Author:
Crilly Michael,Varna Georgiana,Mouli Vemury Chandra,Lemon Mark,Mitchell Andrew
Abstract
The current convergence of global challenges, particularly the climate change emergency, the Covid-19 pandemic, and the Black Lives Matter movement, have highlighted the need for a new lens to challenge and interrogate key urban planning assumptions related to spatial urban inequality. Yet urban inequality is often and invariably described from a limited economic perspective, commonly interpreted and measured as income inequality. This is an overtly statistical measure, or Gini-Type index, often giving limited and unsatisfactory results. Yet, in practice, the spatial distribution and concentration of income inequality is a multi-scalar, multi-variant, and multi-disciplinary issue and has links with other and wider dimensions of inequality and well-being. As such, this article argues for a holistic understanding of urban inequality that goes beyond narrow empirical and quantitative models. It presents collaborative research that aims to impact the actions of urban professionals, to accurately identify and adequately respond to urban inequalities. Through the establishment of an interdisciplinary expert panel, we have uncovered a series of provisional mechanisms and responses to aid practitioners to achieve more spatial equality. We introduce an integrated analytical method, the “litmus test,” that acts as a planning tool for understanding, evaluating, and responding to inequalities and segregation present in the built environment. This novel methodology and procedural framework will assist us in (a) identifying and defining different forms of inequality and segregation beyond the current scope of physical and agency-based forms; (b) measuring and demonstrating the latter with a combination of qualitative, empirical sources that are materially significant in supporting and evidencing planning strategies; and (c) setting out a series of planning and built environment specific responses.
Reference111 articles.
1. Andreoli, F., Mussini, M., Prete, V., & Zoli, C. (2021). Urban poverty: Measurement theory and evidence from American cities. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 19, 599–642.
2. Ansley, F. (1989). Stirring the ashes: Race class and the future of civil rights scholarship. Cornell Law Review, 74(6), 993–1077.
3. Avella, J. R. (2016). Delphi panels: Research design, procedures, advantages, and challenges. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 11, 305–321.
4. Ayton, P., Bernile, G., Bucciol, A., & Zarri, L. (2020). The impact of life experiences on risk taking. Journal of Economic Psychology, 79, Article e102274.
5. Bailey, J., Wallace, M., & Wright, B. (2013). Are gay men and lesbians discriminated against when applying for jobs? A four-city, internet-based field experiment. Journal of Homosexuality, 60(6), 873–894.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献