Gender Analysis of a Women-Friendly City: A Case Study of Subang Jaya

As Malaysia’s first designated Women-Friendly City, Subang Jaya provides a unique opportunity to examine how gendered perspectives shape urban design and public perception. This study applies gender analysis to assess the planning, implementation, and post-occupancy stages of the city’s development. Through a review of local gender-mainstreaming policies, site observations, expert interviews, and a survey of 200 residents, the research highlights critical gaps and successes in gender integration. Findings indicate limited collaboration between women-friendly city planners and gender policy experts during the planning phase, leading to only partial implementation of gender-responsive measures. Nevertheless, survey results reveal that both women and men generally perceive Subang Jaya as safe. Notably, gender differences in safety priorities emerge: men tend to value CCTV surveillance, while women place greater importance on active safety features like emergency call buttons. This suggests a preference among women for proactive safety mechanisms over passive monitoring systems. The paper argues that embedding a gender-sensitive approach in urban planning is crucial to building inclusive, equitable, and responsive cities—offering important insights for Subang Jaya’s continued evolution as a Women-Friendly City.

Gender Equality; Inclusive City; Women-Friendly City

1. Anttiroiko, A.-V., & de Jong, M. (2020b). Smart city governance: From e-government to urban e-governance. Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Andrews, D., Criscuolo, C., & Gal, P. N. (2021). The best versus the rest: The global productivity slowdown, divergence across firms and the role of public policy. OECD Productivity Working Papers. https://doi.org/10.1787/5jrs3sbcrvzx-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. ASEAN. (2017). ASEAN Declaration on the Gender-Responsive Implementation of the ASEAN Community Vision 2025. ASEAN Secretariat. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. ASEAN Secretariat. (2020). ASEAN Sustainable Urbanisation Strategy (ASUS). ASEAN Secretariat. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Asian Development Bank. (2022). Creating livable and inclusive cities in Asia. Asian Development Bank. https://www.adb.org/publications/creating-livable-and-inclusive-cities-asia [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Bansal, G., Hanna, A., Lasecki, W. S., & Binns, R. (2023). Bias in AI and digital governance: Addressing overlooked dimensions. Journal of AI Ethics, 4(1), 45–60. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Bamwesigye, D., and Hlavackova, P. (2019). Analysis of sustainable transport for smart cities. Sustainability 11:2140. doi: 10.3390/su11072140 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Barnes, M. (2021). Gender-sensitive urban planning: Strategies for safer cities. Urban Studies, 58(4), 733–750. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Beebeejaun, Y. (2017). Gender, urban space, and the right to everyday life. Journal of Urban Affairs, 39(3), 323–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2016.1255526 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Berrone, P., & Joan, E.-R. (2022). Cities and the inclusive growth agenda: A roadmap for practitioners. IESE Business School. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Bilodeau, A., White, S., & Nevitte, N. (2020). Citizenship, political engagement, and belonging: Immigrants in Canada. University of Toronto Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Blumen, O. (1994). Gendered spaces: The social and spatial relations of the sexes. Urban Geography, 15(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.15.1.1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Bondi, L. (1998). Gender, class, and urban space: Public and private space in contemporary urban landscapes. Urban Geography, 19(2), 160–185. https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.19.2.160 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Booth, C., & Bennett, C. (2002). Gender mainstreaming in the European Union: Towards a new conception and practice of equal opportunities? European Journal of Women's Studies, 9(4), 430–446. https://doi.org/10.1177/13505068020090040301 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Campisi, T., Akgün, N., Nikiforiadis, A., & Tesoriere, G. (2022). Women and urban mobility: Perspectives from European cities. Transportation Research Procedia, 60, 89–96. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Carrasco, C. (2019). The city and the gender division of labor. Urban Studies, 56(10), 2025–2040. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098018789050 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Cengiz, R., Soytemel, E., & Öztürk, S. (2022). Women-Friendly Cities Joint Programme: Institutional mechanisms for gender-sensitive urban development. Gender, Place & Culture, 29(5), 648–666. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2022.2040127 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Chan, J. H., & Chye, L. H. (2023). Smart nation strategies in Singapore: Gender perspectives in urban technology adoption. Journal of Smart Cities and Urban Innovation, 4(2), 145–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciu.2023.04.007 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Cities Alliance. (2020). Women and the city: How gender equality can transform cities for all. Cities Alliance. https://www.citiesalliance.org/resources/publications/cities-alliance-knowledge/women-and-city [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Čolić Marković, J., & