Speaker
Description
Over the last 30 years, significant research consolidated the Walkability Indexes in measurements of the pedestrian-friendly built environment (Dovey, 2020; Frank et al., 2021; Moura et al., 2017). These studies provide robust evidence of the benefits of walkability, highlighting its benefits on health, quality of life, and environment (Lowe et al., 2022). Such contributions underscore walkability's interdisciplinary and integrative nature, supporting its inclusion in policy frameworks that address complex challenges, including sustainable development, climate change, and the transition to a decarbonised economy.
This work aims to examine how walkability is promoted through policies. Using qualitative discourse analysis (Fairclough, 1995; LeGreco & Tracy, 2009), we examine national-level policies in Portugal from 1998 to 2023 within a conceptual framework, which, positions walkability at the centre of synergies between two causal dimensions: Components that impact walkability and Outcomes, referring to elements impacted by walkability. The analysis explores how these conceptual categories manifest, explicitly or implicitly, within policy content, offering insights into walkability's role in policy interactions.
Our results reveal that walkability can serve both as an objective and a prerequisite for addressing transversal themes in policy narratives. Two distinct patterns of policies promoting walkability were identified: (1) a Sectoral Pattern and (2) an Integrative Pattern. These two dynamic patterns indicate the emergence of walkability in Portugal’s planning environment as part of a process toward policy integration. This trajectory has enabled the development of intersectoral arrangements to tackle complex contemporary challenges (Cejudo & Trein, 2023).
References
Cejudo, G. M., & Trein, P. (2023). Pathways to policy integration: a subsystem approach. Policy Sciences, 56(1), 9–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-022-09483-1
Dovey, K. (2020). What is walkability? The urban DMA. Urban Studies, 57(1), 93–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098018819727
Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis. Longman.
Frank, L. D., Appleyard, B. S., Ulmer, J. M., Chapman, J. E., & Fox, E. H. (2021). Comparing walkability methods: Creation of street smart walk score and efficacy of a code-based 3D walkability index. Journal of Transport and Health, 21(March), 101005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2020.101005
LeGreco, M., & Tracy, S. J. (2009). Discourse tracing as qualitative practice. Qualitative Inquiry, 15(9), 1516–1543. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800409343064
Lowe, M., Adlakha, D., Sallis, J. F., Salvo, D., Cerin, E., Moudon, A. V, … Giles-Corti, B. (2022). City planning policies to support health and sustainability: an international comparison of policy indicators for 25 cities. The Lancet Global Health, 10(6), e882–e894. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(22)00069-9
Moura, F., Cambra, P., Gonçalves, A. B. (2017). Measuring walkability for distinct pedestrian groups with a participatory assessment method: A case study in Lisbon. Landscape and Urban Planning, 157, 282–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.07.002
| Keywords | walkability; policies integration; policy interactions; discourse analysis; Portugal |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | Yes |
