Investigating the level of citizens' satisfaction with the quality of urban life (Case study: District 3 of Charikar City, Parwan Province)

Abstract

Urban quality of life is one of the most important topics in urban spaces today, attracting widespread attention from researchers and professionals across the urban field. Urban quality of life refers to a set of social, economic, environmental, cultural, and psychological factors that directly and indirectly affect the welfare, satisfaction, and happiness of residents of a city. The present study, using a descriptive-analytical method, examines the satisfaction of reside nts in District 3 of Charikar with their urban quality of life. As observed in the histogram, the data distribution does not follow a normal pattern. Initially, the mean scores of the indicators were prepared using Compute Variable, and then nonparametric tests were used to test the hypotheses. Using the Friedman test, the indicators were evaluated and ranked. The results indicate that the overall status of quality of life in the region is relatively low, especially in the transportation domain, which received the lowest score. In contrast, physical environment, social environment, and economic indicators are in higher ranks. The statistical analyses show significant differences in the evaluation of these indicators; thus, the p-value of 0.005 at a 99% confidence level confirms meaningful differences among the research indicators. The statistical analysis in this region indicates that residents do not perceive a satisfactory level of urban quality of life, and the indicator scores are below the average evaluation. The social environment quality indicator, with a mean score of 2.37, the economic environment quality indicator with a mean score of 2.38, the physical environment quality indicator with a mean score of 2.46, and the transportation quality indicator with a mean score of 2.30 were assessed as unfavorable. Additionally, considering the ranking of indicators, the physical environment quality indicator (2.75) ranked first, while the transportation quality indicator (2.36) ranked last.