Speaker
Description
In recent years, urban proximity has received renewed attention in urban and transport planning as cities strive to create environments that promote sustainability, health and overall quality of life. While the environmental and health benefits of proximal urban environments are well documented - such as reduced carbon emissions, improved air quality and increased physical activity - the social implications, particularly in terms of social cohesion, remain under-researched. Social cohesion, which refers to the strength of social ties, shared values and a sense of belonging within communities, has been linked to a range of benefits, including increased community resilience, improved public health and greater collective well-being. However, despite its importance, there is still limited understanding of how proximity to everyday destinations shapes social cohesion.
Previous research has examined how different characteristics of the built environment - such as density, diversity, design and walkability - affect social cohesion. These factors have been shown to influence how people interact with their surroundings and with each other. However, few studies have specifically isolated the impact of proximity to key destinations - such as grocery stores, parks, schools and health facilities - on social cohesion. This gap is particularly important given that proximity can influence the frequency and quality of social interactions, as well as the overall accessibility of services that support daily needs.
In this research, we aim to address this gap by integrating both objective and subjective measures of proximity to destinations to assess their influence on community cohesion. Our study uses survey data on social cohesion and perceptions of proximity, together with geo-referenced data on actual distances to everyday destinations in five Spanish cities: Madrid, Barcelona, Valencia, Palma de Mallorca and Granada. Using partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM), we analyse the relationship between proximity and social cohesion, focusing on how perceptions of proximity mediate this relationship, while controlling for socio-demographic variables such as age, income and education.
The results show a significant negative relationship between distance to everyday destinations and social cohesion, mediated by perceptions of proximity. This suggests that social cohesion is influenced not only by the physical proximity of destinations, but also by how individuals perceive this proximity. The negative effect is particularly pronounced when there is a mismatch between actual and perceived proximity - when destinations are perceived to be closer or further than they actually are. Furthermore, distance to everyday destinations was found to have a significant impact on two critical sub-dimensions of social cohesion: need satisfaction (the extent to which basic and social needs are met within a community) and group membership (the sense of attachment and belonging to a community). The study also highlights the role of socio-demographic factors, with older residents and those living in neighbourhoods with fewer rented homes reporting higher levels of social cohesion, possibly due to greater reliance on local networks and services. These findings highlight the complexity of the relationship between proximity, perceptions and social cohesion, and the need for equitable urban planning strategies.
The implications of this research are clear: urban planners and policy makers should prioritise equitable access to essential services and consider both objective and subjective dimensions of proximity in their designs. By fostering environments where everyday destinations are accessible and perceived as close, cities can strengthen social cohesion, build community resilience and promote a higher quality of life for all residents. This integrated approach is crucial to creating more inclusive and socially sustainable urban environments.
| Keywords | Urban proximity; Urban mobility; 15-minute cities; Social cohesion |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | Yes |
