بررسی شاخص‌های کیفیت زندگی در نواحی روستایی؛ مطالعه موردی دهستان‌های بخش مرکزی شهرستان اردستان، استان اصفهان

نویسندگان

چکیده

 کیفیت زندگی، واژهای پیچیده، چندبُعدی و کیفی در رابطه با شرایط و وضعیت جمعیت، در یک مقیاس جغرافیایی
خاص (شهر، منطقه، محله، بخش و...) است که هم متکی بر شاخص‌های ذهنی یا کیفی و هم متکی بر شاخص‌های عینی یا کمی است. هدف مقاله حاضر، بررسی و
سنجش شاخص‌های کیفیت زندگی در دهستان‌های بخش مرکزی شهرستان اردستان، استان اصفهان
با استفاده از شاخص‌های ذهنی و عینی است.
داده‌های مورد نیاز با استفاده از پیمایش خانوارهای روستایی دهستان‌های بخش مرکزی
شهرستان اردستان جمع آوری شده و البته برخی از داده‌های ثانویه نیز بهره برداری
گردیده است. 203 نفر از سرپرستان خانوارها از بین تمام دهستان‌ها (کچو، علیا،
گرمسیر، همبرات، برزاوند، ریگستان و سفلی) به شیوه تصادفی طبقه ای برای مطالعه
انتخاب شدند. نتایج مطالعات و ارزیابی کیفیت ذهنی و عینی در دهستان‌های مذکور نشان
می‌دهد دهستان‌های بخش مرکزی شهرستان اردستان در سه طبقه قرار دارند. در طبقه اول
دهستان کچو با بیشترین سطح کیفیت زندگی، در طبقه دوم دهستان‌های علیا، همبرات و
گرمسیر با سطح کیفیت زندگی متوسط، و سایر دهستان‌ها از قبیل برزاوند، سفلی و
ریگستان در طبقه سوم با پایین ترین سطح کیفیت زندگی قرار دارند. هر چند همبستگی
بین ابعاد کیفیت زندگی بالا نیست، اما به طور کلی، یافته‌های تحقیق اهمیت مطالعه همزمان ابعاد عینی و ذهنی کیفیت زندگی را نشان می دهد، که می تواند به پیشبرد مطالعات کیفیت زندگی نواحی  روستایی کمک نماید.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

To study the indicators of quality of life in rural areas: a case study of rural district of Ardestan, Isfahan province

نویسندگان [English]

  • Z. Keshavari
  • M. Adibi
  • M. Ghanbari
چکیده [English]

 To study the indicators of life quality in rural
areas: a case study of rural district of section central of Ardestan county in
Isfahan province Mehdi Adibi Sadeh, Zahra Sadat Keshavarz, Mohammad
Ghanbari   Introduction Life quality is a complicated, multi-dimensional,
and qualitative item regarding conditions and position of a population in a
particular geographical scale, such as city, district, etc. This item depends
both on subjective or qualitative and objective or quantitative indicators. Life
quality is not a new concept, the concept has existed in Greek
philosophy and Aristotle has mentioned
the topic of happiness. Life quality of rural people is dependent to many
factors like employment, income,
access to services such as education,
health, environment, security and a strong association.
Although life quality of urban
people is dependent are also
the­se factors but challenges of measuring
prosperity and a better life in rural areas is very
different. Therefore, given the
importance of life quality in development and well-being
of human communities, measurement
of life quality and explain the factors affecting their is very important. Methodology The present study aims to study and assess the
quality of life indicators in rural district of Ardestan in Isfahan province
using subjective and objective indicators. Required data was obtained by
surveying families living in rural district of Ardestan some secondary data
was also applied. 203 of family supervisors among all villages (Kachu, Alia,
Garmsir, Hambarat, Barzavand, Rigestan, and Sofla) were selected for study by
applying hierarchical random method.  DiscussionThe most important characteristics
of the respondents in this research is as
follows: average age of respondents: 40 years, 42.7 percent have elementary
education, 48 percent have permanent occupation, income average of respondents
2670000 rials. Life quality can be influenced by individual factors, the socio-economic and demographic. On this basis, the appropriate test to be used in this
regard and the most important of test
results are listed in the following tables.



