Table 4.
Neighbourhood dimensions (Egan 2004) | Asset | # Mentioned* | Deficit | # Mentioned* |
---|---|---|---|---|
(+) Services | Many services available | 32 (13 resp) | Budget cuts | 10 (7 resp) |
Accessible/adapted to community needs | 21 (10 resp) | Poor link to community | 7 (6 resp) | |
Cooperation | 7 (6 resp) | |||
(+) Housing and the built environment | Green space / Sloterplas lake | 29 (15 resp) | Poor housing | 18 (15 resp) |
Renovated dwellings | 5 (5 resp) | Small dwellings for large families | 5 (5 resp) | |
Unsafe | 5 (4 resp) | |||
insufficient green space/ clean area | 4 (2 resp) | |||
(+) Transport and connectivity | Public transport and connectivity | 13 (13 resp) | ||
(−) Governance | No insight in public administration | 7 (7 resp) | ||
(−) Environmental | Rubbish in the streets | 10 (10 resp) | ||
(−) Social and cultural | Many activities | 12 (8 resp) | Poor social cohesion | 19 (11 resp) |
Culture mix (positive) | 4 (4 resp) | Insufficient culture mix | 13 (8 resp) | |
(−) Economy | Poverty | 42 (17 resp) | ||
One-sided economy | 8 (8 resp) | |||
Unemployment | 7 (4 resp) | |||
Unhealthy food supply | 5 (5 resp) |
This concerns the number of times the issue was presented in the interviews. In brackets: number of professionals bringing the issue forward