Urban Inclusion Assessment: A Scoping Review of Concepts, Measures, and Persistent Gaps

AbstractRapid urbanization is intensifying socio-spatial inequality within cities, and a growing body of scholarship seeksto define and measure urban inclusion; yet this literature has not previously been mapped comprehensively. Thisscoping review, conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews(PRISMA-ScR), systematically maps academic scholarship on urban inclusion measurement published between2005 and 2025. Four bibliographic databases (Scopus, Google Scholar, Lens.org, and OpenAlex) were searched,yielding 9,015 records; after deduplication, automated filtering, and application of the 2005–2025 eligibilitywindow, 1,344 unique records were screened, 311 were assessed at full text, and 189 articles were included. Thefull deduplicated corpus of 1,344 documents was characterized through bibliometric analysis. Three findingsstructure the results. First, production has accelerated sharply: annual output rose from an average ofapproximately 23 documents per year in a foundational period (2005–2015) to approximately 161 per year in thecontemporary period (2021–2025), with 2025 alone contributing 23.2% of the corpus. Second, knowledgeproduction is geographically concentrated: the United States, China, and Europe account for 60% of attributedcorresponding authorships, while Sub-Saharan Africa accounts for 5%. Third, literature has matured thematically,evolving from single-dimension, infrastructure-focused assessment toward multidimensional, rights-based, andcapabilities-oriented frameworks converging on five recurring dimensions: economic, social, spatial,environmental, and institutional. Against this maturation, the synthesis identifies four persistent, interrelated gapsin the scholarship: a disconnect between theoretical traditions and measurement practice; the geographic andepistemic concentration of knowledge production; aggregation blindness toward intra-urban and intersectionalexclusion; and an outcome-centric, data-intensive measurement orientation that neglects process and feasibility.These gaps constitute an evidence-based agenda for the next generation of urban inclusion assessment.