SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Quantrade Journal of Complex Systems in Social Sciences / 2026 / Cilt: 8 Sayı: 1

Analysis of Multidimensional Well-being: The Case of Türkiye and Azerbaijan

Çok Boyutlu Refahın Analizi: Türkiye ve Azerbaycan Örneği

Mehmet Yunus Çelik(Kastamonu Üniversitesi İİBF İktisat Bölümü)0000-0003-4793-8306
Elvin Hüseynov(Kastamonu Üniversitesi, Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü, İktisat Ana Bilim Dalı, İktisat (DR))0009-0003-9741-8955
Pages
78–89
Publication Date
2026-07-03
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The study examines the effects of 11 key dimensions – income, employment, education, health, environment, and life satisfaction – on overall well-being, using data covering the years 2009–2024.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study, starting from the premise that traditional economic indicators are insufficient for measuring the well-being of modern societies, comparatively analyzes the life satisfaction of Türkiye and Azerbaijan within the framework of the OECD's Better Life Index (BLI).
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study examines the effects of 11 key dimensions – income, employment, education, health, environment, and life satisfaction – on overall well-being, using data covering the years 2009–2024.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The study emphasizes that economic growth alone is insufficient; holistic social policies focused on education, health, and income equality are of strategic importance for a sustainable quality of life.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2009–2024 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Yaşam Memmuniyeti · Daha İyi Yaşam Endeksi (DİYE) · Çok Boyutlu Refah

Abstract

This study, starting from the premise that traditional economic indicators are insufficient for measuring the well-being of modern societies, comparatively analyzes the life satisfaction of Türkiye and Azerbaijan within the framework of the OECD's Better Life Index (BLI). The study examines the effects of 11 key dimensions – income, employment, education, health, environment, and life satisfaction – on overall well-being, using data covering the years 2009–2024. Methodologically employing quantitative analysis techniques, the research reveals the annual changes in BLI scores and the weighted effects of the variables in both countries. The findings show that Türkiye has a higher BLI score than Azerbaijan throughout the analyzed period, with the difference particularly evident in the areas of education and health. Simulation results demonstrate that education infrastructure has the highest multiplier effect in improving quality of life for both countries. The study emphasizes that economic growth alone is insufficient; holistic social policies focused on education, health, and income equality are of strategic importance for a sustainable quality of life.

Özet

Bu çalışma, modern toplumların refah düzeyini ölçmede geleneksel ekonomik göstergelerin yetersizliğinden yola çıkarak, Türkiye ve Azerbaycan’ın yaşam memmuniyetini OECD’nin Daha İyi Yaşam Endeksi (DİYE) çerçevesinde karşılaştırmalı olarak analiz etmektedir. Çalışmada, 2009–2024 yıllarını kapsayan veriler ışığında; gelir, istihdam, eğitim, sağlık, çevre ve yaşam memnuniyeti gibi 11 temel boyutun toplam refah üzerindeki etkileri incelenmiştir. Metodolojik olarak nicel analiz tekniklerinin kullanıldığı araştırmada, her iki ülkenin DİYE puanlarındaki yıllık değişimler ve değişkenlerin ağırlıklı etkileri ortaya konmuştur. Bulgular, Türkiye’nin analiz edilen dönem boyunca Azerbaycan’a kıyasla daha yüksek bir DİYE puanına sahip olduğunu ve farkın özellikle eğitim ile sağlık alanlarında belirginleştiğini göstermektedir. Simülasyon sonuçları, her iki ülke için de yaşam kalitesini artırmada en yüksek çarpan etkisine sahip alanın eğitim altyapısı olduğunu kanıtlamaktadır. Çalışma, ekonomik büyümenin tek başına yeterli olmadığını; sürdürülebilir bir yaşam kalitesi için eğitim, sağlık ve gelir adaleti odaklı bütünsel sosyal politikaların stratejik önemini vurgulamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Çelik, M. Y., Hüseynov, E. (2026). Analysis of Multidimensional Well-being: The Case of Türkiye and Azerbaijan. Quantrade Journal of Complex Systems in Social Sciences, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 1, 78–89. https://doi.org/10.64739/quantrade.1939952

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (30)

  1. Alkire, S., & Foster, J. (2011). Counting and multidimensional poverty measurement. Journal of Public Economics, 95 (7–8), 476–487.
  2. Boarini, R., Comola, M., Smith, C., Manchin, R., & De Keulenaer, F. (2014). What makes for a better life? The determinants of subjective well-being in OECD countries (OECD Statistics Working Papers No. 2014/03). OECD Publishing.
  3. Clark, A. E., Flèche, S., Layard, R., Powdthavee, N., & Ward, G. (2018). The origins of happiness: The science of well-being over the life course. Princeton University Press.
  4. Deaton, A. (2013). The great escape: Health, wealth, and the origins of inequality. Princeton University Press.
  5. Decancq, K., & Lugo, M.A. (2013). Weights in multidimensional indices of well-being: An overview. Econometric Reviews, 32(1), 7–34.
  6. Diener, E., Lucas, R.E., Schimmack, U., & Helliwell, J.F. (2009). Well-being for public policy. Oxford University Press.
  7. Durand, M., & Exton, C. (2019). Measuring well-being: International approaches and applications. Routledge.
  8. Fleurbaey, M., & Blanchet, D. (2013). Beyond GDP: Measuring welfare and assessing sustainability. Oxford University Press.
  9. Helliwell, J., Layard, R., & Sachs, J. (2020). World Happiness Report 2020. Sustainable Development Solutions Network.
  10. Mammadov, A. (2020). Azerbaijan's socio-economic development and quality of life. Baku State University Press.
  11. OECD. (2023a). Better Life Index: Measuring Well-being. OECD Publishing.
  12. OECD. (2023b). OECD Better Life Index Methodology. OECD Statistics.
  13. OECD. (2024). Better Life Index: Measuring Well-being. OECD Publishing.
  14. Ravallion, M. (2012). Why don't we see poverty convergence? American Economic Review, 102(1), 504–523.
  15. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford University Press.
  16. Stiglitz, J.E., & Fitoussi, J.-P. (2018). Measuring what counts: The global movement for well-being. The New Press.
  17. Stiglitz, J., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J.-P. (2009). Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress. Paris: Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress.
  18. Veenhoven, R. (2019). Happiness in Nations: Subjective well-being and quality of life across countries. Springer.
  19. World Bank (2022). World Development Indicators: Azerbaijan and Türkiye. Washington, DC: World Bank Group.
  20. World Bank. (2023). World Development Indicators. Washington, DC: World Bank.
  21. Durand, M., & Exton, C. (2019). Measuring well-being: International approaches and applications. Routledge.
  22. Helliwell, J., Layard, R., & Sachs, J. (2020). World Happiness Report 2020. Sustainable Development Solutions Network.
  23. Mammadov, A. (2020). Azerbaijan's socio-economic development and quality of life. Baku State University Press.
  24. OECD. (2023a). Better Life Index: Measuring Well-being. OECD Publishing.
  25. OECD. (2023b). OECD Better Life Index Methodology. OECD Statistics.
  26. OECD. (2024). Better Life Index: Measuring Well-being. OECD Publishing.
  27. Stiglitz, J., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J.-P. (2009). Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress. Paris: Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress.
  28. Veenhoven, R. (2019). Happiness in Nations: Subjective well-being and quality of life across countries. Springer.
  29. World Bank (2022). World Development Indicators: Azerbaijan and Türkiye. Washington, DC: World Bank Group.
  30. World Bank. (2023). World Development Indicators. Washington, DC: World Bank.