Content uploaded by Carl Grodach
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Carl Grodach on Jun 13, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cupr20
Urban Policy and Research
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cupr20
Planning Innovation or City Branding? Exploring
How Cities Operationalise the 20-Minute
Neighbourhood Concept
Alexa Gower & Carl Grodach
To cite this article: Alexa Gower & Carl Grodach (2022) Planning Innovation or City Branding?
Exploring How Cities Operationalise the 20-Minute Neighbourhood Concept, Urban Policy and
Research, 40:1, 36-52, DOI: 10.1080/08111146.2021.2019701
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/08111146.2021.2019701
View supplementary material
Published online: 09 Feb 2022.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 170
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Planning Innovation or City Branding? Exploring How Cities
Operationalise the 20-Minute Neighbourhood Concept
Alexa Gower and Carl Grodach
Department of Architecture, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
ABSTRACT
Cities worldwide are increasingly adopting the 20-minute neighbourhood
concept within broader sustainable urban development strategies.
However, there is limited understanding of how the concept has been
operationalised in cities that have adopted the concept nor of the
outcomes to offer guidance to new locations considering uptake. This
paper reports on a content evaluation of how the 20-minute
neighbourhood concept has been operationalised in planning
documents of the 33 cities worldwide that have adopted or are
considering the concept. A general lack of implementation with
measurability nor statutory policy weight to support planners to enact
the concept in practice was found.
抽抽象象的的
世界各地的城市越来越多地采用20 分钟街区更广泛的可持续城市发展
战略中的概念。然而，人们对该概念的理解有限在已采用该概念的城
市中实施结果为考虑吸收的新地点提供指导。这关于20 分钟的内容评
估的论文报告邻里概念已在规划中实施全球33 个城市已通过或正在实
施的文件考虑到这个概念。普遍缺乏实施支持规划者制定的可衡量性
或法定政策权重在实践中发现了这个概念。
ARTICLE HISTORY
Received 5 July 2021
Accepted 14 December 2021
KEYWORDS
20-minute neighbourhoods;
chrono-urbanism; city
branding; planning
concepts; policy
implementation
The 20-minute neighbourhood concept is increasingly adopted by cities worldwide within broader
sustainable urban development strategies. The concept aims to ensure all people can access essential
daily services and amenities within a 20-minute walk from home (Department of Environment,
Land, Water and Planning 2019, C40 Cities 2020). Originating in Portland, Oregon, in the 1990s
as an aspirational idea (Hutabarat Lo 2009), the 20-minute neighbourhood concept draws on
and presents another variation of transportation and amenity planning spatialisation that began
with Ebenezer Howard’s 1898 Garden city (Curtis 2019). To date, the 20-minute neighbourhood
concept has been adopted or is being considered for adoption by 33 cities internationally at the
end of 2020. 20-minute neighbourhoods and similar “chrono-urbanism”concepts like Paris’
15-minute city (Hidalgo 2020) have drawn increasing attention during the Covid-19 pandemic
as governments seek a post-Covid future that is more resilient to health and economic crises
(Hu and Schweber 2020, Perinotto 2020, Sisson 2020, Wittenberg 2020) and as “work from
home”practices shed light on pre-existing inequalities in access to neighbourhood essentials
(Boucher 2020, C40 Cities 2020, Pyzyk 2020).
1
Despite the growing application of the 20-minute neighbourhood concept, research has yet to
examine how the concept has been operationalised in city planning documents. Planning concepts
© 2022 Editorial Board, Urban Policy and Research
CONTACT Alexa Gower alexa.gower@monash.edu Department of Architecture, Monash University, Building F, Room
F4.16, Caulfield Campus. 900 Dandenong Road, Caulfield East, Melbourne, VIC 3145, Australia @alexagower
Supplemental data for this article can be accessed at https://doi.org/10.1080/08111146.2021.2019701.
URBAN POLICY AND RESEARCH
2022, VOL. 40, NO. 1, 36–52
https://doi.org/10.1080/08111146.2021.2019701
that are implemented with measurable and clear benchmarks are vital for planners to implement
plan aims and, without measurability, the concept may devolve into a city branding device. Yet,
even if the 20-minute neighbourhood concept is employed as city branding by selling a reputation
for sustainable urbanism, it still requires discretionary principles for selecting “on brand”local
urban policies across the city. While this offers an indirect avenue for spatial change, there are
potential weaknesses and risks.
Based on a content analysis of planning documents in 33 cities internationally, this policy review
provides new knowledge on how cities implement, operationalise and define for the 20-minute
neighbourhood concept. We begin with an overview of the literature on 20-minute neighbourhoods
and related concepts. We next turn to a description of the research approach before a presentation
of findings. We find that although some cities develop measurable and well-defined planning targets
in formal policy to produce strategic spatial improvements, the vast majority of examples lack
specificity and clarity. From this examination, the study then uses a city branding lens to reflect
on the potential outcomes achieved for cities adopting the concept that these levels of measurability
reveal.
1. 20-Minute Neighbourhoods: Planning Concept Foundations, Measurability, and
Branding
Measurability in a planning concept can assist effective policy implementation as it establishes clear
benchmarks and goals to encourage communication of ideas and accountability for action. Clear
definitions in benchmarks aid understanding between all actors as it creates a common language
and vision for action. Balsas (2004) argues that measuring the current performance of an area
against clear goals can reveal and clearly communicate specific weaknesses and help actors prioritise
interventions in the area. Zengerling (2019) also highlights that practical and tangible objectives in
policy that provides fixed and tangible expectations of action. These definitions and goals can be
measured, and this also offers accountability, as measurement links these inadequacies to specific
locations and the personnel responsible for those areas. They further add that if the policy objectives
are implemented with statutory weight in the planning system, then a further legal layer of expec-
tation and accountability for action is added. Policies that remain aspirational statements are gen-
eralised and elusive and, as a result, encourage inaction and are difficult to evaluate.
The 20-minute neighbourhood concept emerged in response to criticism around clear, measur-
able language in the domain of planning for urban liveability (Arundel et al. 2017). The concept
itself has antecedents going back to early twentieth-century neighbourhood planning (Pozoukidou
and Chatziyiannaki 2021). Planners responding to rapid industrialisation and urbanisation pro-
posed the distribution of self-contained and mixed-use places through systems of transit connection
(Curtis 2019). In the UK, Ebenezer Howard’s“Garden City”concentrically organised mixed-use
places with proximate access to countryside features of parkland and broad acreage to avoid the
overcrowding and public health problems associated with urbanisation. In the US, Clarence Perry’s
“neighbourhood unit”prioritised the school and ordered street layout and parkland percentages
from this central hub (Lloyd Lawhon 2009). Jane Jacobs’s(1961) later championed the concept
of land mix diversity within an immediate area by arguing that proximity makes cities vital and
key to a dynamic and vibrant local area within a larger city. Each iteration of the concept reflects
the time and place in which the policy operated and this evaluation of the 20-minute neighbour-
hood concept also acknowledges the influence that these contextual factors play in the operationa-
lisation of this policy.
Over the past 20 years, the focus on compact, mixed-use places has translated to growing aca-
demic and policy attention to walkable neighbourhoods and urban liveability issues. In this time,
researchers have built a significant body of evidence highlighting the nexus between health,
environmental, and equity issues, which is beginning to be translated into spatial policies (Frank
et al. 2010, Duncan et al. 2012, OECD 2012). Moreover, there is a growing body of international
URBAN POLICY AND RESEARCH 37
research on the importance, benefits and spatial parameters of walkability in neighbourhoods with
research situated in Australian (Gunn et al. 2017), American (Ewing and Handy 2009, Hoehner
et al. 2011), Asian (Yu et al. 2017, Tao et al. 2021) and European contexts (Brookfield 2017,
Moura et al. 2017).
