한국디지털건축인테리어학회논문집 (Journal of The Korean Digital Architecture Interior Association)

한국디지털건축·인테리어학회 (Korean Digital Architecture-Interior Association)
권호 표지

AHP를 이용한 도시의 삶의 질 비교

A Comparative Evaluation of Urban Quality of Life Using AHP

  • 김동윤 (안양대학교 스마트도시공간연구소)
  • 투고 : 2013.01.18
  • 심사 : 2013.02.25
  • 발행 : 2013.03.25
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Considering the fact that quality of life(QOL) conceptually has objective and subjective attributes but difficulties in measuring the subjective aspect cause a number of studies not to be balanced, this study exploits AHP(Analytical Hierarchy Process) which has been used for systematic decision making to include the other aspect. As the first step of the process decision making hierarchy model is set by content analysis of the UNDP QOL index and additional review of previous studies. 'Improving urban QOL' is a goal on top, 'Economical QOL', 'Environmental QOL', 'Social QOL' and 'Physical QOL' are dimensions of sub-goal(means objectives), and further decomposition follows. AHP shows that the dimensions of economical, physical, environmental and social QOL scored higher respectively. The aim of the model is to measure and prioritize the urban QOL in the two case study cities. The final score of the each city could be computed by integration of relative weights of dimensions for urban QOL. The final score of QOL for city A was 0.6642 and for city B the figure decreased to 0.3358. The method of this study could be used in stages of the process of urban planning. First stage is when planners try to have a correct and reliable perspective from the existed conditions of the city. Second stage is when the projects should be investigated to be confirmed for their efficiency. In other words planners can direct the scarce resources towards the aspects of QOL which are more important. And the results revealed that using AHP creates opportunity to involving the different groups in the stage of criteria weighting so that the attitudes of local community could be integrated well to the decision making to be suitable for a new paradigm of participatory and communicative planning.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. 김동윤, "도시의 입지결정요인 추출에 관한 연구", 한국디지털건축 인테리어학회 논문집, 11(2), pp. 51-60. 2011.
  2. 박철민 송건섭, "자치구 주민의 삶의 질 실태 분석 평가", 한국지방자치학회보, 11(4), pp.103-123. 1999.
  3. 유경문, "인구이동의 결정요인에 관한 실증분석: 한국의 경우(1966-1985)를 중심으로", 경제학연구, 39(1), pp. 175-196. 1991.
  4. 이곤수, 삶의 질 관점에서 본 평택시의 정부신뢰, 서울: 동아시아연구원. 2011.
  5. 임정빈 최재녕 홍근석, "중요도-성과분석(IPA)을 통한 삶의 질과 지역이주 간의 관계 분석", 한국인사행정학회보, 제11권 제3호, 한국인사행정학회, pp. . 217-242. 2012.
  6. 최준호 이환범 송건섭, "광역도시와 인근 중소도시 지역주민 간 상호이주 영향요인 평가", 한국행정학보, 37(1), pp. 183-203. 2003.
  7. Davidson, W. B. and P. R. Cotter, The Relationship between Sense of Community and Subjective Well-being: A First Look, J. Commun. Psychol., 19, pp. 246-253. 1991. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6629(199107)19:3<246::AID-JCOP2290190308>3.0.CO;2-L
  8. Dissart, J. and S. Deller, Quality of Life in the Planning Literature, J. Plann. Literat., 15, pp. 135-161. 2000. https://doi.org/10.1177/08854120022092962
  9. Ferrel, B. R., Hassey, D. K., and M. Grant, Measurement of the Quality of Life in Cancer Survivors, Quality of Life Research, 4, pp. 523-531. 1995. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00634747
  10. Grayson, L. and K. Young, Quality of Life in Cities: On Overview and Guide to the Literature, The British Library, London, p. 148. 1994.
  11. McCall, S., Quality of Life, Soc. Indicat. Res., 2, pp. 229-248. 1975. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00300538
  12. Megone, C., The Quality of Life: Starting from Aristotle. In: Quality of Life: Perspectives and Politics, Baldwin, S., C. Godfrey and C. Propper (Eds.). Biddles, London, pp. 28-41. 1990.
  13. O'Brien, D. J. and S. Ayidiya, Neighborhood Community and Life Satisfaction, J. Comm. Develop. Soc., 22, pp. 20-37. 1991.
  14. Satty, T. L., Analytical Hierarchy Process. New York, McGraw-Hill. 1980.
  15. UNDP, Human Development Report. Oxford University Press, New York, p. 240. 1994.
  16. Zebrack, B., Quality of life for Long-term Survivors of Leukemia and Lymphoma, Journal of Psycho-social Oncology, 18, pp. 39-59. 2000.