Quality of Life Index: Istanbul 2020

Abstract

This paper is based on a quality of life index study comparing 39 districts in Istanbul. The study is the third of a series of studies, where the first study was conducted and published in 2011 and the second in 2016. The results of the periodic research reveal the transformation of districts in Istanbul in terms of quality of life. The study, carried out on the same methods and parameters, aims to monitor the quality of life at the district level in Istanbul over the years. The weighted average method was used in the analysis made with the district-level 2020 data in Istanbul. According to the index results, Kadıköy, Beşiktaş, Bakırköy, Üsküdar, and Şişli are the districts with the highest quality of life, while Gaziosmanpaşa, Esenler, Sultanbeyli, Sultangazi, and Arnavutköy districts are in the last place. As a result of the clustering study, when evaluated in terms of 5 clusters, it is observed that 4.8 percent of the population of Istanbul lives in the first level, which is the highest quality of life, while 15.9% are second, 31.5% are third, 36.2% are fourth, and 11.6% are in districts with a fifth level of quality of life.

A decision support model to evaluate liveability in the context of urban vibrancy

“…Afterward, we digitize urban form and urban function maps. 23–25 We used 26 population density database and Mahallem Istanbul 27 SES score for socio-demographic features. In use value measures, the active people density is the dependent variable.…”

Mapping urban well-being with Quality Of Life Index (QOLI) at the fine-scale of grid data

“…The index was then used to evaluate the quality of life in Cagliari, Italy. Another index, introduced by Şeker 10 consists of 100 objective indicators grouped into three categories. The weight of each indicator is determined by a group of experts.…”

“…However, although the proposed index took urban population density into account, it was only used as a variable in the model and not as a standardisation tool—the neighbourhood’s amenities were not calculated per capita. Studies 10 , 11 have evaluated urban well-being as the weighted sum of the indicators at the district scale. The disadvantage of this approach is the large area covered by one analytical unit—the districts are so large that they are internally very diverse in terms of quality of life, making the results unreliable.…”

The reproduction of inequality in Turkey: Power distribution in a primary class*

“…Istanbul is a cosmopolitan city and has different towns with different economical, cultural, and life conditions. Dr. Resit Galip Primary School is a state school in a middle-standard town with a low life index (şeker, 2015) Zeytinburnu, Istanbul. There are many textile mills, Syrian shops, and small retailers in the neighborhood.…”