Importance of Chess Evaluation Criteria

When evaluating a position, using the following criteria:

1. Material
2. King Safety
3. Activity
4. Pawn Structure

Are each of these given equal weight? For example, if material and pawn structure are even, but Black has the edge on activity while White has the edge on King safety, would this position be even or would one side be considered better because activity is more important than King safety?

Any help on this issue would be greatly appreciated.

Material, king safety, and pawn structure are all situational.

King Safety doesn't matter if he can't exploit it, for example.  Doubled pawns are bad for your game - unless you can use them as a way to get your rooks into the game.   It's better to be ahead in material than behind - unless the situation says otherwise such as when the opponent sacs a piece to get an attack.

I'd have to say that 'activity' gives one the ability to move pieces to attack or defend as the situation warrants. I can't think of a time where have less activity is beneficial.

Are space and activity effectively the same thing?

After posting this, I did a search on the web and I found Dan Heisman's great article on 'Evaluation Criteria'.Reading this opened my eyes on this topic. Heisman also bases evaluation on 1. Material 2. King safety 3. activity (space is a subset of activity) and 4. pawn structure and they are listed in order of importance. So in effect if material and King safety are even and Black has an advantage in activity and White in pawn structure Black would be at least better (and possibly winning) depending on the activity advantage that he has.

Hope this helps.