Research on the related benefits of urban liveability to walkable neighbourhoods also grew at this
time (Lowe et al. 2013, Mavoa et al. 2016). However, unlike walkability, there were difficulties trans-
lating liveability research concepts into pragmatic policy. Arundel et al. (2017) report that refer-
ences to urban liveability within Australian city planning are without measurable goals or targets
for implementation and that only select topics that had pre-existing systems such as walkability,
public transport access and public open space were regularly measured. They also noted that the
more complex topics of amenity and employment, in particular, were consistently missing detail
in their definition. Additionally, Tournois (2018) highlights explicitly how the urban liveability
planning concept has been utilised for city marketing and branding to attract people to the type
of lifestyle and quality of life offered by a city.
The 20-minute neighbourhood and other chrono-urban concepts can potentially respond to
these criticisms and provide a more precise metric for planners to operationalise in practice.
The concept itself was developed in both Shanghai (Hou and Liu 2017) and Portland, Oregon,
inthemid-1990sasawaytomeasureaccesstoservicescitywideandtoassessprogresstowards
achieving city liveability (Hutabarat Lo 2009). In brief, the concept proposes that all essential
daily services and amenities should be met within a walkable distance of a residential area, includ-
ing access to high-quality public transport that provides a connection to high order services and
employment. While there is a degree of overlap in definitions on what composes essential daily
services and amenities between instances of the concept, there is no definitive definition. Further-
more, the walkable distance specified also ranges from 15 min in Paris, 20 min in Melbourne and
Portland, Oregon, and 30 min in Dublin, Ottawa, Sydney and Bogota. The related term “chrono-
urbanism”was coined more recently by Carlos Moreno (2019), whose work has been highly cited
in the Paris 15-minute city. This term more broadly describes the city planning concept as a
rethinking of time in relation to mobility to maintain the current quality of living more sustain-
ably.Itproposestodothisbymovingtowardsamore polycentric, diverse use city with the four
components of proximity, diversity, density and ubiquity to offer high living quality within short
distances and minimise auto dependence. Unlike Transit-orientated development, the focus is
upon mobility across the town centre with public transport as a aiding rather than driving feature
(Curtis 2019).
The adoption of the 20-minute neighbourhood concept has been rapid and internationally wide-
spread, with particular urgency spurred on by Covid-19 and the associated city lockdowns (C40
Cities 2020, Sisson 2020). Covid-19 was a unprecedented event for many cities worldwide, with
immense spatial ramifications for the immediate future operation of cities (Hamidi et al. 2020).
It has presented planners with a fleeting opportunity to shift policy and built environment practice
to more progressive ideas (Graziano 2021, Lotfata 2021). The 20-minute neighbourhood concept
was adopted in nine cities before 2020, and two additional cities have formally adopted the concept
since the pandemic. Fifteen are conducting further research into the possibility of applying it.
2
In
eight of these 15 cities considering adopting the policy, the motivation is explicitly stated as a Covid-
19 and city lockdown recovery strategy.
With the international popularity of the 20-minute neighbourhood concept and the potential
to aid city rejuvenation post-Covid, a greater understanding of how cities operationalise the con-
cept is critical. The concept may assist in setting measurable benchmarks against planning and
design goals. Alternatively, the concept may also be taken up as an urban branding mechanism
in the name of selling urban sustainability (Rinaldi et al. 2021). Critics have long argued that
“entrepreneurial cities”market their attributes to compete for resources, jobs, and capital invest-
ment and that this leads to gentrification, social exclusion, and commodification of place (Harvey
1989,Peck2014, Bonakdar and Audirac 2020). Others claim branding can go beyond simple
38 A. GOWER AND C. GRODACH
promotion to serve strategic planning purposes (Eshuis and Edwards 2013,JooandSeo2018,
Zenker 2018). They argue branding creates positive place identity that can provide guiding prin-
ciples for coherent policy selection (Kavaratzis 2004,Boisen2015). However, this risks focussing
on selective place features that support the place brand and often leads to the exclusion of par-
ticular communities or resident experiences that are not “on-brand”(Boisen et al. 2011,Van-
Hoose et al. 2021).
2. City Planning Document Content Analysis Methods
The research team conducted a content analysis of city planning documents and websites referring
to 20-minute neighbourhoods and similar chrono-urbanism concepts to investigate two research
questions: How do cities define and operationalise the 20-minute neighbourhood concept in planning
documents? Do city implementation modes of the 20-minute neighbourhood concept facilitate sus-
tainable planning or city branding outcomes?
The research team selected city planning documents to study from a detailed internet search for
cities that adopt the 20-minute neighbourhood planning concept. Search terms included “15/20-
minute neighbourhood”,“15/20-minute cities”,“chrono-urbanism”,“liveable neighbourhood”,
“liveability”and “active cities”. To validate the extensive nature of the search, we conducted further
investigation into all cities signed up to the C40 20-minute neighbourhood charter and mentioned
in other 20-minute neighbourhood information and planning community opinion pieces.
Altogether this search identified 32 cities and municipal areas that referenced the 20-minute neigh-
bourhood concept and were able to collect the relevant plans and policy documents for each city.
The C40 charter was not included in this set of 32 as it is not specific to place nor applied, but
instead was an advisory document to other cities forming their own policy.
Fourteen of the 32 places were excluded from the study due to insufficient information available
to address the research questions. In these cases, the 20-minute neighbourhood concept was refer-
enced, but the city had not produced specific documents outlining how the policy concept would be
applied. Seven of these examples are investigating the applicability of 20-minute neighbourhoods
and have not formally adopted the concept. These seven exploratory investigations in addition
to the remaining 18 formal adoptions demonstrate the escalating attention of the 20-minute neigh-
bourhood concept.
The 18 cities remaining in the study (Table 1) are spread across four continents and ten countries
and represent a diversity of city population size. There appeared to be no relationship between city
population size and 20-minute neighbourhood concept approach in the final results.
From the final set of 18 cities, a sample of four cities (Melbourne, Paris, Portland, and Singapore)
were studied to pilot, test and refine the systematic process of the content analysis. The pilot was
conducted by two research team members independently to ensure intercoder reliability and
then reviewed by a third researcher (see Appendix A for detail). This pilot identified the three
areas of study: implementation, definition and measurability. To structure the content analysis of
the different definitions of the 20-minute neighbourhood concept included in the plans, a grouping
system was also established in the pilot. This identified a series of 8 consistent core themes that
more broadly described the different elements included in the definition (for example: the three
elements of bus stops, train stations and frequent public transit services are all grouped under
the core theme of “public transport”)(Table 2). The 8 core themes ranged from key service pro-
visions like food, education and health, transport options, places for sport and recreation to key liv-
ing fundamentals of employment and housing.
After refining the content analysis process, the system was applied to each key document of the
18 cities in a three-step process. First, the researchers noted content regarding policy implemen-
tation within the planning system to denote the document type. Implementation was coded as
one of three labels: city strategic plan, city statutory document, or city marketing brochure. Second,
all elements included in the definition of a 20-minute neighbourhood were tabulated under the 8
URBAN POLICY AND RESEARCH 39
Table 1. Cities studied.
