No abstract

Urban development continues to face the dilemma of spatial inequality of public facilities, particularly educational and medical facilities. Identifying inequalities in various types of public facilities and their driving mechanisms is crucial in reducing social inequality. However, information on this topic is limited. This study took 10 typical cities in China as cases. We used the methods of the Gini coefficient and hedonic price model as bases in evaluating the equality of nine types of education and medical facilities, focusing on the differences between urban and rural areas. Moreover, we further analyzed the driving factors of facility equality. Results showed that equality of public facilities in urban areas was significantly higher than that in rural areas. Primary schools, middle schools, and health service centers were relatively equal, and kindergartens and pharmacies were unequal only in rural areas. However, the equality of facilities with large-size or commercial attributes was not optimistic. Furthermore, there remained a significant gap among counties (or districts), which was mainly driven by population, economy, and building density in the form of logarithm and logarithmic linear models. Our research contributes to an in-depth understanding of the inequality of public facilities and further supports decision-making to improve social equality.

With the rapid increase of urban population, housing demand is gradually increasing, and traffic congestion is becoming more and more serious. People are increasingly concerned about the relationship between housing and public transportation. Hence, studying the impact of public transport on housing prices will be conducive to promoting the coordinated development of urban public transport and urban social economy. Taking Hangzhou, China as a case city, this study selected 477 residential districts and their surrounding comprehensive public transport characteristics to construct the hedonic price model, and further quantitatively analyses the impact of urban public transport on housing prices. The empirical results showed that most of the public transport characteristics produce significant premium capacity to the housing market. The ranking of the premium capacity from high to low is the distance between the community to the subway station, the speed of nearby roads, and the number of public bicycle stations. In addition, a few public transport characteristics, such as the number of bus and water bus stops, have no significant impact on housing prices. This research can serve as a theoretical basis for government departments to carry out urban planning and real estate enterprises to make decisions.

No abstract