City Know-hows

Neighbourhoods: Walkability, affordability and social inclusion in Melbourne, Australia 

Photo of Brunswick Street and surrounding residential area in Melbourne, Australia showing walkable access to shops and services. Photo credit: Roberto Seba. Shopping on Brunswick Street, with permission from Visit Victoria.

Target audience

Urban planners, city governments, social housing providers

The problem

Access to affordable housing supports peoples’ health and wellbeing, yet, not all houses are affordable nor are they located in amenity rich liveable neighbourhoods.

Typically, more established neighbourhoods are amenity-rich and more liveable whilst amenity-poor neighbourhoods are more affordable but located in outer-suburban locations, placing people far from the places and destinations they need.

By incorporating disadvantage, our research explored an overlooked aspect of the relationship between housing affordability, walkability and the built environment.

What we did and why

We studied whether relationships between walkability and house prices (i.e., price premiums or discounts) differed by neighbourhood-level disadvantage.  We did this by using hedonic pricing models stratified by five levels of disadvantage using data from metropolitan Melbourne, Australia and explanatory built environment variables including walkability and its components (street connectivity, dwelling density and destination access), and public transit access.   Hedonic pricing models are useful for measuring the value of environmental features when no other estimates exist.

Our study’s contribution

We found that:

  • destination access increased house prices;
  • distance from transit reduced house prices;
  • disadvantaged neighbourhoods had lower levels of walkability compared to more advantaged neighbourhoods;
  • the association between walkability and house prices was weakest in the most disadvantaged neighbourhoods.

Our findings suggest that houses in disadvantaged neighbourhoods were more affordable because they lacked amenity in terms of walkability, destination access and transit.

Impacts for city policy and practice

Future planning could redress inequities in walkability and housing affordability by retrofitting existing neighbourhoods and making new neighbourhoods more walkable from the outset. Increasing densities in outer suburban areas could make destination and transit provision and access more viable. However, in established amenity rich neighbourhoods with good access to destinations and transit, inclusionary zoning policies could reduce inequities by ensuring these neighbourhoods have social and affordable housing.

Further information

Full research article:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related posts

Challenges and paradigms to evaluate the relationship of urban environments with population health

Our study introduces and reviews how the built environment and its relation to population health are assessed in the literature. We did this by identifying methodological shortcomings and research potentials that need to be addressed jointly. Our assessment aims to undertake multiple health issues in an integrated manner, and identify priorities within the city whereby health is a primary goal.

Read More »