City, Country Reference
Study
focus
Implementation stage and Study
inclusion notes
Tirana, Albania Excluded Concept was not implemented at the
time of research but applicability under
review by the city. As a result, this
instance was able to be addressed by
the research question
Bendigo, Victoria, Australia City of Greater Bendigo (2016),
Department of Environment, Land,
Water and Planning (2016)
Included
Melbourne, Victoria,
Australia
Department of Environment, Land, Water
and Planning (2017)
Included
Moonee Valley, Victoria,
Australia
City of Moonee Valley (2018),
Department of Environment, Land,
Water and Planning (2018)
Included
Sydney, Australia Transport for NSW (2018a,2018b) Included
Buenos Aires Argentina Excluded Under review (see Tirana)
Brampton, Ontario, Canada The planning partnership (2013), City of
Brampton (2020)
Included
Montreal, Canada Excluded Insufficient quantity and reliability of
information on the implementation
status and approach by the city able to
be gathered at the time of research.
Ottawa, Canada Planning, Infrastructure and Economic
Development Department (2019,2020)
Included
Portland, Canada Wiewel and Kafoury (2012), Bureau of
planning and sustainability (2016)
Included
Liberty Village, Toronto,
Canada
Excluded Insufficient information (see Montreal)
Bogota, Chile Plan de ordenamiento territorial (2018) Included
Chendu China Excluded Under review (see Tirana)
Shanghai, China Shanghai Urban Planning and Land
Resources Administration Bureau
(2016), Shanghai Urban Planning and
Land Resource Administration Bureau
(2018)
Included
Paris, France Ville de Paris (2021) Included
London, England Excluded Under review (see Tirana)
Dublin, Ireland Dublin Chamber (2020) Included
Milan, Italy Comune di Milano (2020) Included
Hamilton, New Zealand Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency (2020) Included
Edinburgh Scotland Excluded Under review (see Tirana)
Glasgow, Scotland Excluded Insufficient information (see Montreal)
Singapore, Singapore Land Transport Authority (2019) Included
Madrid, Spain Excluded Insufficient information (see Montreal)
Kirkland, Washington, US City of Kirkland (2015,2020,2021) Included
Detroit, US City of Detroit (2016), Duggan (2016) Included
Eugene, Oregon, US Eugene Planning Division (2018), City of
Eugene (2020)
Included
Houston, Texas, US Excluded Under review (see Tirana)
Minneapolis, US Excluded Insufficient information (see Montreal)
Minnesota, US Excluded Insufficient information (see Montreal)
Seattle, US Excluded Under review (see Tirana)
Tempe, Arizona, US Community Development Department
(2013)
Included
Wales Excluded Insufficient information (see Montreal)
Table 2. Eight core themes included as the definition of 20-minute neighbourhoods.
Shopping centres Health facilities and services Education
Greenspaces and Sports grounds Housing diversity Employment areas
Public transport Active transport
Outliers
a
a
Outliers refers to the two themes of “Speciality housing”and “Street connectivity”that were not consistently found across all
instances of the 20-minute neighbourhood concept.
40 A. GOWER AND C. GRODACH
core themes in Table 2, with the researchers explicitly looking for the inclusion of further infor-
mation on the quantity and quality of elements. Outliers were noted as points of difference to
the 8. Lastly, the researchers noted content in each document that outlined a clear goal or specific
benchmark for achieving the policy in the city in order to evaluate the measurability of the policy or
the lack thereof. These goals were assessed by a measurability index based on the methods of Proffitt
et al. (2019), with a series of determining questions for each index point. This measurability index is
outlined in brief in Table 3 and in detail in Appendix B. As per Proffitt et al., this index was estab-
lished around weighted, binary questions and examples of potential answers for reviewer clarity in
evaluation. These results were then tallied to make a ranking of the 18 cities.
From the table of collected data, the 18 documents were then systematically analysed against
the three research areas of implementation, definition and measurability to answer the first
research question: How do cities define and operationalise the 20-minute neighbourhood concept
in planning documents? The analysis involved quantifying the instances for each result under
each research area, i.e. for implementation, how many cities had policies backed with statutory
weight in the planning system, how many were strategic policy documents only and how many
were city marketing documents that were not included in the planning system. This analysis,
in turn, enables us to determine the extent to which cities employ the concept as a branding
device and the various implications of this. This answers the second research question: Do city
implementation modes of the 20-minute neighbourhood concept facilitate sustainable planning or
city branding outcomes?
Criticism exists that the 20-minute neighbourhood concept does not analytically observe the
structural political economy, class, disability and race issues that drive the inequity that the concept
seeks to address (Stafford and Baldwin 2018, Weng et al. 2019). While the research team acknowl-
edge this shortcoming of the concept, addressing this criticism is beyond the scope of this research
which examines the processes by which the practical implementation of the concept has been oper-
ationalised. A further limitation of this study is that the research did not consider the different city
contexts, planning accounts or local terminology/languages in the analysis of the indicators. Future
studies could consider how to build this into their metric.
3. Content Analysis of Eighteen 20-Minute Neighbourhood Policy Documents
The content analysis shows that the 20-minute neighbourhood concept is formally implemented
into each cities’planning system, however, only as strategic guidelines without statutory weight
for operationalisation. The definitions used in the planning documents were consistent in topics
between the cities but typically lacked clear or tangible metrics. Only two of the eighteen cities
studied included measurable policy benchmarks that would assist planners in implementing 20-
minute neighbourhood strategies.
3.1. Type of Planning Document
Of the eighteen cities that have implemented the 20-minute neighbourhood concept, twelve had
incorporated it into the city’s planning system (Table 4). However, these twelve cities had intro-
duced the concept in strategic guidelines rather than a policy supported by statutory weight. Six
Table 3. Measurability index assessment criteria –brief overview.
Binary question Weighting
Does the goal include a specificdefinition to what is to be achieved 4 points
Does the goal include a quantified extent of the city which this should be achieved across? 3
Does the goal include a time by which this achievement should be realised 2
Does the goal include a qualitive extent of the city which this should be achieved across? 1
URBAN POLICY AND RESEARCH 41
of the eighteen explicitly used the concept as city marketing material without any adoption or inte-
gration in the planning system. These results were spread internationally with no apparent relation-
ship found location.
3.2. 20-Minute Neighbourhood Definition
The definition of what elements make up a 20-minute neighbourhood are not consistent between
places and, in many instances, lack sufficient detail for implementation. Only eight cities (Bendigo,
Brampton, Hamilton, Melbourne, Milan, Moonee Valley, Portland and Ottawa) consistently pro-
vided detailed information regarding the quantity and quality of each element among the eight
core themes identified (Shopping centres, Employment areas, Education, Public transport, Active
Transport, Greenspace and Sports Grounds, Health, Housing diversity). Three cities (Shanghai, Sin-
gapore and Tempe) included detail for over half of the themes, but had gaps in detail for some
themes. Four cities (Detroit, Dublin, Kirkland and Paris) regularly referred to all themes, but did
not define them in the document (Table 5).
The ten core themes themselves appeared consistently across a majority of documents in the 18
cities. Notably, this consistency cut across city strategy plans and marketing brochures. Only two
cities (Eugene and Sydney) defined a 20-minute neighbourhood with fewer themes and Bogota
was the only city to include a narrow definition for a 20-minute neighbourhood by focusing on
just the three themes.
Table 4. Type of planning document.
