Are vital neighbourhoods socially privileged? Exploring the spatial relationship between urban vitality and urban vulnerability

Identifier:  imarina:9366455

Handle: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11797/imarina9366455

Authors:  Gómez-Varo, I; Delclòs-Alió, X; Miralles-Guasch, C; Marquet, O

Abstract:
The built environment plays a key role in everyday wellbeing, as well-designed and accessible environments help fulfil people's daily needs and activities. Of special relevance is the urban vitality concept of Jane Jacobs, a core principle of local planning strategies worldwide, which is used as an indicator of street vibrancy and quality of life among city residents. However, the promotion of her ideas on dense, lively, and diverse neighbourhoods coexists with increasing urban inequalities. The present study aims to examine if, and how, vital places are related with different levels of social vulnerability. To do so, we use Exploratory Spatial Data Analysis (ESDA) of synthetic indicators of both vitality and vulnerability. Our results provide evidence of local associations between urban vitality and urban vulnerability, and identify four main scenarios that can be helpful for policy intervention. The findings of this study have the potential to guide urban planning strategies to promote vital environments while preventing situations of social vulnerability. We identify four scenarios for policy based on the relationship between vitality and vulnerability.Scenario-specific policies should be designed to address vitality with equity lens.In Low vitality - High vulnerability areas need to ameliorate physical infrastructure for vitality while also developing social policies.In High vitality - High vulnerability areas, policies should prevent residents' displacement.In High vitality - Low vulnerability areas, policies should promote diversity of residents.In Low vitality - Low vulnerability areas, policies should promote dense and diverse developments in terms of uses and population while promoting car-free mobility.