Accessibility and inclusive use of public spaces within the city-centre of Ibadan, Nigeria

Abstract

Purpose Issues pertaining to accessibility and inclusiveness of public spaces are not explicitly discussed in developing nations. Thus, this study aims to explore how ease of access and socio-economic status of residents influence the use of city-centre public spaces in Ibadan, Nigeria. Design/methodology/approach A survey involving users (N = 427) of three different types of public spaces (shopping mall, park and recreational centre) was undertaken. Statistical analysis including Kruskal Wallis H-test and ordered logistic regression analysis were used in determining the differences in the public spaces attributes and predicting the determinants of use. Findings The analysis revealed that the use of a private car, income and gender significantly predict the frequency of use. It was observed that the determinants of public space use differ across the three categories. In particular, accessibility better predicted the use of the park than it did for the shopping mall or the recreation club. Practical implications It brings to fore ways through which city planning in developing countries can address social exclusion and spatial disparity within city-centres. Specifically, new proposals need to be sensitive to the walkability potentials when sitting parks whilst holistic efforts must be directed towards group-specific needs when planning shopping malls and recreation clubs. City management strategies, policies and incentives are required to encourage the use of public transportation systems within city-centre spaces as it presents a vital platform for improving access and inclusive use. Originality/value The study fills the gap in the literature by extending knowledge on certain aspects of city-centre’s public spaces in a unique cultural setting. The implications of socioeconomic disparity on public space use became apparent.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 13 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.