City strategic plan
Bendigo, Australia Ottawa, Canada Milan, Italy Kirkland, US
Melbourne, Australia Portland, Canada Singapore, Singapore Tempe, US
Moonee Valley, Australia Shanghai, China Hamilton, NZ
Sydney, Australia
City marketing brochure
Bogota, Chile Brampton, Canada Paris, France Detroit, US
Eugene, Canada Dublin, Ireland
Table 5. Further detail included across all 8 themes by location.
Degree of detail specified Locations
Quantity of
locations
High level of further detail (quality and quantity) for
all 8 core themes:
Bendigo
Melbourne
Moonee Valley
Brampton
Ottawa
Portland
Milan
Hamilton
8
Further detail included for over half of the 8 core
themes
Shanghai
Singapore
Tempe
3
Low level further detail included in 8 core themes Paris
Dublin
Kirkland
Detroit
4
Partial inclusion of the 8 core themes Eugene
(Employment, Health omitted)
Sydney
(Greenspace and Sportsgrounds, Housing diversity
omitted)
2
Minimal themes included Bogota: employment, greenspace and active
transport only included
1
42 A. GOWER AND C. GRODACH
Two themes of “Speciality housing”and “Street connectivity”were included in some but not all of
the 18 cities, with eleven cities specifying “Speciality housing”(Bendigo, Moonee Valley, Sydney,
Brampton, Ottawa, Portland, Milan, Hamilton, Kirkland, Eugene and Tempe) and six for “Street
connectivity”(Bendigo, Melbourne, Moonee Valley, Portland, Shanghai and Hamilton). Beyond
the eight core themes, four cities included outlier themes not present in the definitions adopted
by other cities. These included the themes of “Distance from blight”in Detroit, “COVID-19 adap-
tion”in Milan, “Cleanliness”and “Law enforcement”in Paris, and “Travel Experience”in Singapore.
The next section summarises the detail found for each of the eight key themes organised by level
of detail and information in the eighteen cities. The detailed results are tabulated with referencing in
Appendix C.
3.2.1. High Level of Further Detail –Shopping Centres, Employment Areas and Education
The three themes of Shopping centres, employment areas and education most consistently included
further specifics most consistently in the documents. Accessibility to “Shopping centres”was
included in all but one of the study cities and with 14 places including detail of the types of
shops, either grocery, dining or retail, but with a degree of diversity between the combinations
of these three (see Table 6).
Six out of eleven of the cities that included grocery food in the shopping centres theme provided
further detail on the types of food to be available, i.e. convenience, food market, supermarket and
full-service grocery. Detroit also made this distinction requirement for a dining establishment, spe-
cifying coffee shop and restaurant as required, while Kirkland provided a list of specific places for
both dining and retail. Retail and services generally did not include further specification in the cases
which included it, leaving room for interpretation in implementation as these labels could (or not)
also include grocery and dining establishments.
Employment areas were defined in the documents as targeted industries and/or employment
locations. The specific industries specified were diverse, established large employers or emerging
growth industries that ranged construction and warehousing to knowledge professionals, research,
indoor recreation, and day-care. Two cities, Milan and Dublin, specified remote, non-workplace
centred employment, while Singapore defined employment opportunities by location such as
business parks/nodes and industrial estates (see Table 7).
For “Education”, twelve cities specified the levels of childhood schools required (Bendigo,
Brampton, Detroit, Hamilton, Kirkland, Moonee Valley, Ottawa, Portland, Shanghai and
Tempe) and five of these cities specified forms of informal further education also to be available
(Brampton, Moonee Valley, Ottawa, Portland, and Tempe).
3.2.2. Some Further Detail Included –Public Transport, Active Transport and Housing
Diversity
Alternatively, the themes of “public transport”,“active transport”and “housing diversity”
werebroadlyincludedinallofthecitydocumentsbutwithlittledetailonwhataspectsor
features. This is particularly surprising given the 20-minute neighbourhood concept’s broad
emphasis on walkable areas and reducing car dependence. For “public transport”,thedetail
included primarily referred to access to a transit stop of indeterminate quality (Bendigo,
Detroit, Dublin, Eugene, Kirkland, Melbourne, Portland, Shanghai, Singapore, Sydney and
Tempe), with only Portland specifying that this stop should have frequent services. The
five cities of Bendigo, Detroit, Ottawa Singapore, and Tempe also specified that it should
be a multimode station.
For “Active transport”, eight cities mentioned improving walking or bicycle infrastructure but
did not specify how (Bogota, Brampton, Dublin, Eugene, Melbourne, Moonee Valley, Portland,
Singapore and Sydney). Only six cities provided some specifics on quality streets by specifying
greening measures, night safety and road calming more broadly (Bendigo, Detroit, Hamilton,
Kirkland, Milan, Ottawa).
URBAN POLICY AND RESEARCH 43
Table 6. Shopping centres.
Grocery food Dining establishments Retail and services References
Grocery only
Portland Grocery store, local markets; within 1/2 mile of grocery
store (chain and independent) + convenience stores
inc. liquor (Commercial Type 1)
Wiewel and Kafoury (2012, p. 84)
Milan Outdoor municipal markets Comune di Milano (2020, p. 15)
Shanghai 5 min: Food market, small business
15 min: Supermarket
Shanghai Urban Planning and Land
Resources Administration Bureau
(2016)
Grocery and Dining
Bendigo Convenience shop Food and drink premises Department of Environment, Land,
Water and Planning (2016, p. 14)
Grocery and
Retail
Singapore Hawker centres Retail shops Land Transport Authority (2019,
p. 14)
Ottawa Healthy affordable food: local grocery stores, farmers
markets
Local retail and commercial
services
Planning, Infrastructure and
Economic Development
Department (2020, p. 31)
Grocery, dining and retail
Detroit Grocery stores Restaurants, coffee shops Shopping, services Duggan (2016)
Eugene Full service grocery store, convenience store, Hospitality Salons City of Eugene (2020)
Kirkland Grocery store (high priority anchor) Service businesses commercial type 1 type 2 (restaurants,
specialty grocery, bakeries, bars, laundry & dry cleaners,
pet stores, book stores, etc)
Retail, service businesses
commercial type 1 (pharmacies
& drug stores)
City of Kirkland (2021)
Moonee Valley Convenience centres-fresh food via local shops, full
service grocery stores
Eating and drinking establishments Local retail City of Moonee Valley (2018, p. 65)
Tempe Grocery Restaurants Retail goods/ services Community Development
Department (2013, p. iii)
Retail only
Brampton Retail, commercial The planning partnership (2013, pp.
S8 and S9)
Sydney Retail and recreation /
entertainment venues/ services
Transport for NSW (2018a, p. 33)
Dining and
General
shops
Dublin Restaurants Shops Dublin Chamber (2020,p.5)
General shops only
Melbourne Local shopping centres Department of Environment, Land,
Water and Planning (2017, p. 99)
Paris Local shops
Hamilton General services, commercial
centre-shopping centres, local
shops
Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency
(2020, p. 30)
Note: Bogota did not include elements for this theme.
44 A. GOWER AND C. GRODACH
Table 7. Employment areas.
