IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i6p2391-d1356383.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quality of Life as a Limiting Factor in the Development of the Region along the Great Bačka Canal (Serbia)

Author

Listed:
  • Milan Lalić

    (Department of Geography, Tourism and Hotel Management, Faculty of Sciences, University of Novi Sad, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia)

  • Milka Bubalo Živković

    (Department of Geography, Tourism and Hotel Management, Faculty of Sciences, University of Novi Sad, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia)

  • Bojan Đerčan

    (Department of Geography, Tourism and Hotel Management, Faculty of Sciences, University of Novi Sad, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia)

  • Dragana Tekić

    (Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Novi Sad, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia)

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a study of the regional–demographic characteristics and the quality of life of the population of Central Bačka, carried out in five municipalities along the Great Bačka Canal (June–August 2022). It included 870 respondents (0.5% of the total adult population). This is a region that has considerable potential for satisfaction with quality of life; however, the studied area has undergone socioeconomic stagnation, so it was necessary to analyze the effect that the activities of all the existing natural and anthropogenic elements could have on mitigating the negative trends of development in an area where the staple of the economy is agricultural production and which was one of the most-developed areas in Serbia. The aim of this study was to identify the factors that impact the perceptions of the population regarding quality of life in the settlements of Central Bačka to define measures that could improve their quality of life. The hypothesis was that, based on the identified factors, the population is not satisfied with their quality of life, which could have a significant impact on demographic trends; there are statistically significant differences in the attitudes of the respondents surrounding basic standard-of-living elements, depending on their sociodemographic characteristics. The instrument used in the study consisted of two parts. The first part of the questionnaire was designed to compile the sociodemographic features of the participants, and the second part was used to study the indicators that determine quality of life. The non-parametric techniques used in this study were the Mann–Whitney U test and the Kruskal–Wallis test. The results indicated a medium or low degree of satisfaction with most of the indicators, confirming the proposed hypothesis regarding differences in the subjective perception of well-being compared to the sociodemographic characteristics of the studied population.

