2004
DOI: 10.2208/jscej.2004.55
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluating Infrastructure Projects by Means of Measures of the Quality of Life

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…where the weight of each element k (w i k ) is affected not only by achieved satisfaction level k but also by that of other elements (Hayashi et al, 2004). The weight w k represents the magnitude of an instrumental value of each element k contributing to QoL, and the product w k S k can be regarded as an assigned value.…”
Section: Qol Values and Preferencesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where the weight of each element k (w i k ) is affected not only by achieved satisfaction level k but also by that of other elements (Hayashi et al, 2004). The weight w k represents the magnitude of an instrumental value of each element k contributing to QoL, and the product w k S k can be regarded as an assigned value.…”
Section: Qol Values and Preferencesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, various case studies applying QOL analysis to urban planning were introduced, and the effects of QOL improvements caused by transportation infrastructure were quantitatively and visually demonstrated: for example, the case of Nanjing city in China by Gu et al (2016) [28]. However, the study of Hayashi et al (2004) [29] is the only example of a case study on the intercity passenger transportation system of HSR. This study applied the abovementioned method to estimate the inhabitants' QOL in the MAHSR corridor following the opening of the MAHSR.…”
Section: Model Settingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This change gives rise to a different way of thinking, namely the weight between quality of life (QOL) components is different from that in Sun Yat Sen's time when economic benefit was dominant in QOL. Figure 6 shows a methodology, developed by the authors (Hayashi et al, 2003), for measuring QOL based on the satisfaction of an individual with fi ve fundamental components or axes as shown in fi gure 7. Here, QOL is defi ned as Where λ k : weight of axis k S k : satisfaction level of axis k DS k : stress level of axis k X k : indicators of axis k The sense of value is defi ned by the vector of weight λ k which is obtained as a substitution ratio between the values of the axes.…”
Section: Changes In Lifestyle and People's Sense Of Valuementioning
confidence: 99%