Employment source Type Industries References
Bendigo “Home Office, employment nodes (La Trobe University, Bendigo
Hospital)”
Remote work working
locations
Employment clusters
University education and health City of Greater Bendigo (2016,
p. 15)
Bogota “New industries”New industries Plan de ordenamiento territorial
(2018, p. 92)
Brampton “Health Employment cluster”Employment clusters Health City of Brampton (2020)
Detroit “Local jobs –green collar construction and maintenance Jobs –
revitalisation of community”
Local jobs for the
community
Green collar construction and maintenance
jobs
Duggan (2016)
Dublin “Flexible work practices”Remote (flexible) work
working locations
Dublin Chamber (2020,p.6)
Hamilton “Construction and construction related services”Construction Crown Infrastructure Projects
(2020,p.2)
Kirkland “Access to employment via reliable transit services + Mixed Use
commercial neighbourhoods”
Mixed use Commercial City of Kirkland (2021)
Melbourne “Local employment opportunities”Local Department of Environment, Land,
Water and Planning (2017, p. 99)
Milan “Smart and remote work models, co-working space”Remote (flexible)
working locations
Comune di Milano (2020,p.5)
Moonee
Valley
“Local economy”Local Department of Environment, Land,
Water and Planning (2018, p. 15)
Ottawa “Knowledge based –research and development; Traditional –
warehousing, distribution, construction, heavy industrial, trades;
Traditional Mixed Use –Community office-based work, place of
worship, indoor recreation, day care”
Knowledge based –research and
development;
Traditional –warehousing, distribution,
construction, heavy industrial, trades;
Traditional Mixed Use –Community
office-based work, place of worship,
indoor recreation, day care
Planning, Infrastructure and
Economic Development
Department (2020, p. 53)
Portland “Active employment centres”Employment clusters Bureau of planning and
sustainability 2016, p. 6 & 10)
Singapore “45 min Business Parks, industrial estates, business nodes”Employment clusters Industrial and commercial Land transport authority (2019,
p. 19)
Sydney “Jobs and skills for the city –Sydney Airport/ Mascot; metro centre:
knowledge jobs”
Employment clusters Sydney Airport/ Mascot; metro centre:
knowledge jobs
Transport for NSW (2018a, p. 35)
Tempe “Central activity hubs”Employment clusters Community Development
Department (2013,p.7)
Note: Eugene, Paris and Shanghai did not include elements for this theme.
URBAN POLICY AND RESEARCH 45
For “Housing diversity”, seven out of the twelve inclusions specified further detail for affordable
housing, listing types such as “multi-family, single dwelling and larger dwellings”that should be
affordable (Bendigo, Brampton, Detroit, Moonee Valley, Ottawa, Portland, Tempe). Shanghai
included detail on how affordable housing should be provided as part of the “four in one housing
guarantee system”.
3.2.3. Low Level of Further Detail –Greenspace and Sports Grounds and Health
Lastly, the themes of “Greenspace and Sports grounds”and “Health”were predominantly included
without any supporting detail. “For ‘Greenspace’”, fourteen cities refer to it simply as green and
community serviced public space without any further specifics. Only Shanghai and Ottawa were
particular in quantity per person to be available. This could potentially indicate the influence of
context on open space requirements made and is an area requiring further research.
Eleven cities outlined different variations of an indiscriminate health service, i.e. “local clinic,
health clinic, health care facility, health services”but not a specific doctor or service. A further
four mentioned health, without any supporting detail.
3.3. Measurability and Benchmarks
Lastly, the researchers evaluated whether the documents in the eighteen cities had clear and
measurable benchmarks for these definitions to enact the concept. Out of the eighteen docu-
ments, only two cities (Portland and Eugene) were scored 4 (see Table 8 for results and
Appendix B for assessment index) clear and measurable benchmarks that outlined what was
to be achieved and when: “Portland: 80% of citizens to have walkable (1/2 mile) and safe
access to goods and services outlined (further in the document) by 2035”and “Eugene: Bench-
marks of 90% and by 2035”. The measurability of the benchmark set by these two cities is con-
tingent on the clarity of definition included in the policy. Shanghai, Singapore and Sydney did
include some measurements. However, these relate to transport planning only and patronage
numbers without measuring other factors like destinations within a 20-minute neighbourhood
for a score of 3.
Seven cities (Bendigo, Bogota, Hamilton, Kirkland, Melbourne, Ottawa and Sydney) committed
to improvements upon the current conditions but did not explicitly state the degree of improve-
ment that will be achieved (score 2). Indeterminate benchmarks of “reduce”,“improve”and
“enhance”were included with no further indication of how these cities are currently performing
relative to these descriptions or specifying what these words signify in this context.
Five cities (Detroit, Milan, Moonee Valley, Paris, and Tempe) included only aspirational state-
ments that were broad and non-specific (score 1). There was no indication of when these goals were
to be met by or how far the city was required to improve in any of the areas.
4. Conclusion: Implementation to Facilitate 20-Minute Neighbourhood Concept:
Sustainable Planning or City Branding?
As the analysis shows, only two cities- Portland and Eugene- include specific, measurable bench-
marks in their 20-minute neighbourhood policy documents. This assists both cities in the
implementation of the concept by supporting the evaluation and prioritisation of areas with the
greatest need for action (Balsas 2004). Alongside this, the evaluation also creates expectations of
concept delivery of the concept and designates responsibility to city policymakers (Zengerling
2019). In this way, “authenticity”is provided to the marketed 20-minute neighbourhood vision
for Portland and Eugene (Zenker 2018, p. 2). Implementation guidelines demonstrate a genuine
commitment to the concept and to pragmatically achieving the concept’s goals for sustainable
planning.
46 A. GOWER AND C. GRODACH
Table 8. Measurability results.
Measurability Reference Summary Score
Eugene GOAL: 90% of Eugene neighbourhoods function as 20
min neighbourhood by 2032
Benchmarks of 90% and by 2035. Clarity
determined by their definition of 20-minute
neighbourhoods
4
Portland Distance, Destination, Density: 80% of citizens to have
walkable (1/2 mile), safe access to goods and
services by 2035
Benchmarks of 80% citizens, access within 1/2
mile, by 2035. Non-specificdefinition of
“goods and services”
4
Shanghai Transit travel time only –transport system that is safe
and supports healthy lives
Measurable benchmark of transit times but
non-specific language of other qualities like
“safe”
3
Singapore Transit travel time only –Improved transit time
through walk-cycle ride options, Reduction in
public transport travel time –AIMS: 9 in 10 peak-
period journeys using Walk-Cycle-Ride completed
in less than 45 min, improve bus speeds, jobs closer
to home, transport that is safe and promotes a
healthy life
Benchmarks of transit times, quantity of
journeys undertaken by a mode
3
Sydney Improve access to transport network, increase public
transport service frequency (citywide), mass transit/
train links to connect metro areas, expanding
network “Percentage of dwellings within 30
minutes of the nearest metropolitan and strategic
centre using the public transport network and/or
walking during the morning peak.”Pulse of Greater
Sydney p.15
Benchmarks of transit times, Indeterminate
benchmarks of “improve”,“increase”and
“expand”
3
Kirkland Good destination and good access’–“10-Minute
Neighbourhood Analysis”tool to measure progress
toward goal –creating a compact, efficient, and
sustainable land use pattern
Indeterminate benchmarks of “good”2
Ottawa Urban intensification: affordable housing close to
sustainable transport options, and services
(measurability green space only)
Indeterminate benchmarks of “close”.
Measurable benchmarks for theme of
Greenspace
2
Bendigo Compact city, reduce cost of housing and transport,
environment, support local economy, rezoning that
supports 10 min neighbourhood principles (refer to
pg. 21.05-2 Urban Growth Boundary Greater Bendigo
Planning Scheme)
Indeterminate benchmarks of “reduce”and
“supports”
2
Melbourne “Improve walkability in the city via change to the built
environment composition”
Indeterminate benchmarks of “improve”2
Hamilton Enhanced connection to established education and
economic areas within the city
Indeterminate benchmarks of “enhanced”2
Bogota Distance, reduce Inequality, reallocate road space to
active transport
Indeterminate benchmarks of “reduce”and no
reference to how much road space to be
reallocated
2
Dublin Dublin Chamber’s vision is that within 15 min of
active transport from their home, Dublin residents
should:
.Have access to a key public transport hub to
commute around the city to access work or
higher-level services;
.Be connected to their local community through
safe, accessible, and well-
.connected footpaths and cycle paths;
.Have access to an open greenspace and high-
quality public realm;
.Have facilities and services that promote local
living and a local economy.
