IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i18p10062-d631484.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Inclusion of Gender Views for the Evaluation and Mitigation of Urban Vulnerability: A Case Study in Castellón

Author

Listed:
  • Patricia Huedo

    (Department of Mechanical Engineering and Construction, School of Technology and Experimental Sciences, Jaume I University, Campus Riu Sec, 12071 Castelló de la Plana, Spain
    Universitary Institute of Feminist and Gender Studies, Jaume I University, Campus Riu Sec, 12071 Castelló de la Plana, Spain)

  • María José Ruá

    (Department of Mechanical Engineering and Construction, School of Technology and Experimental Sciences, Jaume I University, Campus Riu Sec, 12071 Castelló de la Plana, Spain
    Universitary Institute of Feminist and Gender Studies, Jaume I University, Campus Riu Sec, 12071 Castelló de la Plana, Spain
    Interuniversitary Institute of Local Development, Jaume I University, Campus Riu Sec, 12071 Castelló de la Plana, Spain)

  • Laura Florez-Perez

    (Bartlett School of Sustainable Construction, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK)

  • Raquel Agost-Felip

    (Interuniversitary Institute of Local Development, Jaume I University, Campus Riu Sec, 12071 Castelló de la Plana, Spain
    Departament of Developmental, Educational and Social Psychology and Methodology, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Jaume I University, Campus Riu Sec, 12071 Castelló de la Plana, Spain)

