M. van Ham
Please Note
166 records found
1
The Problem of Uncertain Contextual Characteristic (PUCC)
Does it matter how contextual poverty is measured for the neighbourhood effect estimation?
Co-creation with carbon data
Reframing the designer’s role in the decarbonization of the built environment
Uneven Digital Visibility of Urban Places
Evidence From TikTok Hotspots
The Economic Urban Divide
A Detailed Study of Income Inequality and Segregation in Dutch Urban Areas (2011–2022)
When Ageing Meets Neighbourhood Demolition
Negotiating Time, Space, and Kinship in State-Led Urban Redevelopment in China
Do you see it how I see it?
Differences in neighborhood perceptions explained by individuals’ socioeconomic characteristics and trust attitudes
Regression Toward the Mean in Neighborhood Effects Research
A Geographic Perspective
The spatio-temporal evolution of social inequalities in cities
A multidimensional, multiscalar and longitudinal approach for neighbourhood classification
Although urban form and thermal behavior are inherently interrelated, similar urban forms can exhibit different thermal responses depending on factors like vegetation cover, impervious surfaces, and building materials. To better represent real-world variability, separating morphological classifications from thermal characteristics allows for an analysis that accounts for these differences.
To address these challenges, we develope an approach that generates empirically derived urban morhophological types while maintaining connections to LCZ categories. Our tool systematically classifies urban morphological types for fine-grained, nationwide assessments, enabling consistent comparisons across diverse Dutch urban residential areas. This approach uses readily available geospatial data and applies unsupervised machine learning techniques to identify urban morphological typologies. By standardizing the classification process into 100 x 100 m grid cells from Statistics Netherlands, our method provides a consistent spatial and temporal framework that transcends changing administrative boundaries.
Our approach helps streamline vulnerability analysis by facilitating the intersection of multiple environmental and social dimensions. We demonstrate the tool's utility through an explorative analysis that identifies which socio-economic groups reside in neighborhoods with high heat exposure, considering both morphological types and additional factors influencing heat exposure. This tool provides urban planners and researchers with an empirically-grounded framework for identifying priority areas in existing settlements for scalable adaptation interventions across different urban contexts. ...
Although urban form and thermal behavior are inherently interrelated, similar urban forms can exhibit different thermal responses depending on factors like vegetation cover, impervious surfaces, and building materials. To better represent real-world variability, separating morphological classifications from thermal characteristics allows for an analysis that accounts for these differences.
To address these challenges, we develope an approach that generates empirically derived urban morhophological types while maintaining connections to LCZ categories. Our tool systematically classifies urban morphological types for fine-grained, nationwide assessments, enabling consistent comparisons across diverse Dutch urban residential areas. This approach uses readily available geospatial data and applies unsupervised machine learning techniques to identify urban morphological typologies. By standardizing the classification process into 100 x 100 m grid cells from Statistics Netherlands, our method provides a consistent spatial and temporal framework that transcends changing administrative boundaries.
Our approach helps streamline vulnerability analysis by facilitating the intersection of multiple environmental and social dimensions. We demonstrate the tool's utility through an explorative analysis that identifies which socio-economic groups reside in neighborhoods with high heat exposure, considering both morphological types and additional factors influencing heat exposure. This tool provides urban planners and researchers with an empirically-grounded framework for identifying priority areas in existing settlements for scalable adaptation interventions across different urban contexts.
Fifty years after the Schelling's Models of Segregation
Bibliometric analysis of the legacy of Schelling and the future directions of segregation research
In 1969 Thomas C. Schelling published his paper “Models of Segregation” and in 1971 he published a follow-up paper introducing “Dynamic Models of Segregation”. Schelling's papers developed the theoretical models of interactive dynamics of individual residential choices, resulting in pronounced patterns of residential segregation at the city level. Even after 50+ years, the topic of residential segregation and sorting remains as relevant as when Schelling published his papers. The two Schelling papers have been cited more than 8000 times together, and have made a strong impact on the residential segregation literature and beyond. In this paper, we examine how Schelling's ideas have impacted empirical research on residential segregation, and thus contributed to a greater understanding of urban processes. We find that few empirical papers explicitly test the Schelling models in residential segregation studies, and there are a growing number of influential papers in the field of segregation that do not reference Schelling. However, the papers by Schelling have served as a source of inspiration for a diverse set of empirical studies, new ways of defining neighbourhoods and developing more comprehensive theories of segregation.
Residential mobility and new forms of spatial inequality in the settlement system
A comparative study of Estonia and Lithuania
The evolution of compounding residential inequalities
A multiscale analysis of neighbourhood change trajectories in Amsterdam
The neighbourhood
Where Wilson, Schelling and Hägerstrand meet
¿Segregados quiénes, cuándo y dónde?
La heterogeneidad de la segregación en Países Bajos