IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v114y2022ics0264837722000059.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Right to the city and community facility planning for elderly: The case of urban renewal district in Hong Kong

Author

Listed:
  • Wang, Siqiang
  • Yung, Esther, Hiu Kwan
  • Yu, Yifan
  • Tsou, Jin Yeu

Abstract

The concept of right to the city has attracted increasing attention in urban planning area. However, many cities are far from providing equitable resources. The questions of what is, who has the right, and how it has been affected during urban renewal process have not been fully examined. Although access to public services is widely recognized as an important right, whether elderly’s right to community facilities in urban renewal district has been addressed sufficiently still remains questionable. This study builds a conceptual framework to understand the factors affecting elderly’s right to community facilities in an urban renewal district. Through focus group meetings held in three neighborhoods in Kwun Tong district and spatial analysis, elderly’s perception and the provision of community facilities were ascertained. The findings reveal how inequitable provision of community facilities, gentrification caused by transit-oriented development mode and insufficient mobility services have affected elderly’s right to access community facilities and deprived their rights. Urban renewal, as an important urban planning strategy, has not effectively remedied the inequality in access to public goods. The study recommends strategic planning policies to enhance equitable right to the city in the planning for building a more age-friendly community in urban renewal district.

Suggested Citation

  • Wang, Siqiang & Yung, Esther, Hiu Kwan & Yu, Yifan & Tsou, Jin Yeu, 2022. "Right to the city and community facility planning for elderly: The case of urban renewal district in Hong Kong," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:114:y:2022:i:c:s0264837722000059
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.105978
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837722000059
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.105978?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Marcuse, 2009. "From critical urban theory to the right to the city," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2-3), pages 185-197, June.
    2. Miguel Padeiro & Ana Louro & Nuno Marques da Costa, 2019. "Transit-oriented development and gentrification: a systematic review," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(6), pages 733-754, November.
    3. Grace Lee & Edwin Chan, 2008. "The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Approach for Assessment of Urban Renewal Proposals," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 89(1), pages 155-168, October.
    4. Tao Zhou & Yulin Zhou & Guiwen Liu, 2017. "Key Variables for Decision-Making on Urban Renewal in China: A Case Study of Chongqing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-19, March.
    5. R A Beauregard, 1994. "Capital Switching and the Built Environment: United States, 1970–89," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 26(5), pages 715-732, May.
    6. Yuqiu Jia & Zhenhua Zheng & Qi Zhang & Min Li & Xiaofang Liu, 2020. "Associations of Spatial Aggregation between Neighborhood Facilities and the Population of Age Groups Based on Points-of-Interest Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-16, February.
    7. Casey Dawkins & Rolf Moeckel, 2016. "Transit-Induced Gentrification: Who Will Stay, and Who Will Go?," Housing Policy Debate, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(4-5), pages 801-818, September.
    8. Margit Mayer, 2009. "The 'Right to the City’ in the context of shifting mottos of urban social movements," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2-3), pages 362-374, June.
    9. Verlinghieri, Ersilia & Venturini, Federico, 2018. "Exploring the right to mobility through the 2013 mobilizations in Rio de Janeiro," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 126-136.
    10. Ghebreegziabiher Debrezion & Eric Pels & Piet Rietveld, 2007. "The Impact of Railway Stations on Residential and Commercial Property Value: A Meta-analysis," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 161-180, August.
    11. Massingue, Suzanna Allen & Oviedo, Daniel, 2021. "Walkability and the Right to the city: A snapshot critique of pedestrian space in Maputo, Mozambique," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    12. Skinner, Emily & Masuda, Jeffrey R., 2013. "Right to a healthy city? Examining the relationship between urban space and health inequity by Aboriginal youth artist-activists in Winnipeg," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 210-218.
    13. Kębłowski, Wojciech & Van Criekingen, Mathieu & Bassens, David, 2019. "Moving past the sustainable perspectives on transport: An attempt to mobilise critical urban transport studies with the right to the city," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 24-34.
    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. Ling Yang & Hsiao-Tung Chang & Jian Li & Xinyue Xu & Zhi Qiu & Xiaomin Jiang, 2023. "A Comprehensive Evaluation of the Friendliness of Urban Facilities for the Elderly in Taipei City and New Taipei City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-19, September.
