Can Proximal Environments Prevent Social Inequalities Amongst People of All Ages and Abilities? An Integrative Literature Review Approach

Abstract

Although many studies are currently examining the city of proximity as a way to promote sustainable and environmentally friendly cities, few consider it meaningful to achieve an “inclusive” mobility model for people of all ages and abilities, including people with disabilities, children, or the elderly. This literature review paper focuses on the extent to which the city of proximity can provide inclusive mobility and reduce inequalities in the urban scene, thus achieving social sustainability. Out of the 256 references analysed under an integrative review methodology, only 10 delivered solid results. One of the main contributions of this paper is an indicator and sub-indicator system to improve the integrative methodology in urban studies, which led to the identification of several incoherencies in proximity models in terms of accessibility and design for all risking fostering urban with these policies. Although the mentioning of vulnerable collectives may mean a rise in inclusion awareness, one of the most relevant outputs of this paper is the lack of specific measures to revert the disadvantageous situations that conventional mobility planning delivers, as well as the neglection to use proximity actions to promote inclusive and socially resilient urban cities.

Simultaneous Inequity of Elderly Residents in Melbourne Metropolitan

“…As a result, efficient and well-designed PT facilitates the accommodation of different ways of meeting their needs. From this perspective, PT improves equal access to opportunity [45,46].…”

Proximity Sports as a Sustainable Strategy for the Promotion of Physical Activity at an Early Age: The KIA Project

“…From the socio-ecological model [17], the physical environment would be relevant for the levels and type of physical activity taking place in a city, neighborhood, or community [18]. Different studies have found that proximity to an exercise facility is positively associated with leisure-time physical activity, whether considering proximity as a 10 min walking distance, 1 km from home, "the 15-min city", a 20-min walking distance, or even asking about perceived proximity [19][20][21][22][23][24][25]. In adults, PA among women, younger adults, people with higher education, and urban residents appeared to have a stronger association with distance to an exercise facility [19].…”

“…Adolescents' perception of living in environments or dwellings that facilitate physical activity is associated with a healthier BMI, more hours of physical activity and family time, and fewer hours of screen time [20], as well as greater intensity and duration of PA activities [24]. Regarding children, there is a significant correlation between the spatial characteristics of an urban neighborhood and general environmental cues regarding the duration and intensity of physical activity [21].…”