MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408730348 · doi:10.1016/j.jth.2025.102021

An investigation of 15-minute neighbourhoods in Surrey, British Columbia: A community-informed social equity analysis for a fast-growing, diverse, Canadian city

2025· article· en· W4408730348 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Aayush Sharma, Aman Chandi, Meghan Winters

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Transport & Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research CouncilSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsEquity (law)SociologySocial equalityMedia studiesGeographyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Auto-centric urban design drives health and environmental issues. Proximity-based concepts like “15-minute neighbourhoods” can reduce these harms. Most studies on 15-minute neighbourhoods have been in European centres, and few have incorporated community views. Set in a fast-growing city, this study developed a community-informed definition of 15-minute neighbourhoods and explored social equity in accessibility to amenities. Based in Surrey, British Columbia, Canada (population 580,000), this mixed-methods study involved mapping and community engagement. We created preliminary maps of 15-minute neighbourhoods by using open data for 6 amenity types (community centres, educational facilities, grocery stores, health facilities, parks, and public transit) and mapping spatial access by walking/cycling for every dissemination area using ArcGIS and r5r. We then hosted focus groups with equity-deserving residents (n = 102) to understand if these preliminary maps aligned with their experiences and gather input on what was missing and what concerns they had. We drew on participants’ input to create a community-informed definition and refined maps. With census data (2021), we conducted a social equity analysis by calculating the percentage of residents living in 15-minute neighbourhoods and assessing access for equity-deserving populations. Overall, 52% of Surrey residents lived in areas considered 15-minute neighbourhoods. Participants felt maps missed some amenities (e.g., places of worship) and that beyond amenities, supportive infrastructure, safety, and terrain were vital. We produced bivariate maps, including microscale design features, highlighting areas with many amenities but little supportive infrastructure. The social equity analysis did not highlight inequities in spatial access; rather, areas with more children/youth living in one-parent households, Indigenous peoples, low income residents, and recent immigrants were more likely to be 15-minute neighbourhoods. Community voices added insights into factors beyond amenities that matter. As proximity-based planning proceeds, care is needed to ensure that future city design meets the needs of all residents. • Community input shaped the definition of 15-min neighbourhoods. • Over ½ of Surrey's population lived in a 15-min neighbourhood. • There were no socio-spatial inequities in access to amenities in Surrey. • Residents thought factors other than amenities, such as infrastructure, were vital.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Transport & HealthSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207