Kentsel Yaşam Kalitesi Ölçümlerinde Kavramsal Değerlendirmeler ve Boyut ÖnerileriYıldız Akpolat, Füsun Kökalan Çımrın, Aykut Çalışkan
Bireyin faydasına dönük iyi olma idealine arayış olan ve fiziksel açıdan kentler üzerinden anlam bulan yaşam kalitesi sosyal göstergeler ve bu göstergelerin memnuniyeti üzerine değer atfetmektedir. Alan yazınına sunulan teorik perspektifin geçerliliğinin kültürel dokuyu işleyen mekânsal farklılıklarından dolayı standart bir yapıyı mecburen temsil edememesi bizleri Türkiye özelinde model arayışına yönlendirmiştir. Nedensel karşılaştırmalı nicel araştırma yönteminin kullanıldığı araştırmada 2015 yılında TÜİK tarafından kentlerin yaşam kalitelerinin ölçülmesinde esas alınan göstergeler ikincil veri analizi tekniğiyle yeniden ele alınmış ve istatistiki açıdan faktör analizine tabi tutulmuştur. Boyut belirleme süreçlerinde kentsel yaşam kalitesinin çekim alanında yer alan faktörlerin toplumsal ihtiyaçlar, mekânsal durum, kamu hizmetlerinden memnuniyet, sosyo-ekonomik kalkınma ve yaşam memnuniyeti olduğu anlaşılmıştır. Yaşam kalitesi göstergelerinin önem düzeyleri ve memnuniyeti ölçen bir ölçme aracıyla yola devam edebilme çabasının arandığı bu araştırma ülkemizde sosyal bilimlerin gelişimine de katkı sunacağı öngörülmektedir.
Assessments of Conceptual in Quality of Urban Life Measurements and Dimensional RecommendationsYıldız Akpolat, Füsun Kökalan Çımrın, Aykut Çalışkan
In pursuit of the ideal of well-being for the benefit of the individual, the concept of quality of life, which is physically meaningful through cities, attributes value to social indicators and the satisfaction of these indicators. The theoretical perspective presented to the literature is not in a standard structure due to the different spatial that process the cultural fabric. This situation necessarily led us to search for a model in Turkey. Representing our area offered a standard structure due to the different spatial functioning of the cultural fabric of the validity of the theoretical perspective we are compelled to search for models in Turkey has led to private. In this study, in which the causal-comparative quantitative research method was used, the indicators that were taken as the basis for measuring the quality of life of cities by Turkish Statistical Institute TSI in 2015 were reconsidered with the secondary data analysis technique and were subjected to factor analysis in statistical terms. It has been understood that the factors in the field of significance gravity of urban life quality in the dimension determination processes are encapsulated by social needs, spatial situation, satisfaction with public services, socio-economic development, and life satisfaction. It is predicted that this study, in which the effort to continue its journey with a tool that measures the importance levels and satisfaction of the quality of life indicators, will contribute to the development of social sciences in our country.
It is possible to define the quality of urban life as the balance of supply and demand of the services needed by the individual living in the city and all conditions. Although this process is complex, it also refers to a series of indicators. In addition to the well-being of the citizens and the variety and quality of services, the standards of the urban spaces must also be considered. In this sense, it is possible to define quality of urban life it as a concept that deals with the measurable spatial, social and physical elements that form the framework of the concept of urban life quality and how city residents perceive these elements. At this point, the main factor discussed is which dimensions the concept of urban life quality includes, as there is no consensus on this issue in the current literature.
Although there is no single agreed model for measuring urban life quality in the literature, it can be said that the most common and accepted approach used in this issue are the as listed above indicators. Indeed, it is seen that urban life quality studies first emerged within the social indicators movement in the 1960s. The social indicator paradigm roughly entails concise, comprehensive and balanced judgments about the state of fundamental aspects of society. According to the current literature approach, social indicators are divided into two. The first of these refers to the objective features of society, that is, to the objective elements that characterize the living conditions in a settlement. In the subjective approach in the second group, an attempt is made to develop a perspective based on the data obtained mostly from the questionnaire technique. People’s perceptions, behaviors, and perspectives of objective conditions are taken into account. We have recently witnessed the addition of a third element to these two dominant approaches in the literature. According to this model, which we can consider to be a combination model, it is necessary to use both objective and subjective indicators together to understand the urban life quality.
When we look at the research on urban life quality, we see that the first studies were conducted within the social indicators movement in the 1960s and centered mostly on objective indicators. An example of this approach is a study by Liu (1976) in 1970 in which more than 244 metropolitan areas in the USA were assessed measured using five general categories; economic, political, environmental, health, education, and social categories were discussed in the research.
One of the first important studies on subjective indicators was conducted by Campbell et al. (1976). This research, which is structured on satisfaction with life and happiness indicators, is based on the relationship between quality of life and social change. Campbell et al. emphasized that expectations, emotions, desires, and value judgments should be followed to assess understand the quality of life. In addition, according to Marans (1975, 2007) and Connerly (1988), one of the most important names in the urban life quality field, individuals’ views are influenced by their past life experiences as well as their perception and evaluation of the characteristics of the living environment.
The theoretical perspective presented to the literature is not in a standard structure due to the different spatial that process the cultural fabric. This situation necessarily led us to search for a model in Turkey. Being able to represent our area offered a standard structure due to the different spatial functioning of the cultural fabric of the validity of the theoretical perspective we are compelled to Turkey has been seeking to direct the specific model and size drink. The fact that the concept of urban life quality becomes measurable is built on the goal of determining the parameters and establishing the importance levels of the connected parameters. This study used a causal-comparative quantitative research method and the indicators that were taken as the basis for measuring the quality of life of cities by Turkish Statistical Institute in 2015 were reconsidered with secondary data analysis technique and subjected to factor analysis in terms of statistics.
It has been understood that the factors in the field of gravity of urban life quality in the dimension determination processes are social needs, the spatial situation, satisfaction with public services, socio-economic development, and life satisfaction. It is considered that determining the importance levels of social indicators, which constitute the centrality of the research where the consideration reflections of countries at the local level, including international organizations, are important, and including them in the studies will contribute to the achievement of accurate results. It has been observed that the variables included in the model among the dimensions of quality of life and in the field of attraction of urban life quality are mainly composed of the variable structure of needs and focus of satisfaction. It is thought that the results of the study will contribute to the dimension determination and data collection processes to be used in urban life quality measurement studies.