Abstract

The inclusion of gender views in every field and, especially, in urbanism, has become crucial for urban planning. Considering both men’s and women’s interests in an integrated gender equality perspective provides better results that improve the quality of public spaces and engenders a more sustainable society. However, to realize such benefits, efforts are required not only to understand the needs and preferences of urban residents but also to shape policies and develop strategies to mitigate vulnerability with population involvement. In order to help decision makers at the urban level evaluate vulnerability with the inclusion of gender views, this study proposes a model that incorporates the specificities of urban fabric users that face adverse conditions. The model is based on a structured and standardized checklist of key topics that could be applied to any urban development. From this checklist, a list of categories, subcategories, and indicators were proposed and validated using the inter-judge agreement technique. To illustrate this model, this paper presents the case study of Castellón (Spain) in which deprived neighborhoods were analyzed, updating a previous model intended only to detect vulnerability. The results help link policy making to social vulnerability and indicate strategies to reach inclusive neighborhoods via a gender equality approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Patricia Huedo & María José Ruá & Laura Florez-Perez & Raquel Agost-Felip, 2021. "Inclusion of Gender Views for the Evaluation and Mitigation of Urban Vulnerability: A Case Study in Castellón," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-23, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:18:p:10062-:d:631484
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/18/10062/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/18/10062/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Juan Velasquez Atehortua, 2017. "Barrio Women’s Gendering Practices for Sustainable Urbanism in Caracas, Venezuela," Gender, Development and Social Change, in: Anita Lacey (ed.), Women, Urbanization and Sustainability, pages 67-89, Palgrave Macmillan.
    2. Liisa Horelli, 2017. "Engendering urban planning in different contexts – successes, constraints and consequences," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(10), pages 1779-1796, October.
    3. Rosa T. Affleck & Kevin Gardner & Semra Aytur & Cynthia Carlson & Curt Grimm & Elias Deeb, 2019. "Sustainable Infrastructure in Conflict Zones: Police Facilities’ Impact on Perception of Safety in Afghan Communities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-20, April.
    4. Izabela Grabowska, 2021. "Quality of Life in Poor Neighborhoods through the Lenses of the Capability Approach—A Case Study of a Deprived Area of Łódź City Centre," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-24, June.
    5. Raman, Rewati & Roy, Uttam Kumar, 2019. "Taxonomy of urban mixed land use planning," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    6. Jose Carpio-Pinedo & Sonia De Gregorio Hurtado & Inés Sánchez De Madariaga, 2019. "Gender Mainstreaming in Urban Planning: The Potential of Geographic Information Systems and Open Data Sources," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 221-240, March.
    7. Liam Riley, 2020. "Malawian urbanism and urban poverty: geographies of food access in Blantyre," Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 38-52, January.
    8. Carolyn Whitzman, 2007. "Stuck at the Front Door: Gender, Fear of Crime and the Challenge of Creating Safer Space," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 39(11), pages 2715-2732, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Bridgelall, Raj & Stubbing, Edward, 2021. "Forecasting the effects of autonomous vehicles on land use," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    2. Yunes Almansoub & Ming Zhong & Asif Raza & Muhammad Safdar & Abdelghani Dahou & Mohammed A. A. Al-qaness, 2022. "Exploring the Effects of Transportation Supply on Mixed Land-Use at the Parcel Level," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-28, May.
    3. Seyda Akcali & Arzu Cahantimur, 2022. "The Pentagon Model of Urban Social Sustainability: An Assessment of Sociospatial Aspects, Comparing Two Neighborhoods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-24, April.
    4. Jana, Arnab & Sarkar, Ahana & Bardhan, Ronita, 2020. "Analysing outdoor airflow and pollution as a parameter to assess the compatibility of mass-scale low-cost residential development," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    5. Jelle Brands & Tim Schwanen & Irina van Aalst, 2015. "Fear of crime and affective ambiguities in the night-time economy," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 52(3), pages 439-455, February.
    6. Llopis Abella,Jimena & Fruttero,Anna & Tas,Emcet Oktay & Taj,Umar, 2020. "Urban Design, Public Spaces, and Social Cohesion : Evidence from a Virtual Reality Experiment," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9407, The World Bank.
    7. Alessia Iannillo & Isidoro Fasolino, 2021. "Land-Use Mix and Urban Sustainability: Benefits and Indicators Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-18, December.
    8. Hongji Chen & Kangchuan Su & Lixian Peng & Guohua Bi & Lulu Zhou & Qingyuan Yang, 2022. "Mixed Land Use Levels in Rural Settlements and Their Influencing Factors: A Case Study of Pingba Village in Chongqing, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-18, May.
    9. Vania Ceccato & Nathan Gaudelet & Gabin Graf, 2022. "Crime and safety in transit environments: a systematic review of the English and the French literature, 1970–2020," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 105-153, March.
    10. Muhammad Akram Uzzaman & Zamadonda Nokuthula Xulu-Kasaba & Muhammad Ehsanul Haque, 2021. "Personal Safety and Fear of Sexual Harassment among Female Garment Workers in Bangladesh," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-11, December.
    11. Havet, Nathalie & Bayart, Caroline & Bonnel, Patrick, 2021. "Why do Gender Differences in Daily Mobility Behaviours persist among workers?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 34-48.
    12. María Jesús Rodríguez-García & Francesca Donati, 2021. "European Integral Urban Policies from a Gender Perspective. Gender-Sensitive Measures, Transversality and Gender Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-15, August.
    13. repec:thr:techub:10026:y:2021:i:1:p:17-31 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Eduardo Medeiros & Ana Brandão & Paulo Tormenta Pinto & Sara Silva Lopes, 2021. "Urban Planning Policies to the Renewal of Riverfront Areas: The Lisbon Metropolis Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-20, May.
    15. Hongyu Zheng & Yuefei Zhuo & Zhongguo Xu & Cifang Wu & Jianhong Huang & Qi Fu, 2021. "Measuring and characterizing land use mix patterns of China’s megacities: A case study of Shanghai," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(4), pages 2509-2539, December.
    16. Peter Kitchen & Allison Williams, 2010. "Quality of Life and Perceptions of Crime in Saskatoon, Canada," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 95(1), pages 33-61, January.
    17. Costa, Cayo & Ha, Jaehyun & Lee, Sugie, 2021. "Spatial disparity of income-weighted accessibility in Brazilian Cities: Application of a Google Maps API," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    18. Bąkowska-Waldmann Edyta & Piniarski Witold, 2023. "Gender-Specific Preferences Regarding Urban Green Areas," Quaestiones Geographicae, Sciendo, vol. 42(4), pages 23-41, December.
    19. Linda Sandberg & Malin Rönnblom, 2015. "‘I don’t think we’ll ever be finished with this’: Fear and safety in policy and practice," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 52(14), pages 2664-2679, November.
    20. Ding, Chuan & Cao, Xinyu & Yu, Bin & Ju, Yang, 2021. "Non-linear associations between zonal built environment attributes and transit commuting mode choice accounting for spatial heterogeneity," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 22-35.
    21. Tikoudis, Ioannis & Farrow, Katherine & Mebiame, Rose Mba & Oueslati, Walid, 2022. "Beyond average population density: Measuring sprawl with density-allocation indicators," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:18:p:10062-:d:631484. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.