Indeterminate benchmarks of “have access”
and “be connected”
2
Tempe Multimodal transportation system (20-minute city)
where residents can walk, bicycle or use public
transit to meet all basic daily, non-work needs:
connecting activity hubs
Broad statement of aims with no benchmarks
and non-specific language for descriptions
1
Milan Services and Neighbourhood: “everything within 15
minutes walking”
Broad statement of aims with no benchmarks
and non-specific language for descriptions:
i.e. “everything”
1
(Continued)
URBAN POLICY AND RESEARCH 47
Examining the remaining 16 cities reveals a different pattern of document type, implementation
and outcome around the 20-minute neighbourhood concept. While the concept is adopted inter-
nationally, the planning documents were found to lack measurable policy benchmarks. Although
it was found that the documents outlining the concept for the cities are formally integrated into
the cities’planning system, planners may have difficulty operationalising a concept that is ill-
defined and without measurable targets. This obtuse and intangible adoption of the concept weak-
ens any implied responsibility to act as there is no general understanding of what should be deliv-
ered nor explicit deadlines against which to measure actions. Without measurability, integration in
the planning system provides planners little support for delivering outcomes.
Moreover, in each case, the concept lacked statutory weight and was found in strategic
guidelines only. Correlating with a city branding approach, the 20-minute neighbourhood con-
cept in this way provides a set of general guidelines for different planners to select policies that
suit their local area but also remain coherent or “on-brand”with the city-wide direction. This
policy coherency is essential for the concept to meaningfully contribute to the city’s reputation
via branding and can also aid the wide-scale coordination of local efforts with state-led infra-
structure improvements. However, implementation via a strategic guidelines document type is
discretionary, with action and delivery entirely reliant on the choice and importantly, opportu-
nities for the local planning team to enact the changes proposed by the concept in their area.
Reliance on discretionary implementation for the 20-minute neighbourhood concept can con-
sequently introduce spatial inequity and inconsistency as some local areas are able to deliver
the concept, some selectively and others unable. This research, therefore, contributes a new
understanding of the weakness of local level planning autonomy for the 20-minute neighbour-
hood concept due to the strategic guidelines status and highlights that without wide-scale, con-
sistent implementation, the policy coherency that the guidelines support may be only beneficial
for the city’s reputation.
Furthermore, a statutory-backed document type outlines rights and responsibilities and, as a
result, facilitate new opportunities for change in the many government department areas requiring
cooperation to achieve the multifaceted 20-minute neighbourhood concept. Without the support of
statutory weight, 20-minute neighbourhood measurability may be restricted to only those accepted
opportunities for measurable targets that already exist in policy. While the research generally found
consistency in both the broad themes included in the definition and the lack of tangible detail or
metrics defining the quantity and quality for each theme, the “Shopping”and “Employment oppor-
tunities”themes were outliers to this trend. For these two themes, the different planning documents
included high detail in the definition, yet this detail varied greatly between cities. That only two
topics have this detail illustrates the narrow scope for measurability via alignment with accepted
policy action opportunities. Building on Zengerling (2019), this limitation provides an
Table 8. Continued.
Measurability Reference Summary Score
Moonee
Valley
Health and wellbeing outcomes, accessible and well-
connected neighbourhoods for pedestrians and
cyclists, environment, housing and densities to
make local transport viable, access to quality public
transport connecting people to jobs and “higher
order services”, facilitate thriving local economies
Broad statement of aims with no benchmarks
and non-specific language for descriptions
1
Paris Taking care of the common goods: collective services
and activities, prioritising working-class
neighbourhoods, climate action
Broad statement of aims with no benchmarks
and non-specific language for descriptions
1
Detroit Measurement: mobility, pedestrian orientated access
Aims: revitalisation-growth of population and jobs,
increasing community assets, reactivation of areas
Broad statement of aims with no benchmarks
and non-specific language for descriptions
1
Brampton Our Mission: getting to transit-oriented communities Broad statement of aims with no benchmarks
and non-specific language for descriptions
1
48 A. GOWER AND C. GRODACH
understanding of the barriers to operationalisation and measurability found in the eighteen cities
for achieving the 20-minute neighbourhood concept outcomes.
Lastly, a city branding lens sheds additional light on the outcomes achieved for cities that
adopt the 20-minute neighbourhood concept without implementation that facilitates sustain-
able planning. Tournois (2018) notes that the liveability concept provides a city branding tool
for cities to announce the quality of living the place offered to attract employees and
businesses. This research extends this assertion to include the 20-minute neighbourhood con-
cept as a city branding tool as it is an internationally recognised concept –eighteen cities have
adopted it worldwide, and a further fifteen are investigating potential application. This inter-
national recognition means that the concept provides an easy and efficient means to advertise
acity’s spatial planning direction and values. This branding is critical post-Covid, as working-
from-home makes the spatialisation of work even more global and immaterial and cities are
also forced to pivot to remain attractive and viable in this new context (Ramos Alfaro and
Vaghela 2020,Liu2021). However, without an ability to deliver this concept and vision
through implementation as occurs in Portland and Eugene, the efficacy of this “unauthentic”
orhollowbrandingcanbeexpectedtobeshort-lived.
This city branding approach geared toward international reputation, coherent policy selection
guidelines and alignment with existing opportunities can be seen in the example of Melbourne,
Australia. Melbourne is a city that has been awarded the “most liveable city”for seven consecutive
years (2010–2017) to great internal city fanfare (Wahlquist 2017, Global Victoria 2020). It is now
one of the initial cities post-millennium to adopt the 20-minute neighbourhood concept into its
strategic policy. The state government website, “Invest Victoria –why Melbourne, one of the
world’s most liveable cities”, shows how Melbourne utilises this title to attract businesses and inter-
national students, build economic development and advertise that the city is competitive on the
world stage as an employment hub (Invest Victoria 2020). Yet, this research shows that the 20-min-
ute neighbourhood concept in Melbourne lacks statutory weight or clear, measurable benchmarks
and instead suggests the concept as a guideline for coherent, but discretionary city improvement
policy selection. The Plan Melbourne strategic policy highlights “delivering state infrastructure pro-
jects”as a particular, existing opportunity for implementing the 20-minute neighbourhood concept
and requests that “on-brand”policies be selected for these projects (DELWP Department of
Environment, Land, Water and Planning 2014, p. 7).
In summary, this paper contributes new knowledge on the implementation of the 20-minute
neighbourhood concept adopted in policy by cities internationally. By answering the research
question: do city implementation modes of the 20-minute neighbourhood concept facilitate sus-
tainable planning or city branding outcomes?, it secondly illustrates the importance of operatio-
nalisation when cities adopt a concept into policy and what an examination of the levels of
measurability included can tell us of the possible outcomes of this concept adoption. Through
a content analysis of the planning documents from the 18 cities that have adopted the 20-minute
neighbourhood concept, this policy review found that most cities had adopted the concept into
policy with little measurability or benchmarks that would enable planners to operationalise the
concept. This not only frustrates plan implementation, but it effectively turns policy into a city
branding device as opposed to facilitating sustainable planning outcomes. While it may create
a favourable reputation of the city internationally, the cities lack a clear and facilitative guide
for the selection and delivery of “on-brand”policies that could further the reputation for sustain-
able urbanism that they seek to achieve.