      Table 1: The condition of rural district of
section central of Ardestan County in indicators of life quality     Rural district   Indicators of
life quality   Factor of life
quality     Social   Physical   Economical   environment     Average   SD[1]   Rank   Average   SD   Rank   Average   SD   Rank   Average   SD   Rank   quantity   Rank     Kachu   4.47   0.72   6   3.52   0.97   1   3.42   0.98   1   3.14   0.96   1   0.16   1     Alia   4.55   0.72   5   3.51   1.05   3   3.33   1   2   3.08   0.99   3   0.12   2     Barzavand   4.59   0.69   2   3.42   0.93   7   3.25   0.95   4   3.10   0.89   2   0.06   3     Sofla   4.65   0.63   1   3.51   1   2   3.28   0.93   3   3.01   0.95   6   0.05   4     Garmsir   4.56   0.67   4   3.46   1   4   3.24   0.93   5   3.03   0.96   4   0.00   5     Hambarat   4.56   0.76   3   3.43   1.01   6   3.23   0.93   6   2.97   0.94   7   0.02   6     Rigestan   4.43   0.78   7   3.44   1.01   5   3.19   0.91   7   3.02   0.87   5   0.03   7       According to Table
2 in
all indicators,
the life quality in case study is
moderate and less and the
most inappropriate situation can be seen
in the economic and environmental
indicators.   Table 2: Comparison of family evaluation in life quality base on the T-Test
independent       Criteria   Sub
criteria   T-Test
independent     Average   SD   Levees
test   t   df   (Sig)     f   Sig     social   Education   16.309   5.45   0.053   0.033   5.706-   538   0.12     Health & security   13.643   8.40   0.024   0.005   3.248-   382   0.067     Leisure   18.278   3.28   0.043   0.000   6.473-   427   0.071     Physical   Housing   10.362   5.74   0.060   0.021   0.191   553   0.053     Information   10.598   6.12   0.035   0.047   0.269   621   0.096     Economical   Income
& job   17.405   6.48   0.082   0.053   8.407-   403   0.018     Environment   Quality
of environment   18.780   5.13   0.039   0.174   10.998-   419   0.000        Figure 1: Level of life quality in rural district of
section central of Ardestan County in Isfahan province Conclusion Results of the
study and assessment of objective and subjective qualities of given villages
indicate that they are classified in three categories. In the first one, Kachu
is with the highest quality of life Alia, Hambarat, and Garmsir are in the
second category possessing medium quality of life and other villages, including
Barzavand, Sofla, and Rigestan, are in the third category with the least level
of quality of life. In spite of no high correlation between qualities of life,
but generally, research`s findings show the importance of concurrent study of
subjective and objective dimensions of quality of life. This issue can assist
in proceeding studies concerning quality of life in rural areas.  Keywords: life quality, subjective indicators,
objective indicators, rural areas, rural district of Ardestan   Reference Purtaheri, M &
Eftekhari, A.R & Fatahi, A (2011): The evaluation of life quality in rural
areas: a case study: rural district of Khave Shomali, Lorestan province, The
Journal of human geography researches, N.76, Pp.13-31. Khademolhoseiny , A
& Mansourian, H & Sattari, M.H (2010): Measuring Subjective Quality of
Life in Urban Areas (Case study: Noorabad city, Lorestan province), The journal
of geography and environment studies, N.3. Pp.13-31.Devas,
D.A (2004): The method of survey in Social Research, Translated by H.Naiebi,
Tehran, Ney Pub.Rezvani, M.R &
Mansourian, H (2008): The survey of life quality: Review of concepts, indicators, models and present of
proposed model for rural areas, the journal of Rural and development, N.3.
Pp.1-26.Shafiee, M (2006): Role of
globalization in the loosening of
family bonds (case study: Ardestan county,
M.A Thesis, Social science, University Payamenoor. Ghafari, G.R &
Onigh naz, M (2006): Social capital and life quality, the journal of social
studies of Iran, N.1 Pp.159-199. Faraji Mollaie, A
& Azimi, A & Ziyari, K (2010): Analysis of the dimensions of the
