This paper evaluates the use of various place-based and people-based measures of accessibility in the context of public service delivery. While place-based measures examine the spatial separation between service locations and in a single reference location, people-based measures are based on detailed observations of an individual's activity schedule and space–time constraints. The aim of this paper is to contribute to previous methodological studies of accessibility by investigating the extent to which utility-based measures relying on the Burns–Miller framework relate to place- based and other people-based measures of individual accessibility. In total, four place-based and six people-based measures that are frequently used to evaluate urban service delivery are analyzed. The relationships between these measures are examined and their implications for the assessment of equity of urban service distribution are evaluated. We have found substantial differences between place-based and people-based measures, supporting previous findings in the relevant literature and extending them to utility-based space–time measures of accessibility. We also observed substantial differences within the group of people-based measures. It appears that measures which express the cardinality of a feasible opportunity choice set are quite different from measures which express the desirability of such a set. The salience of this difference is also borne out by the measurement of statistical dispersion of accessibility values, indicating that different measures provide markedly different insights into how equally service delivery is distributed among the population.

Against the background of increased interest in subjectively experienced well-being in economics, psychology, and the social sciences, this article analyzes how such well-being is associated with geographical context, social contacts, and life circumstances. The empirical analysis of data collected in Hong Kong is used to elaborate and support two main claims. The first is that geography matters to not only overall well-being but also momentary well-being and that researchers should be careful to specify the influence of geographical context correctly. We therefore employ an approach that is informed by various strands of time–geographical thought and find that life satisfaction is associated more strongly with geographical context than is momentary well-being. Second, we confirm positive relations between social contacts and experienced well-being but extend earlier research by showing that these relations stretch across multiple timescales and depend to some extent on the duration of an activity episode and with whom the activity episode is undertaken. This means that the use of simple indicators of social capital is inadequate for making the complex linkages between well-being and people's social contacts understandable in empirical research.

This paper introduces the theme of the special issue on wellbeing, independence and mobility. We begin with outlining the complexity of each of these notions and then turn towards their interdependence. It is argued that the links between wellbeing, independence and mobility are manifold and contextual in older people's everyday lives: they differ between places, between individuals and across phases in each individual's unique lifecourse. The inherent complexity of those links can be examined fruitfully and understood better if a geographical or environmental analytical perspective is adopted. We also suggest that the interdependence of wellbeing, independence and mobility in later life needs to be understood in the context of neo-liberal governmentality and the creation of particular ways of being and acting for older people. The piece concludes with a brief description of the papers brought together in the special issue.

The authors seek to extend the literature on inequalities and exclusion in the nighttime economy through a rhythmic analysis of visitor presence in public space in nightlife districts in the city centres of the Dutch cities of Groningen, Utrecht, and Rotterdam. Substantial inequalities in visitor presence, based on race/ethnicity and gender, are demonstrated. In the cities considered, racial/ethnic inequalities vary more in spatial terms, and gender inequalities fluctuate more heavily over the course of the night. Overall, however, the findings support the argument that exclusion from the nighttime economy needs to be understood in temporal—ecological terms. Multiple drivers, or pacemakers, of rhythmic inequalities rooted in race/ethnicity and gender are identified, including opening hours and revellers' collective habits. For advocates of greater diversity among nighttime-economy participants, the analysis suggests that neither a more varied supply of nightlife premises, nor more surveillance and policing, are straightforward solutions: a strong orientation of premises toward university students and urban professionals may promote gender-based inclusion, but deters nonwhite revellers, and more police on the street may empower women to move through a nightlife district unaccompanied yet reduce the inclination to do so among racial/ethnic minorities