Spatial variation in the potential for social interaction: A case study in Flanders (Belgium)

Empirical evidence is mounting that good urban design fosters the formation of social fabric. Existing evidence is however limited in at least two respects. First, empirical studies have focused largely on social interactions taking place within the residential neighborhood, while leaving social encounters near the workplace unconsidered. Second, while various studies have examined the impact of the built environment on realized social behavior, there is as yet no empirical research on the potential for having social contact. A deeper understanding of the geography of social interaction potential is nonetheless important, for it is individuals’ social opportunities rather than their preferences and actual choices that are most directly amenable to policy intervention. This paper seeks to address both issues in an empirical case study in Flanders and Brussels (Belgium). An exploratory spatial analysis is conducted to uncover spatial trends in the potential for social interaction in order to better understand the role of urban spatial structure in the production of social interaction potential.

[1]  Mei-Po Kwan,et al.  VISUALISATION OF SOCIO‐SPATIAL ISOLATION BASED ON HUMAN ACTIVITY PATTERNS AND SOCIAL NETWORKS IN SPACE‐TIME , 2011 .

[2]  Thomas H. Sander.  Social Capital and New Urbanism: Leading a Civic Horse to Water? , 2002 .

[3]  Robert D. Putnam,et al.  Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community , 2000, CSCW '00.

[4]  P. Bourdieu.  Forms of Capital , 2002 .

[5]  I. Cullen,et al.  Urban Networks: The Structure of Activity Patterns , 1975 .

[6]  Tijs Neutens,et al.  My space or your space? Towards a measure of joint accessibility , 2008, Comput. Environ. Urban Syst..

[7]  Tijs Neutens,et al.  Arranging place and time: A GIS toolkit to assess person-based accessibility of urban opportunities , 2010 .

[8]  Lance Freeman,et al.  The Effects of Sprawl on Neighborhood Social Ties: An Explanatory Analysis , 2001 .

[9]  J. Brueckner,et al.  Social Interaction and Urban Sprawl , 2006, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[10]  Pascal De Decker,et al.  Understanding Housing Sprawl: The Case of Flanders, Belgium , 2011 .

[11]  Mei-Po Kwan,et al.  Network-based constraints-oriented choice set formation using GIS , 1998 .

[12]  Tijs Neutens,et al.  The Social Interaction Potential of Metropolitan Regions: A Time-Geographic Measurement Approach Using Joint Accessibility , 2013 .

[13]  H. Lund.  Testing the Claims of New Urbanism: Local Access, Pedestrian Travel, and Neighboring Behaviors , 2003 .

[14]  Torsten Hägerstraand.  WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE IN REGIONAL SCIENCE , 1970 .

[15]  M. Horner.  Extensions to the Concept of Excess Commuting , 2002 .

[16]  T. Hägerstrand.  What about people in Regional Science? , 1970 .

[17]  M. O'Kelly,et al.  Disaggregate Journey-to-Work Data: Implications for Excess Commuting and Jobs–Housing Balance , 2005 .

[18]  Etienne Van Hecke,et al.  Pendel in België. Deel I: de woon- en werkverplaatsingen , 2007 .

[19]  Si‐ming Li.  Evolving Residential and Employment Locations and Patterns of Commuting under Hyper Growth: The Case of Guangzhou, China , 2010 .

[20]  H. Miller.  A MEASUREMENT THEORY FOR TIME GEOGRAPHY , 2005 .

[21]  K. Leyden.  Social capital and the built environment: the importance of walkable neighborhoods. , 2003, American journal of public health.

[22]  Harvey J. Miller,et al.  Necessary Space—Time Conditions for Human Interaction , 2005 .

[23]  Hélène Charreire,et al.  Estimating spatial accessibility to facilities on the regional scale: an extended commuting-based interaction potential model , 2011, International journal of health geographics.

[24]  Tijs Neutens,et al.  Dealing with Timing and Synchronization in Opportunities for Joint Activity Participation: Opportunities for Joint Activity Participation , 2010 .

[25]  J. Jacobs.  The Death and Life of Great American Cities , 1962 .

[26]  Darren M. Scott,et al.  An integrated spatio-temporal GIS toolkit for exploring intra-household interactions , 2008 .

[27]  A. Páez,et al.  Running to stay in place: the time-use implications of automobile oriented land-use and travel , 2011 .

[28]  Steven Farber,et al.  My car, my friends, and me: a preliminary analysis of automobility and social activity participation , 2009 .

[29]  Youngihn Kho,et al.  GeoDa: An Introduction to Spatial Data Analysis , 2006 .

[30]  Wei Tu,et al.  A multi-objective approach to scheduling joint participation with variable space and time preferences and opportunities , 2011 .

[31]  Isabelle Thomas,et al.  Measuring urban polycentrism: a European case study and its implications , 2007 .

[32]  J. Coleman,et al.  Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital , 1988, American Journal of Sociology.

[33]  L. Anselin.  Local Indicators of Spatial Association—LISA , 2010 .

[34]  E. Talen.  The social goals of new urbanism , 2002 .

[35]  Eric J. Miller,et al.  The social dimension in action : A multilevel, personal networks model of social activity frequency between individuals , 2009 .

[36]  A. Kearns,et al.  Social Cohesion, Social Capital and the Neighbourhood , 2001 .

[37]  Frank Witlox,et al.  Measuring Spatial Separation Processes through the Minimum Commute: the Case of Flanders , 2011, European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research.

[38]  Nigel Spence,et al.  Excess or wasteful commuting in a selection of British cities , 1998 .

[39]  A. Guest,et al.  Social Ties at the Neighborhood Level , 1999 .

[40]  Tijs Neutens,et al.  Minimum commuting distance as a spatial characteristic in a non‐monocentric urban system: The case of Flanders , 2011 .

[41]  Doan Nguyen,et al.  Evidence of the Impacts of Urban Sprawl on Social Capital , 2010 .

[42]  Shih-Lung Shaw,et al.  Exploring potential human activities in physical and virtual spaces: a spatio‐temporal GIS approach , 2008, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[43]  Barry Boots,et al.  Developing local measures of spatial association for categorical data , 2003, J. Geogr. Syst..