    2. Wenzhen Huang & Linhui Hu & Yalong Xing, 2022. "Sustainable Renewal Strategies for Older Communities from the Perspective of Living Experience," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-16, February.
    3. Jaeyoung Heo & Miki Kozaki & Takaaki Koga & Kotaroh Hirate & Hyun Bae Kim, 2022. "Investigation of the Visual Environment of Railway Station Stairs Using Qualitative and Quantitative Evaluation Methods," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-19, September.
    4. Chen Chen, 2023. "Discussion on the Optimization Method of Public Service Facility Layout from the Perspective of Spatial Equity: A Study Based on the Central City of Shanghai," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-16, September.
    5. Saehim Kim & Joonwon Hwang & Myeong-Hun Lee, 2022. "Effect of Housing Support Programs on Residential Satisfaction and the Housing Cost Burden: Analysis of the Effect of Housing Support Programs in Korea Based on Household Attributes," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-20, August.
    6. Siqiang Wang & Esther Hiu Kwan Yung & Ester Cerin & Yifan Yu & Peiheng Yu, 2022. "Older People’s Usage Pattern, Satisfaction with Community Facility and Well-Being in Urban Old Districts," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-24, 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. Bohman, Helena, 2021. "Same, same but different? Neighbourhood effects of accessibility on housing prices," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 52-60.
    2. Shenjing He, 2012. "Two Waves of Gentrification and Emerging Rights Issues in Guangzhou, China," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 44(12), pages 2817-2833, December.
    3. Peter Marcuse, 2010. "In defense of theory in practice," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1-2), pages 4-12, February.
    4. Shadi O. Tehrani & Shuling J. Wu & Jennifer D. Roberts, 2019. "The Color of Health: Residential Segregation, Light Rail Transit Developments, and Gentrification in the United States," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-19, September.
    5. Sergio Belda-Miquel & Jordi Peris Blanes & Alexandre Frediani, 2016. "Institutionalization and Depoliticization of the Right to the City: Changing Scenarios for Radical Social Movements," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 321-339, March.
    6. Justus Uitermark & Walter Nicholls & Maarten Loopmans, 2012. "Cities and Social Movements: Theorizing beyond the Right to the City," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 44(11), pages 2546-2554, November.
    7. Kurt Iveson, 2010. "Some critical reflections on being critical: Reading for deviance, dominance or difference?," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 434-441, August.
    8. Tornabene, Sara & Nilsson, Isabelle, 2021. "Rail transit investments and economic development: Challenges for small businesses," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    9. Cesare Di Feliciantonio, 2017. "Spaces of the Expelled as Spaces of the Urban Commons? Analysing the Re-emergence of Squatting Initiatives in Rome," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(5), pages 708-725, September.
    10. Sharon M. Meagher, 2010. "Critical thinking about the Right to the City: Mapping garbage routes," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 427-433, August.
    11. Lila Leontidou, 2010. "Urban Social Movements in ‘Weak’ Civil Societies: The Right to the City and Cosmopolitan Activism in Southern Europe," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 47(6), pages 1179-1203, May.
    12. Esin Özdemir & Tuna Tasan-Kok, 2019. "Planners’ role in accommodating citizen disagreement: The case of Dutch urban planning," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(4), pages 741-759, March.
    13. Jin, Tanhua & Cheng, Long & Liu, Zhicheng & Cao, Jun & Huang, Haosheng & Witlox, Frank, 2022. "Nonlinear public transit accessibility effects on housing prices: Heterogeneity across price segments," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 48-59.
    14. Forouhar, Amir, 2022. "Rail transit station and neighbourhood change: A mixed-method analysis with respect to neighbourhood context," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    15. Esin Özdemir & Ayda Eraydin, 2017. "Fragmentation in Urban Movements: The Role of Urban Planning Processes," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(5), pages 727-748, September.
    16. Kafui Attoh, 2017. "Public transportation and the idiocy of urban life," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(1), pages 196-213, January.
    17. Eduardo Mendieta, 2010. "The city to come: Critical urban theory as utopian mapping," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 442-447, August.
    18. Hossain Mohiuddin, 2021. "Planning for the First and Last Mile: A Review of Practices at Selected Transit Agencies in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-20, February.
    19. Gillad Rosen & Anne B. Shlay, 2014. "Whose Right to Jerusalem?," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 935-950, May.
    20. Isabelle Anguelovski, 2015. "Tactical developments for achieving just and sustainable neighborhoods: the role of community-based coalitions and bottom-to-bottom networks in street, technical, and funder activism," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 33(4), pages 703-725, August.

    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:eee:lauspo:v:114:y:2022:i:c:s0264837722000059. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.