Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Systematic review examines urban planning impacts on accessibility and spatial equity for marginalized groups, indicating critical insights.
Inclusive urban spaces are increasingly recognised as critical to sustainable and spatially just cities. Yet, underlying conditions and planning mechanisms that create these spaces and the socio-ecological trade-offs involved remain insufficiently understood. This protocol outlines the methods for a systematic literature review (SLR) that examines how urban planning interventions and policies shape inclusive spaces, enhance accessibility and address inequities for vulnerable and marginalised populations. The review focuses on the planning process, outcomes as well as enablers and barriers analysed through spatial-justice (SJ) dimensions – distributional, procedural and recognition justice as well as temporal dimension of justice and interprets ecosystem services and disservices (ES – EDS) trade-offs as indicators of these justice processes emerging from urban greening and rewilding interventions. Following Collaboration for Environmental Evidence (CEE) and ROSES guidelines, the review will integrate studies published in English between 2000 and 2026. Data synthesis will employ qualitative thematic metrics used to evaluate inclusivity in planning. Findings are expected to contribute to spatial-justice, inclusive planning practice and outcome.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Veibiakkim et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: