IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i20p15176-d1265596.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fifteen-, Ten-, or Five Minute City? Walkability to Services Assessment: Case of Dubai, UAE

Author

Listed:
  • Maram Ali

    (Master of Urban Planning Program, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah P.O. Box 26666, United Arab Emirates)

  • Tarig Ali

    (Department of Civil Engineering, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah P.O. Box 26666, United Arab Emirates)

  • Rahul Gawai

    (Department of Civil Engineering, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah P.O. Box 26666, United Arab Emirates)

  • Ahmed Elaksher

    (Department of Engineering Technology and Survey Engineering, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM 88003, USA)

Abstract

The rapid urbanization growth in Dubai has resulted in connectivity issues and is therefore considered tremendous development pressure. That has led the local authorities to set a vision for Dubai as a 15–20 min city by 2040. In a 15 min city, all services can be reached within 15 min of travel time using sustainable mobility means, including walking, cycling, or electric biking. This study aims to assess the current walkability situation within 15 min in the most significant parts of Dubai. The study considered 13 communities, including Bur-Dubai and Business Bay, which were selected to represent ungated communities and eleven major gated communities. Those neighborhoods were selected based on the developments’ socio-economic status and population density. The assessment considered 14 essential services, grouped into five categories: educational, health, social, entertainment, and religious. The data for this study was collected through desktop research, site visits, and residents’ interviews. The data layers were prepared in ArcGIS Pro 3.0, which was used to perform the network analysis. The results indicate that 28.25% of residents in the ungated neighborhoods have access to essential services within 15 min, similar to gated communities where residents rely on cars to access many services. Furthermore, results suggest that service distribution patterns and walkability infrastructure outside these communities should be developed to obtain higher walkability indicators.

Suggested Citation

  • Maram Ali & Tarig Ali & Rahul Gawai & Ahmed Elaksher, 2023. "Fifteen-, Ten-, or Five Minute City? Walkability to Services Assessment: Case of Dubai, UAE," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-24, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:20:p:15176-:d:1265596
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/20/15176/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/20/15176/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amir Reza Khavarian-Garmsir & Ayyoob Sharifi & Mohammad Hajian Hossein Abadi & Zahra Moradi, 2023. "From Garden City to 15-Minute City: A Historical Perspective and Critical Assessment," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-15, February.
    2. Willberg, Elias & Fink, Christoph & Toivonen, Tuuli, 2023. "The 15-minute city for all? – Measuring individual and temporal variations in walking accessibility," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    3. Banister, David, 2008. "The sustainable mobility paradigm," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 73-80, March.
    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. Sarah Scheiber & Thérèse Bajada & Wendy Jo Mifsud & Steve C. Montebello, 2023. "Exploring the Potential for Timed Cities in Malta: The Case of Paola," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-17, November.
    2. Saujot, Mathieu & Lefèvre, Benoit, 2016. "The next generation of urban MACCs. Reassessing the cost-effectiveness of urban mitigation options by integrating a systemic approach and social costs," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 124-138.
    3. Busscher, Tim & Tillema, Taede & Arts, Jos, 2015. "In search of sustainable road infrastructure planning: How can we build on historical policy shifts?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 42-51.
    4. Thomas Vanoutrive & Ann Verhetsel, 2013. "Classifying transport studies using three dimensions of society: market structure, sustainability and decision making," Chapters, in: Thomas Vanoutrive & Ann Verhetsel (ed.), Smart Transport Networks, chapter 1, pages 1-8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Tornberg, Patrik & Odhage, John, 2018. "Making transport planning more collaborative? The case of Strategic Choice of Measures in Swedish transport planning," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 416-429.
    6. Idiano D'Adamo & Massimo Gastaldi & Ilhan Ozturk, 2023. "The sustainable development of mobility in the green transition: Renewable energy, local industrial chain, and battery recycling," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(2), pages 840-852, April.
    7. Alvaro Rodriguez-Valencia & Hernan A. Ortiz-Ramirez, 2021. "Understanding Green Street Design: Evidence from Three Cases in the U.S," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, February.
    8. Gössling, Stefan, 2016. "Urban transport justice," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 1-9.
    9. Cavoli, Clemence, 2021. "Accelerating sustainable mobility and land-use transitions in rapidly growing cities: Identifying common patterns and enabling factors," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    10. Allard, Ryan F. & Moura, Filipe, 2018. "Effect of transport transfer quality on intercity passenger mode choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 89-107.
    11. Romanika Okraszewska & Aleksandra Romanowska & Marcin Wołek & Jacek Oskarbski & Krystian Birr & Kazimierz Jamroz, 2018. "Integration of a Multilevel Transport System Model into Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-20, February.
    12. Combs, Tabitha S., 2017. "Examining changes in travel patterns among lower wealth households after BRT investment in Bogotá, Colombia," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 11-20.
    13. Alexandros Nikitas, 2019. "How to Save Bike-Sharing: An Evidence-Based Survival Toolkit for Policy-Makers and Mobility Providers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-17, June.
    14. Tomasz Bieliński & Łukasz Dopierała & Maciej Tarkowski & Agnieszka Ważna, 2020. "Lessons from Implementing a Metropolitan Electric Bike Sharing System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-21, November.
    15. Bayissa Badada Badassa & Baiqing Sun & Lixin Qiao, 2020. "Sustainable Transport Infrastructure and Economic Returns: A Bibliometric and Visualization Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-24, March.
    16. Banister, David, 2011. "The trilogy of distance, speed and time," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 950-959.
    17. Jokinen, Jani-Pekka & Sihvola, Teemu & Mladenovic, Milos N., 2019. "Policy lessons from the flexible transport service pilot Kutsuplus in the Helsinki Capital Region," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 123-133.
    18. Harry Geerlings & Bart Kuipers, 2013. "Smart governance and the management of sustainable mobility: an illustration of the application of policy integration and transition management in the Port of Rotterdam," Chapters, in: Thomas Vanoutrive & Ann Verhetsel (ed.), Smart Transport Networks, chapter 11, pages 224-247, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Hopkins, Debbie & Stephenson, Janet, 2014. "Generation Y mobilities through the lens of energy cultures: a preliminary exploration of mobility cultures," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 88-91.
    20. Jin Xue & Hans Jakob Walnum & Carlo Aall & Petter Næss, 2016. "Two Contrasting Scenarios for a Zero-Emission Future in a High-Consumption Society," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-25, December.

    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:15:y:2023:i:20:p:15176-:d:1265596. 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.