IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v99y2020ics0264837719317211.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dynamic modeling to support an integrated analysis among land use change, accessibility and gentrification

Author

Listed:
  • Silva, Camilla Almeida
  • Giannotti, Mariana
  • Almeida, Cláudia Maria de

Abstract

The gentrification phenomenon is characterized by the replacement of the prevailing social class living in a residential area by another one with a higher income due to improvements in technical and social infrastructures, such as upgrades in the accessibility conditions. Gentrification is a matter of great concern, especially in big cities of developing countries, where infrastructure provision should not reinforce patterns of sociospatial segregation. The main motivation of this work is to verify if land use transitions could lead to possible gentrification, under the influence of accessibility-related variables – such as the public transportation network, education and health equipments and the availability of employment. In order to represent a phenomenon that varies over time and space, the study proposes a dynamic modeling via cellular automata, using the validation of past simulations to measure the suitability of each accessibility variable to explain the observed land use transitions. The probability of each cell´s transition was calculated using the weights of evidence method considering the explanatory variables, based on the Bayes´ Theorem. The proposed model is applied in a case study that comprises districts in the southwestern sector of São Paulo city, Brazil, an area marked by the heterogeneity of its land use, with a considerable predominance of low-income dwellings. The work was based on spatial data from more than a decade (2000−2016), which besides providing information on land use, also enable the categorization of residential and retail buildings according to their standard and size. The modeling process revealed that for different ranges of each variable, transition trends usually associated with gentrification took place, such as the increasing presence of retail and services, the construction of new buildings in previously non-residential areas, the occupation of vacant land and the reduction of industrial use. However, observing the occurrence spots of those changes, it is reasonable to state that most of the occupation patterns found in each area tended to remain throughout the years, which means that low-income areas were not totally eliminated. Distinct levels of added value granted to the urban tissue were observed as a function of the predominant land use in each area – highlighting the complexity of the relationship between urban form and gentrification. The satisfactory results in the model validation confirmed the good performance of the explaining variables in modeling the urban form dynamics within the study area.

Suggested Citation

  • Silva, Camilla Almeida & Giannotti, Mariana & Almeida, Cláudia Maria de, 2020. "Dynamic modeling to support an integrated analysis among land use change, accessibility and gentrification," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:99:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719317211
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104992
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837719317211
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104992?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dong, Hongwei, 2017. "Rail-transit-induced gentrification and the affordability paradox of TOD," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1-10.
    2. Cervero, Robert B., 2013. "Linking urban transport and land use in developing countries," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 6(1), pages 7-24.
    3. Jonathan Levine & Joe Grengs & Qingyun Shen & Qing Shen, 2012. "Does Accessibility Require Density or Speed?," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 78(2), pages 157-172.
    4. Liu, Guiwen & Chen, Sijing & Gu, Jianping, 2019. "Urban renewal simulation with spatial, economic and policy dynamics: The rent-gap theory-based model and the case study of Chongqing," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 238-252.
    5. Singh, Yamini Jain & Fard, Pedram & Zuidgeest, Mark & Brussel, Mark & Maarseveen, Martin van, 2014. "Measuring transit oriented development: a spatial multi criteria assessment approach for the City Region Arnhem and Nijmegen," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 130-143.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pedro Bueno Rocha Campos & Cláudia Maria de Almeida & Alfredo Pereira de Queiroz, 2022. "Spatial Dynamic Models for Assessing the Impact of Public Policies: The Case of Unified Educational Centers in the Periphery of São Paulo City," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-25, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhao, Yingrui & Hu, Songhua & Zhang, Ming, 2024. "Evaluating equitable Transit-Oriented development (TOD) via the Node-Place-People model," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    2. Boeing, Geoff, 2017. "Honolulu Rail Transit: International Lessons from Barcelona in Linking Urban Form, Design, and Transportation," SocArXiv mzsb2, Center for Open Science.
    3. Papa, Enrica & Bertolini, Luca, 2015. "Accessibility and Transit-Oriented Development in European metropolitan areas," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 70-83.
    4. Pankaj Bajracharya & Selima Sultana, 2022. "Examining the Use of Urban Growth Boundary for Future Urban Expansion of Chattogram, Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-21, May.
    5. Chetan Doddamani & M. Manoj, 2023. "Analysis of the influences of built environment measures on household car and motorcycle ownership decisions in Hubli-Dharwad cities," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 205-243, February.
    6. Yang Yang & Chunlu Liu & Baizhen Li & Jilong Zhao, 2022. "Modelling and Forecast of Future Growth for Shandong’s Small Industrial Towns: A Scenario-Based Interactive Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-16, December.
    7. Cavoli, Clemence, 2021. "Accelerating sustainable mobility and land-use transitions in rapidly growing cities: Identifying common patterns and enabling factors," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    8. Sharma, Sabal & Levinson, David, 2019. "Travel cost and dropout from secondary schools in Nepal," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 385-397.
    9. Combs, Tabitha S., 2017. "Examining changes in travel patterns among lower wealth households after BRT investment in Bogotá, Colombia," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 11-20.
    10. Pasha, Obed & Wyczalkowski, Chris & Sohrabian, Dro & Lendel, Iryna, 2020. "Transit effects on poverty, employment, and rent in Cuyahoga County, Ohio," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 33-41.
    11. Wei Wu & Prasanna Divigalpitiya, 2022. "Assessment of Accessibility and Activity Intensity to Identify Future Development Priority TODs in Hefei City," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, September.
    12. Wang, Y. & Mauree, D. & Sun, Q. & Lin, H. & Scartezzini, J.L. & Wennersten, R., 2020. "A review of approaches to low-carbon transition of high-rise residential buildings in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    13. Thi Mai Chi Nguyen & Hironori Kato & Le Binh Phan, 2020. "Is Built Environment Associated with Travel Mode Choice in Developing Cities? Evidence from Hanoi," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-16, July.
    14. Ibraeva, Anna & Correia, Gonçalo Homem de Almeida & Silva, Cecília & Antunes, António Pais, 2020. "Transit-oriented development: A review of research achievements and challenges," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 110-130.
    15. David Levinson & David Giacomin & Antony Badsey-Ellis, 2014. "Accessibility and the choice of network investments in the London Underground," Working Papers 000124, University of Minnesota: Nexus Research Group.
    16. Jinkun Yang & Linchuan Yang & Haitao Ma, 2022. "Community Participation Strategy for Sustainable Urban Regeneration in Xiamen, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-14, April.
    17. Sangwan Lee & Liming Wang, 2022. "Intermediate Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Prices of Housing near Light Rail Transit: A Case Study of the Portland Metropolitan Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-17, July.
    18. Rogier Pennings & Bart Wiegmans & Tejo Spit, 2020. "Can We Have Our Cake and Still Eat It? A Review of Flexibility in the Structural Spatial Development and Passenger Transport Relation in Developing Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-25, July.
    19. Abdi, Mohammad Hamed, 2021. "What the newcomers to transit-oriented development are confronted with? Evidence from Iranian policy and planning," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    20. Ahmet Salih Günaydın & M. Faruk Altunkasa, 2022. "Developing the socio-spatial integration of historical city centers with spatial strategies: the case of Gaziantep," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(6), pages 8092-8114, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:99:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719317211. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.