Notes
1. While different cities employ similar concepts, we use the 20-minute concept because it is the most common
in the plans under study.
2. Refer to Table 1 for a list of the cities that have adopted the 20-minute concept.
URBAN POLICY AND RESEARCH 49
Disclosure Statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Funding
This work was supported by the Melbourne Experiment, Monash University.
ORCID
Alexa Gower http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3436-2723
Carl Grodach http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0614-3152
References
Arundel, J., et al., 2017. Creating liveable cities in Australia 128.
Balsas, C.J.L., 2004. Measuring the livability of an urban centre: an exploratory study of key performance indicators.
Planning practice and research, 19, 101–110. doi:10.1080/0269745042000246603.
Boisen, M., 2015. Place branding and non-standard regionalization in Europe. In: S. Zenker and B.P. Jacobson, eds.
Interregional place branding: best practices, challenges and solutions. Cham: Springer International Publishing,
13–22.
Boisen, M., Terlouw, K., and Van Gorp, B., 2011. The selective nature of place branding and the layering of spatial
identities. Journal of place management and development, 4, 135–147.
Bonakdar, A. and Audirac, I., 2020. City branding and the link to urban planning: theories, practices, and challenges.
Journal of planning literature, 35, 147–160. doi:10.1177/0885412219878879.
Boucher, D., 2020. Local living, rise of 20 minute cities post-Covid [online]. Urban Dev. Available from: https://
theurbandeveloper.com/articles/local-living-rise-of-20-minute-cities-post-covid [accessed 3 Apr 2021].
Brookfield, K., 2017. Residents’preferences for walkable neighbourhoods. Journal of urban design, 22, 44–58. doi:10.
1080/13574809.2016.1234335.
Bureau of Planning and Sustainability, 2016. Portland comprehensive plan 2035.
C40 Cities, 2020. How to build back better with a 15-minute city [online]. Available from: https://www.
c40knowledgehub.org/s/article/How-to-build-back-better-with-a-15-minute-city?language=en_US [accessed 3
Apr 2021].
City of Brampton, 2020. Vision for 20-minute walkable neighbourhoods.
City of Detroit, 2016. Detroit’s re-imagining the civic commons.
City of Eugene, 2020. How is walkability measured? [online]. Available from: https://www.eugene-or.gov/1223/How-
is-Walkability-Measured [accessed 20 Oct 2021].
City of Greater Bendigo, 2016. Greater Bendigo housing strategy.
City of Kirkland, 2020. Kirkland comprehensive plan [online]. Available from: https://www.codepublishing.com/
WA/Kirkland/ [accessed 4 Oct 2021].
City of Kirkland, 2015. City of Kirkland transportation master plan.
City of Kirkland, 2021. Kirkland municipal code: D. land use goals and policies [online]. Available from: https://www.
codepublishing.com/WA/Kirkland/ [accessed 4 Oct 2021].
City of Moonee Valley, 2018. Moonee V2040 phase four 4 MV2040 strategy.
Community Development Department, 2013. City of Tempe general plan 2040.
Comune di Milano, 2020. Milano 2020 adaptation strategy.
Crown Infrastructure Projects, 2020.Hamilton mode shift programme –20 minute city. Hamilton: Waka Kotahi NZ
Transport Agency.
Curtis, C., 2019.Planning, transport and accessibility. Chicago, IL: Lund Humphries.
Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP), 2014.Plan Melbourne: metropolitan planning
strategy. Melbourne: The State of Victoria.
Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, 2016. Greater Bendigo planning scheme: clause 21.05 com-
pact greater Bendigo.
Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, 2017. Plan Melbourne 2017–2050.
Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, 2018. Moonee valley planning scheme: clauses 15-01-4r-
healthy neighbourhoods, 16.01-1R-housing supply, and 18.02-1R-sustainable personal transport.
Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, 2019.20-minute neighbourhoods: creating a more liveable
Melbourne. Melbourne: The State of Victoria.
Dublin Chamber, 2020. Dublin: the 15-minute city.pdf.
50 A. GOWER AND C. GRODACH
Duggan, M., 2016. 20-minute neighborhood concept. Presented at the Mackinac policy conference, Detroit Regional
Chamber, Mackinac.
Duncan, D.T., et al., 2012. Space, race, and poverty: spatial inequalities in walkable neighborhood amenities?
Demographic research, 26, 409–448. doi:10.4054/DemRes.2012.26.17.
Eshuis, J. and Edwards, A., 2013. Branding the city: the democratic legitimacy of a new mode of governance. Urban
studies, 50, 1066–1082.
Eugene Planning Division, 2018. Envision Eugene community vision.
Ewing, R. and Handy, S., 2009. Measuring the unmeasurable: urban design qualities related to walkability. Journal of
urban design, 14, 65–84. doi:10.1080/13574800802451155.
Frank, L., et al., 2010. The development of a walkability index: application to the neighborhood quality of life study.
British journal of sports medicine, 44, 924–933.
Global Victoria, 2020. World’s 2nd most liveable city [online]. https://global.vic.gov.au/victorias-capabilities/why-
melbourne/worlds-2nd-most-liveable-city [accessed 18 Feb 2021].
Graziano, T., 2021. Smart technologies, back-to-the-village rhetoric, and tactical urbanism: post-COVID planning
scenarios in Italy. International journal of e-planning research, 10, 80–93. doi:10.4018/IJEPR.20210401.oa7.
Gunn, L.D., et al., 2017. Designing healthy communities: creating evidence on metrics for built environment features
associated with walkable neighbourhood activity centres. International journal of behavioral nutrition and physical
activity, 14 (164), 1–12.
Hamidi, S., Ewing, R., and Sabouri, S., 2020. Longitudinal analyses of the relationship between development density
and the COVID-19 morbidity and mortality rates: early evidence from 1,165 metropolitan counties in the United
States. Health & place, 64, 102378. doi:10.1016/j.healthplace.2020.102378.
Harvey, D., 1989. From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: the transformation in urban governance in late capit-
alism. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human geography, 71, 3–17.
Hidalgo, A., 2020.Café Fabrique: Quelle ville du quart d’heure dans le 14e arrondissement? [online]. Paris En
Commun. https://annehidalgo2020.com/cafe-fabrique-quelle-ville-du-quart-dheure-dans-le-14eme-arrondissement/
[accessed 4 Mar 21].
Hoehner, C.M., et al., 2011. Association between neighborhood walkability, cardiorespiratory fitness and body-mass
index. Social science & medicine, 73, 1707–1716. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.09.032.
Hou, L. and Liu, Y., 2017. Life circle construction in China under the idea of collaborative governance: a comparative
study of Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou. Geographical review of Japan series B, 90, 2–16. doi:10.4157/
geogrevjapanb.90.2.
Hu, W. and Schweber, N., 2020. Will cars rule the roads in post-pandemic New York? N. Y. Times,p.4.
Hutabarat Lo, R., 2009. Walkability: what is it? Journal of urbanism: international research on placemaking and urban
sustainability, 2, 145–166. doi:10.1080/17549170903092867.
Invest Victoria, 2020. One of the world’s most liveable cities [online]. https://www.invest.vic.gov.au/why-melbourne/
a-worlds-livable-city [accessed 18 Feb 2021].
