Syndicate content

Recent comments

  • Reply to: Can transit-oriented development change travel behavior in cities?   1 day 2 hours ago

    A great article.
    Thank you for your good discussion and TOD empirical evidence (case of Boston).
    I am interested on your findings on the relationship between travel behaviour and household residential density (household per residential acre). Does your household per residential acre means household per gross acre? Your clarification would be very helpful for me. Thank you and looking to hearing from you soon.

  • Reply to: Success when we deemed it failure? Revisiting sites and services 20 years later   1 week 3 days ago
    Link to World Development journal paper has been updated and is working.  Thank you for flagging that.  Your points are well taken and the paper addresses some of these.  Additional research, especially socio-economic surveys and longitudinal studies, is needed to help us better understand the dynamics over time.  Best wishes for your research!   
  • Reply to: Top 7 disruptive technologies for cities   1 week 4 days ago
    Thank you for your feedback, Elmer! Please find the article here. -- The Editorial Team
  • Reply to: Top 7 disruptive technologies for cities   1 week 5 days ago

    very enlightening article. am interested in the article on the use of blockchain for zoning/urban planning. where cani get access to this? thanks

  • Reply to: Success when we deemed it failure? Revisiting sites and services 20 years later   1 week 5 days ago

    Hi. I am trying to download the article using the link but it seems not 'free' anymore. Is there another way to access the full article? Currently finishing up a PhD thesis on low-income housing in Naga City, Philippines and the study seems to be relevant literature.

    Just a first thought. 'Success' would have to be checked though with the initial intent of sites-and-services projects. The projects showcased the 'low-income housing strategy' of the World Bank in the 1970s and thus was supposed to cater to the poor. SS was supposed to replace public housing which was the default response of states to the poor's demands for housing, other than slum clearance. On this aspect and the time-frame in which the World Bank was expecting benefits to materialize, SS were not.

    But in another aspect, your study has a point - on the dynamism over neighborhoods over time. The poor do not stay poor forever, or they may have just been eased out through gentrification or for some other reason. As I have no access to the study, I could not comment further. It would be interesting to know whether the study included case studies of households that have been there from the start and how local politics and relationships shaped the way these SS are right now.