Built environment, urban vitality and social cohesion: Do vibrant neighborhoods foster strong communities?

• Published in: Landscape and urban planning Vol. 204; p. 103951
• Main Authors: Mouratidis, Kostas, Poortinga, Wouter
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier B.V 01.12.2020
• Subjects: empirical research; green infrastructure; land use; landscapes; metropolitan areas; public transportation; social cohesion; spatial data; surveys
• ISSN: 0169-2046; 1872-6062
• DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103951

•The more vibrant neighborhoods are found to have lower social cohesion.•High density and local amenities are linked to high urban vitality.•High density and local amenities are linked to low social cohesion.•Urban vitality is positively linked to social cohesion for similar urban form types.•Walkability, public space design and housing design may strengthen social cohesion. Urban vitality and social cohesion both provide multiple benefits in cities. While it has been argued that urban vitality – the liveliness of cities – may strengthen social cohesion, this has not been sufficiently examined by empirical research. This paper presents and tests a model in which urban vitality mediates the relationship between built environment characteristics and neighborhood social cohesion, using survey and geospatial data from the Oslo metropolitan area. We find that neighborhood density and land use mix are positive predictors of urban vitality, but are negatively associated with social cohesion. Green space is found to be associated with lower urban vitality, while public transport accessibility is associated with higher social cohesion. Results indicate seemingly contradictory relationships between the built environment, urban vitality and social cohesion. On the one hand, although compact urban form has higher levels of urban vitality, it has lower levels of social cohesion compared to low-density, single-use urban form. On the other hand, for similar urban form types, urban vitality is found to be positively associated with social cohesion, suggesting that local initiatives and interventions aiming to increase residents’ walking and social activity within their neighborhood could also strengthen social cohesion.