Jacobs, J., 1961.The death and life of great American cities. New York: Random House.
Joo, Y.-M. and Seo, B., 2018. Transformative city branding for policy change: the case of Seoul’s participatory brand-
ing. Environment and planning C: politics and space, 36, 239–257. doi:10.1177/2399654417707526.
Kavaratzis, M., 2004. From city marketing to city branding: towards a theoretical framework for developing city
brands. Place branding,1,58–73.
Land Transport Authority, 2019. Singapore land transport master plan 2040.
Liu, A., 2021. The right way to rebuild cities for post-pandemic work [online]. Bloomberg.com.https://www.
bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-09/the-right-way-to-rethink-cities-for-post-covid-work [accessed 12 May
2021].
Lloyd Lawhon, L., 2009. The neighborhood unit: physical design or physical determinism? Journal of planning his-
tory, 8, 111–132. doi:10.1177/1538513208327072.
Lotfata, A., 2021. Tactical planning as an approach to improve urban walkability in the era of COVID-19 [online].
The Field. Available from: https://thefield.asla.org/2021/06/10/tactical-planning-as-an-approach-to-improve-
urban-walkability-in-the-era-of-covid-19/ [accessed 20 Sep 2021].
Lowe, M., et al., 2013.Liveable, healthy, sustainable: what are the key indicators for Melbourne neighbourhoods?
Melbourne: Place, Health and Liveability Research Program, The University of Melbourne.
Mavoa, S., et al., 2016.The Australian national liveability study final report: development of policy-relevant liveability
indicators relating to health and wellbeing and recommendations for dissemination. Melbourne: McCaughey
VicHealth Community Wellbeing Unit.
Moreno, C., 2019. The 15 minutes-city: for a new chrono-urbanism! [online]. Carlos Moreno. Available from: http://
www.moreno-web.net/the-15-minutes-city-for-a-new-chrono-urbanism-pr-carlos-moreno/ [accessed 18 Feb
2021].
Moura, F., Cambra, P., and Gonçalves, A.B., 2017. Measuring walkability for distinct pedestrian groups with a par-
ticipatory assessment method: a case study in Lisbon. Landscape and urban planning, 157, 282–296. doi:10.1016/j.
landurbplan.2016.07.002.
URBAN POLICY AND RESEARCH 51
OECD, 2012.Compact city policies: a comparative assessment. Paris: OECD.
Peck, J., 2014. Entrepreneurial urbanism: between uncommon sense and dull compulsion. Geografiska Annaler: Series
B, Human geography, 96, 396–401. doi:10.1111/geob.12061.
Perinotto, T., 2020. On the rising tide of good ideas heading for the cities [online]. Fifth Estate. Available from:
https://www.thefifthestate.com.au/columns/news-from-the-front-desk/on-the-rising-tide-of-good-ideas-heading-for-
the-cities/ [accessed 2 Oct 2020].
Plan de ordenamiento territorial, 2018. El pot es mas calidad de vida para Bogota y la region: Guia Estrategica.
Planning, Infrastructure and Economic Development Department, 2019. 5 big moves.
Planning, Infrastructure and Economic Development Department, 2020. Ottawa new official plan: preliminary draft.
Proffitt, D.G., et al., 2019. Accessibility planning in American metropolitan areas: are we there yet? Urban studies, 56,
167–192. doi:10.1177/0042098017710122.
Pozoukidou, G. and Chatziyiannaki, Z., 2021. 15-Minute City: Decomposing the New Urban Planning Eutopia.
Sustainability, 13, 928. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020928
Pyzyk, K., 2020. Chicago COVID-19 data stresses racial disparities seen nationally [online]. Smart Cities Dive.
Available from: https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/news/chicago-coronavirus-data-racial-inequity-disparities/
576377/ [accessed 3 Mar 2021].
Ramos Alfaro, T. and Vaghela, V., 2020. London’s city eyes tech firms, artists for post-Covid renewal [online].
Bloomberg.com. Available from: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-20/london-s-city-eyes-tech-
firms-artists-for-post-covid-renewal [accessed 12 May 2021].
Rinaldi, C., Giovanardi, M., and Lucarelli, A., 2021. Keeping a foot in both camps: sustainability, city branding and
boundary spanners. Cities, 115, 1–4. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2021.103236.
Shanghai Urban Planning and Land Resources Administration Bureau, 2016.Planning guidance of 15-minute com-
munity-life circle: planning and construction guidance, action guidelines. Shanghai: Shanghai Government Printing
Office.
Shanghai Urban Planning and Land Resources Administration Bureau, 2018. Shanghai master plan 2017–2035.
Sisson, P., 2020. Mayors tout the “15-minute city”as Covid recovery –Bloomberg [online]. Bloom. CityLab. Available
from: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-15/mayors-tout-the-15-minute-city-as-covid-recovery?
srnd=citylab [accessed 16 Jul 2020].
Stafford, L. and Baldwin, C., 2018. Planning walkable neighborhoods: are we overlooking diversity in abilities and
ages? Journal of planning literature, 33, 17–30. doi:10.1177/0885412217704649.
Tao, Y., et al., 2021. Planning walkable neighborhoods for “aging in place”: lessons from five aging-friendly districts
in Singapore 18.
The Planning Partnership, 2013.Sustainable community development guidelines. Brampton: City of Brampton.
Tournois, L., 2018. Liveability, sense of place and behavioural intentions: an exploratory investigation of the Dubai
urban area. Journal of place management and development, 11, 97–114. doi:10.1108/JPMD-10-2016-0071.
Transport for NSW, 2018a. Future transport strategy 2056.
Transport for NSW, 2018b. Greater Sydney services and infrastructure plan.
VanHoose, K., Hoekstra, M., and Bontje, M., 2021. Marketing the unmarketable: place branding in a postindustrial
medium-sized town. Cities, 114, 103216. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2021.103216.
Ville de Paris, 2021. Paris ville du quart d’heure, ou le pari de la proximité [online]. Available from: https://www.
paris.fr/dossiers/paris-ville-du-quart-d-heure-ou-le-pari-de-la-proximite-37 [accessed 4 Oct 2021].
Wahlquist, C., 2017. Melbourne “world’s most liveable city”for seventh year running. The Guardian. Available from:
http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/aug/16/melbourne-worlds-most-liveable-city-for-seventh-year-
running [accessed 18 Feb 2021].
Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency, 2020. Hamilton-Waikato metro area mode shift plans.
Weng, M., et al., 2019. The 15-minute walkable neighborhoods: measurement, social inequalities and implications for
building healthy communities in urban China. Journal of transport & health,13, 259–273. doi:10.1016/j.jth.2019.
05.005.
Wiewel, W. and Kafoury, D., 2012. The Portland plan.
Wittenberg, A., 2020. CityLab daily: is the ‘15-minute city’key to Covid recovery? Bloomberg.com.
Yu, R., et al., 2017. Associations between perceived neighborhood walkability and walking time, wellbeing, and lone-
liness in community-dwelling older Chinese people in Hong Kong. International journal of environmental
research and public health, 14, 1199. doi:10.3390/ijerph14101199.
Zengerling, C., 2019. Governing the city of flows: how urban metabolism approaches may strengthen accountability
in strategic planning. Urban planning, 4, 187–199. doi:10.17645/up.v4i1.1750.
Zenker, S., 2018. Editorial: city marketing and branding as urban policy. Cities, 80, 1–3. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2018.06.
001.
52 A. GOWER AND C. GRODACH
