Integrating GIS Accessibility and Location-Allocation Models with Multicriteria Decision Analysis for Evaluating Quality of Life in Buraidah City, KSA

Abstract

The present study was aimed at evaluating the quality of life in the districts of Buraidah city in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia as part of the Kingdom’s Vision 2030, based on provided services in terms of distance and time parameters. This was achieved by integrating Geographic Information System (GIS)-based network analysis and multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) techniques. The service area analysis technique of the GIS Network Analysis tools was applied to the available services in the districts of Buraidah city. Twelve services were investigated with regard to their coverage within 5, 10, and 15 minutes of travel time: universities, high schools, middle schools, elementary schools, hospitals, health centers, ambulance facilities, government services, religious services, security services, sports services, and recreational services. GIS-based multicriteria decision analysis (GIS-MCDA) was implemented in the study to obtain a spatial suitability map of the standard of living quality in the various districts in Buraidah city. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) technique was used to determine the criteria weights. The location-allocation model was used in the study as well for suggestions of new service locations to improve the spatial distribution of services and enhance the quality of life in the districts. The results of the final suitability map to determine districts with the best standard of living according to the provided services show that the living standards in the city are very good, with very high and high levels in around 51 districts, representing 72.9% (449,235 people), and about 19 districts with moderate, low, and very low levels, representing 27.1% (56,765 people). Narrowing the quality of life gap and improving spatial planning requires correcting the current deficiency in services, which is estimated in this study to be 16 services: one high school, one elementary school, one middle school, two universities, one sports service, two security services, two courts, two hospitals, one health center, one park, and two ambulance facilities.

Geological Approach for Landfill Site Selection: A Case Study of Vršac Municipality, Serbia

“…Integrating MCDA and GIS is a great contribution that usually yields very useful spatial alternatives to help decision makers [68]. In the past, analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was one of the useful methodologies in landfill selecting, because it allows group decision making, where group members can use their experience, values, and knowledge to break down a problem into a hierarchy [69,70].…”

Urban Public Service Analysis by GIS-MCDA for Sustainable Redevelopment: A Case Study of a Megacity in Korea

“…The GIS-MCDA process is mainly conducted through the utilization of geographical data and a subjective process that reflects the preference of the decision-maker [49]. In recent years, many previous studies have been conducted using a subjective method called analytic hierarchy process (AHP) [50,51]. They also suggested a combination of objective and subjective methods to give a more accurate weight in the GIS analysis, such as AHP-Entropy [52,53].…”

The Use of New Techniques in Spatial Modeling and Analysis of Urban Quality of Life: Multiple-Criteria Decision Analysis and Gis

“…For Saaty, it is "an integrated framework that combines substantive and non-substantive criteria," based on a pairwise comparison and relative scale (Saaty, 1980). AHP is a powerful and flexible technique which formulates the problem in pyramid structure, it combines the qualitative and quantitative aspects of a decision and provides a simple method for assessing selection criteria, thus minimizing bias in decision-making (Ma et al, 2005;Abd El Karim and Awawdeh, 2020). It also describes a map-focused interactive application to support spatial decision (Rinner, 2007).…”

“…AARP livelihood index (AARP-AARP public policy institute, 2018), QoL assessment indicators (Dehimi and Hadjab, 2019) index (intelligence, 2015), livable city index (Onnom et al, 2018) indicator (Mittal et al, 2020) (quality of life index (LQI)) QoL index (Dissanayake et al, 2020) to name but a few. QoL is an interdisciplinary field where sociologists, psychologists, socio-geographers, and economists attempt to assess living conditions objectively and subjectively on the basis of available data, whether objective or subjective (Domin et al, 2010;Merschdorf et al, 2020;Mittal et al, 2020;Abd el karim and Awawdeh, 2020 ;Garau and Pavan, 2018 ;Dissanayake et al, 2020) in recent years there has been a lot of interest in the QOL issue in the field of geography however, it is difficult to find an agreed definition or measure it, and the reason for the difference in the approaches and goals of scholars (Ištok and Martin, 2012. ) Researchers associate QOL with satisfaction with life (well-being), and QOL is understood as the quality of a place.…”

“…The researcher also used the multi-criteria decision-making method (MCDM) where the weights of the indicators were determined through the AHP process, and the researcher used geographic information systems to extract the QoL map. The study (Abd El Karim and Awawdeh, 2020) aims to use an innovative approach to assess the quality of the urban environment based on the services provided in terms of distance and time criteria by integrating network analysis based on (GIS) and (MCDA). The researcher identified and selected criteria that affect the quality of urban life in the study area based on local and international literature and personal interviews.…”