Quality of Life in the Urban Areas of Iran, The journal of research and urban
planning, N.2 Pp. 1-16.Mohammadi, J &
Zanganeh, M & Abdoli, A (2010): Evaluation quality of life from
perspective of citizens, Mashhad, The journal of urban management, N. 3. Pp.
19-38.Statistical
Center of Iran (2006): Detailed Results of general census of
population and Housing.Auh, Seongyeon.
(2005), an Investigation of the Relationships between Quality of Life and
Residential Environments among Rural Fmilies. Ames: Iowa state University.Bloom, David E.
Craig, Pattricia H. and Malaney, Pia N. (2001), the Quality of Life in Rural
Asia. Manila: Asian Development Bank. Brereton, F,
Clinch, J.P. and Ferreira, S., (2008), Happiness, geography and the
Environment. Ecological Economics, 65(2).Bukenya, Delia.
(2002), Rural Quality of Life in a Changing Environment: a Study of the
Eramosa-Speed Region. Ontario: The University of Guelph.Camagni, R.,
Capello, R., and Nijkamp, P., (1998), Towards Sustainable City Policy: an
economy envirronment technology nexus. Ecological Economics, 24.Coffman, Don D. And
Adamek, Mary S. (1999), “The contributions of Wind Band Participation to
Quality of Life of life senior adults”. Nusic Therapy Perspectives. Vo1. 17,
No. 1.Currie, Janet L.
and Develin, Elizabeth. (2002), “Stroll your way to wellbing: A stigma
associated with pram walking groups designed for new mothers”. Health Care for
Woman International. Vo1. 23, No. 8.Das, D., (2008),
Urban Quality of life: A case study of Guwahati. Social Indicators Research,
88.Fisher, K. J.
(2004), “A community-based walking trial to improve neighborhood quality of
life in older adults: a multilevel analysis”. Annals of Behavioral Mediacine.
Vo1. 28, No. 3.Foo, T.S., (2000),
Subjective assessment of urban quality of life in Singapore (1997-1998),
Habitat International, 24(1). Hardi, P. And
Pinter, L. (2006), City of Winnipeg Quality of Life Indicators, In Sirgy, M.
J., Rahtz, D., and Swain, D.[eds] Community Quality of Life Indicators: Best
Cases 2, Springer.Ibrahim, M. And
Chung, W., (2003), Quality of life of residents living near industrial estates
in Singapore, Social Indicators Research, 61.Kam, I., K, Van,
Leidelmeijer, K., Marsman, G. and de Hollander, A., (2003), urban environmental
quality and human wellbing: Towards a conceptual framework and demarcation of
concepts a literature study. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65(1-2).Lee, Y. J., (2008),
Subjective Quality of Life measurement in Taipei. Building and Environment,
43(7).McCrea, R., Shyy,
T.-K. and Stimson, R., (2006), What is the Strength of the link Between
Objective and Subjective Indicators of Urban Quality of Life? Applied Research
in Quality of Life, 1(1).Muller, Valerie A.
(2002), Satellite, Census, and the Quality of Life. Long Beach: California
State University.Noll, H., (200),
Social indicators and social repoting: the international experience, (www.
Ccsd. Ca/noll).Pacione, M.,
(2003), Urban environmental quality and human wellbing a social geographical
perspective. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65(1-2).Rapley, M., (2003),
Quality of Life Research: Acritical Introduction. SAGE Publications Ltd,
London.Rinner, C. (2007),
Ageographic visualization approach to multi-criteria evelution of urban quality
of life. International Journal Geographic Information Science, Vo1. 21, No. 8.Shafer, C., Lee, B. And Turner, sh., (2000), a
tale of three greenway trails: user perceptions related to quality of life.
Landscape abnd Urban Planning, 49.Talen, E. And Shah,
S. (2007), Neighborhood Evaluation Using GIS: An Exploratory Study. Environment
and Behavior, 39.       













































































  [1]- standard deviation   

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • life quality
  • Subjective Indicators
  • Objective Indicators
  • Rural Areas
  • rural district of Ardestan