Scholarlink

<p>This article examines women’s everyday mobility and experiences of insecurity in an informal neighborhood, comparing how different research methods capture these realities. The study was conducted in Lomas del Centinela, Mexico, and combines community-based approaches, such as participatory workshops and walk-alongs, with digital tools, including wearable sensors and mobile applications. The aim is to assess what each method contributes to understanding patterns of safety and mobility. The results reveal clear differences across approaches: real-time sensor data identified “fear hotspots” that did not appear in maps derived from collective memory, highlighting the limitations of relying solely on participatory workshops. The article offers a practical comparison of these tools, discusses their trade-offs in terms of cost, scalability, and contextual depth, and proposes a methodological framework to guide the combined use of different techniques depending on the context. By integrating qualitative and quantitative data, this framework supports more precise and actionable evidence for urban upgrading policies and concrete changes in public space.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparative assessment of women’s safety and mobility research methods in informal neighborhoods

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月7日

查看全文
  • Leticia Izquierdo,
  • Jason Nawyn,
  • Kent Larson

摘要

This article examines women’s everyday mobility and experiences of insecurity in an informal neighborhood, comparing how different research methods capture these realities. The study was conducted in Lomas del Centinela, Mexico, and combines community-based approaches, such as participatory workshops and walk-alongs, with digital tools, including wearable sensors and mobile applications. The aim is to assess what each method contributes to understanding patterns of safety and mobility. The results reveal clear differences across approaches: real-time sensor data identified “fear hotspots” that did not appear in maps derived from collective memory, highlighting the limitations of relying solely on participatory workshops. The article offers a practical comparison of these tools, discusses their trade-offs in terms of cost, scalability, and contextual depth, and proposes a methodological framework to guide the combined use of different techniques depending on the context. By integrating qualitative and quantitative data, this framework supports more precise and actionable evidence for urban upgrading policies and concrete changes in public space.