Suggested Citation

  • Milan Lalić & Milka Bubalo Živković & Bojan Đerčan & Dragana Tekić, 2024. "Quality of Life as a Limiting Factor in the Development of the Region along the Great Bačka Canal (Serbia)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-33, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:6:p:2391-:d:1356383
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/6/2391/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/6/2391/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xueli Li & Lee Liu & Zhenguo Zhang & Wenzhong Zhang & Dazhi Liu & Yafen Feng, 2020. "Gender Disparity in Perceived Urban Green Space and Subjective Health and Well-Being in China: Implications for Sustainable Urban Greening," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-12, December.
    2. Pawinee Iamtrakul & Sararad Chayphong & Pittipol Kantavat & Yoshitsugu Hayashi & Boonserm Kijsirikul & Yuji Iwahori, 2023. "Exploring the Spatial Effects of Built Environment on Quality of Life Related Transportation by Integrating GIS and Deep Learning Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-26, February.
    3. Samuelsson, Karl & Barthel, Stephan & Colding, Johan & Macassa, Gloria & Giusti, Matteo, 2020. "Urban nature as a source of resilience during social distancing amidst the coronavirus pandemic," OSF Preprints 3wx5a, Center for Open Science.
    4. Zhaohui Zhang & Krishna P. Paudel & Kamal Upadhyaya, 2023. "Preference for rural living environment improvement initiatives in China," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 82(1), pages 61-78, January.
    5. Alwyn Young, 2013. "Inequality, the Urban-Rural Gap, and Migration," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 128(4), pages 1727-1785.
    6. Ed Diener & Eunkook Suh, 1997. "Measuring Quality Of Life: Economic, Social, And Subjective Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 189-216, January.
    7. Marta Orviska & Anetta Caplanova & John Hudson, 2014. "The Impact of Democracy on Well-being," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 115(1), pages 493-508, January.
    8. Wu, Ning & Liu, ZuanKuo, 2021. "Higher education development, technological innovation and industrial structure upgrade," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    9. Meng-Wen Tsou & Jin-Tan Liu, 2001. "Happiness and Domain Satisfaction in Taiwan," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 269-288, September.
    10. Naomi Bailin Wish, 1986. "Are We Really Measuring the Quality of Life?Well‐being Has Subjective Dimensions, As Well As Objective Ones," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(1), pages 93-99, January.
    11. Paul Dolan & Richard Layard & Robert Metcalfe, 2011. "Measuring Subjective Wellbeing for Public Policy: Recommendations on Measures," CEP Reports 23, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    12. Ed Diener & Ed Sandvik & Larry Seidlitz & Marissa Diener, 1993. "The relationship between income and subjective well-being: Relative or absolute?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 195-223, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Milka Bubalo Živković & Bojan Đerčan & Predrag Mlinarević & Marija Cimbaljević & Zorica Pogrmić & Tamara Lukić & Bojana Kalenjuk Pivarski & Goran Balotić & Dejan Pljuco & Milan Lalić & Nikola Lopatić, 2025. "Rural Tourism as a Factor of Rural Revitalization and Sustainability in the Republic of Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-24, June.
    2. Vladimir Malinić & Marko Sedlak & Filip Krstić & Marko Joksimović & Rajko Golić & Mirjana Gajić & Snežana Vujadinović & Dejan Šabić, 2025. "Land Cover Changes in the Rural Border Region of Serbia Affected by Demographic Dynamics," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-35, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jiayuan Li & John Raine, 2014. "The Time Trend of Life Satisfaction in China," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 116(2), pages 409-427, April.
    2. Adalgiso AMENDOLA & Roberto DELL'ANNO & Lavinia PARISI, 2015. "Happiness, Inequality and Relative Concerns in European Countries," CELPE Discussion Papers 136, CELPE - CEnter for Labor and Political Economics, University of Salerno, Italy.
    3. Megan King & Vivian Renó & Evlyn Novo, 2014. "The Concept, Dimensions and Methods of Assessment of Human Well-Being within a Socioecological Context: A Literature Review," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 116(3), pages 681-698, May.
    4. Valerie Møller, 2001. "Happiness Trends Under Democracy: Where Will the New South African," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 33-53, March.
    5. Massimo Aria & Michelangelo Misuraca & Maria Spano, 2020. "Mapping the Evolution of Social Research and Data Science on 30 Years of Social Indicators Research," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 149(3), pages 803-831, June.
    6. Edson Tandoc & Bruno Takahashi, 2013. "The Complex Road to Happiness: The Influence of Human Development, a Healthy Environment and a Free Press," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 113(1), pages 537-550, August.
    7. Philippe Apparicio & Anne-Marie Séguin & Daniel Naud, 2008. "The Quality of the Urban Environment Around Public Housing Buildings in Montréal: An Objective Approach Based on GIS and Multivariate Statistical Analysis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 86(3), pages 355-380, May.
    8. Zhilin Tang, 2014. "They Are Richer But Are They Happier? Subjective Well-Being of Chinese Citizens Across the Reform Era," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 117(1), pages 145-164, May.
    9. Sôrés, Anett, 2013. "Cognitive dimensions of subjective quality of life in Hajdú-Bihar County," APSTRACT: Applied Studies in Agribusiness and Commerce, AGRIMBA, vol. 7(4-5), pages 1-6.
    10. Pei-shan Liao, 2009. "Parallels Between Objective Indicators and Subjective Perceptions of Quality of Life: A Study of Metropolitan and County Areas in Taiwan," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 91(1), pages 99-114, March.
    11. Awaworyi Churchill, Sefa & Smyth, Russell & Farrell, Lisa, 2020. "Fuel poverty and subjective wellbeing," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    12. Avner Offer, 2000. "Economic Welfare Measurements and Human Well-Being, [revised version, March 2000]," Oxford Economic and Social History Working Papers _034, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    13. Opayemi, A.S., 2017. "Personality Factors And Subjective Well-Being Of University Lecturers In South-West, Nigeria," Ilorin Journal of Business and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ilorin, vol. 19(1), pages 164-181.
    14. Angela Curl & John Nelson & Jillian Anable, 2011. "Comparing the lived experience to objective measures of Accessibility," ERSA conference papers ersa10p1262, European Regional Science Association.
    15. Nadeen Ihsan & Babar Aziz, 2019. "A Multidimensional Analysis of Quality of Life: Pakistan’s Context," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 142(1), pages 201-227, February.
    16. Francesco Sarracino & Marcin Piekałkiewicz, 2021. "The Role of Income and Social Capital for Europeans’ Well-Being During the 2008 Economic Crisis," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 1583-1610, April.
    17. Petróczy, Dóra Gréta, 2021. "An alternative quality of life ranking on the basis of remittances," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    18. Mariano Rojas, 2004. "Well-being and the Complexity of Poverty: A Subjective Well-being Approach," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2004-29, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    19. Claudia Senik, 2002. "When Information Dominates Comparison: A Panel Data Analysis Using Russian Subjective Data," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 495, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    20. Uppal, Sharanjit, 2006. "Impact of the timing, type and severity of disability on the subjective well-being of individuals with disabilities," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 525-539, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:6:p:2391-:d:1356383. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.