Mapping and measuring urban-rural inequalities in accessibility to social infrastructures

IF 8 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 GEOGRAPHY, PHYSICAL
Chenmeng Guo , Weiqi Zhou , Chuanbao Jing , Dawa Zhaxi
{"title":"Mapping and measuring urban-rural inequalities in accessibility to social infrastructures","authors":"Chenmeng Guo ,&nbsp;Weiqi Zhou ,&nbsp;Chuanbao Jing ,&nbsp;Dawa Zhaxi","doi":"10.1016/j.geosus.2023.11.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Equal access to social infrastructures is a fundamental prerequisite for sustainable development, but has long been a great challenge worldwide. Previous studies have primarily focused on the accessibility to social infrastructures in urban areas across various scales, with less attention to rural areas, where inequality can be more severe. Particularly, few have investigated the disparities of accessibility to social infrastructures between urban and rural areas. Here, using the Changsha–Zhuzhou–Xiangtan urban agglomeration, China, as an example, we investigated the inequality of accessibility in both urban and rural areas, and further compared the urban-rural difference. Accessibility was measured by travel time of residents to infrastructures. We selected four types of social infrastructures including supermarkets, bus stops, primary schools, and health care, which were fundamentally important to both urban and rural residents. We found large disparities in accessibility between urban and rural areas, ranging from 20 min to 2 h. Rural residents had to spend one to two more hours to bus stops than urban residents, and 20 min more to the other three types of infrastructures. Furthermore, accessibility to multiple infrastructures showed greater urban-rural differences. Rural residents in more than half of the towns had no access to any infrastructure within 15 min, while more than 60% of the urban residents could access to all infrastructures within 15 min. Our results revealed quantitative accessibility gap between urban and rural areas and underscored the necessity of social infrastructures planning to address such disparities.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":52374,"journal":{"name":"Geography and Sustainability","volume":"5 1","pages":"Pages 41-51"},"PeriodicalIF":8.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666683923000718/pdfft?md5=9d6aa8899ba3c46bdf59d779491ff0a1&pid=1-s2.0-S2666683923000718-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geography and Sustainability","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666683923000718","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY, PHYSICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Equal access to social infrastructures is a fundamental prerequisite for sustainable development, but has long been a great challenge worldwide. Previous studies have primarily focused on the accessibility to social infrastructures in urban areas across various scales, with less attention to rural areas, where inequality can be more severe. Particularly, few have investigated the disparities of accessibility to social infrastructures between urban and rural areas. Here, using the Changsha–Zhuzhou–Xiangtan urban agglomeration, China, as an example, we investigated the inequality of accessibility in both urban and rural areas, and further compared the urban-rural difference. Accessibility was measured by travel time of residents to infrastructures. We selected four types of social infrastructures including supermarkets, bus stops, primary schools, and health care, which were fundamentally important to both urban and rural residents. We found large disparities in accessibility between urban and rural areas, ranging from 20 min to 2 h. Rural residents had to spend one to two more hours to bus stops than urban residents, and 20 min more to the other three types of infrastructures. Furthermore, accessibility to multiple infrastructures showed greater urban-rural differences. Rural residents in more than half of the towns had no access to any infrastructure within 15 min, while more than 60% of the urban residents could access to all infrastructures within 15 min. Our results revealed quantitative accessibility gap between urban and rural areas and underscored the necessity of social infrastructures planning to address such disparities.

绘制和衡量城乡在社会基础设施可及性方面的不平等现象
平等利用社会基础设施是可持续发展的基本前提,但长期以来一直是全世界面临的巨大挑战。以往的研究主要关注城市地区各种规模的社会基础设施的可及性,对不平等现象可能更严重的农村地区关注较少。特别是,很少有人调查城市和农村地区社会基础设施无障碍程度的差异。在此,我们以中国长沙-株洲-湘潭城市群为例,调查了城市和农村地区无障碍环境的不平等,并进一步比较了城乡差异。可达性是通过居民前往基础设施的旅行时间来衡量的。我们选择了四类社会基础设施,包括超市、公交车站、小学和医疗保健,这些对城市和农村居民来说都非常重要。我们发现,城市和农村地区的交通便利程度存在巨大差异,差距从 20 分钟到 2 小时不等。与城市居民相比,农村居民需要多花 1 到 2 个小时才能到达公交车站,而到其他三类基础设施则需要多花 20 分钟。此外,多种基础设施的可达性也显示出更大的城乡差异。半数以上城镇的农村居民无法在 15 分钟内到达任何基础设施,而 60% 以上的城镇居民可以在 15 分钟内到达所有基础设施。我们的研究结果揭示了城乡之间在交通便利性方面的数量差距,并强调了社会基础设施规划对解决这种差距的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Geography and Sustainability
Geography and Sustainability Social Sciences-Geography, Planning and Development
CiteScore
16.70
自引率
3.10%
发文量
32
审稿时长
41 days
期刊介绍: Geography and Sustainability serves as a central hub for interdisciplinary research and education aimed at promoting sustainable development from an integrated geography perspective. By bridging natural and human sciences, the journal fosters broader analysis and innovative thinking on global and regional sustainability issues. Geography and Sustainability welcomes original, high-quality research articles, review articles, short communications, technical comments, perspective articles and editorials on the following themes: Geographical Processes: Interactions with and between water, soil, atmosphere and the biosphere and their spatio-temporal variations; Human-Environmental Systems: Interactions between humans and the environment, resilience of socio-ecological systems and vulnerability; Ecosystem Services and Human Wellbeing: Ecosystem structure, processes, services and their linkages with human wellbeing; Sustainable Development: Theory, practice and critical challenges in sustainable development.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信