As a primary objective in transport planning urban neighbourhood accessibility plays an essential role in the sustainable transformation of cities and their infrastructure. In most studies, accessibility is objectively measured using aggregate travel time or generalised costs as an indicator of the separation of people from places. However, this approach does not reflect perceptions of residents, which ultimately shape mobility decisions and represent the “lived reality” of accessibility. This paper addresses this research gap, adding to a growing evidence base on understanding the relationship between perceived and objective measures of accessibility, and discusses opportunities for incorporating perceptions into measures of accessibility. We offer suggestions for how and why individual perceptions of accessibility differ from objective measures using data from Germany and the UK.

A conceptual framework for occupant behaviour as a driver of fuel poverty is presented, comprising: housing and use of the home; heating and energy arrangements and thermal comfort; household structure and dynamics; health and well-being; household finances; and social activity and relations. This framework informs longitudinal analysis of movements into and out of fuel poverty among households in deprived communities in Glasgow. Household surveys across ten years yielded a longitudinal sample of 3297 cases where initial and subsequent fuel poverty status was recorded using an experiential measure. A third of households changed their fuel poverty status over time: 18% moving out of fuel poverty and 16% moving in. Factors strongly associated with movements into fuel poverty included: being a single parent (OR 2.27); experiencing a mental health problem (OR 2.74); and remaining out of work (OR 1.89). Movement out of fuel poverty was less likely among those with infrequent family contact (OR 0.55) and who moved home (OR 0.66); home improvements had no effect upon the experience of fuel poverty. It is argued that the policy problem should be considered one of ‘warmth and energy deprivation’, accompanied by a broader interpretation of vulnerability to as well as from fuel poverty.

Recommendations to reduce health inequalities frequently emphasise improvements to socio-environmental determinants of health. Proponents of 'proportionate universalism' argue that such improvements should be allocated proportionally to population need. We tested whether city-wide investment in urban renewal in Glasgow (UK) was allocated to 'need' and whether this reduced health inequalities. We identified a longitudinal cohort (n = 1006) through data linkage across surveys conducted in 2006 and 2011 in 14 differentially disadvantaged neighbourhoods. Each neighbourhood received renewal investment during that time, allocated on the basis of housing need. We grouped neighbourhoods into those receiving 'higher', 'medium' or 'lower' levels of investment. We compared residents' self-reported physical and mental health between these three groups over time using the SF-12 version 2 instrument. Multiple linear regression adjusted for baseline gender, age, education, household structure, housing tenure, building type, country of birth and clustering. Areas receiving higher investment tended to be most disadvantaged in terms of baseline health, income deprivation and markers of social disadvantage. After five years, mean mental health scores improved in 'higher investment' areas relative to 'lower investment' areas (b = 4.26; 95% CI = 0.29, 8.22; P = 0.036). Similarly, mean physical health scores declined less in high investment compared to low investment areas (b = 3.86; 95% CI = 1.96, 5.76; P < 0.001). Relative improvements for medium investment (compared to lower investment) areas were not statistically significant. Findings suggest that investment in housing-led renewal was allocated according to population need and this led to modest reductions in area-based inequalities in health after five years. Study limitations include a risk of selection bias. This study demonstrates how non-health interventions can, and we believe should, be evaluated to better understand if and how health inequalities can be reduced through strategies of allocating investment in social determinants of health according to need.

Background Existing research points towards physical and mental health gains from housing improvements, but findings are inconsistent and often not statistically significant. The detailed characteristics and variability of housing improvement works are problematic and studies are often small, not experimental, with short follow-up times. Methods A quasi-experimental design was used to assess the impact on physical health and mental health (using SF-12v2 Physical and Mental health component summary scales) of four types of housing improvement works—central heating, ‘Secured By Design’ front doors, fabric works, kitchens and bathrooms—both singly and in pairwise combinations. A longitudinal sample of 1933 residents from 15 deprived communities in Glasgow, UK was constructed from surveys carried out in 2006, 2008 and 2011. Sociodemographic characteristics and changes in employment status were taken into account. Results Fabric works had positive associations with physical health (+2.09, 95% CI 0.13 to 4.04) and mental health (+1.84, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.65) in 1–2 years. Kitchens and bathrooms had a positive association with mental health in 1–2 years (+2.58, 95% CI 0.79 to 4.36). Central heating had a negative association with physical health (−2.21, 95% CI −3.74 to −0.68). New front doors had a positive association with mental health in <1 year (+5.89, 95% CI 0.65 to 11.14) and when provided alongside kitchens and bathrooms (+4.25, 95% CI 1.71 to 6.80). Gaining employment had strong associations with physical health (+7.14, 95% CI 4.72 to 9.55) as well as mental health (+5.50, 95% CI 3.27 to 7.73). Conclusions Fabric works may provide insulation benefits and visual amenity benefits to residents. Front doors may provide important security benefits in deprived communities. Economic regeneration is important alongside property-led regeneration.