First Publish Date: 23 September 2021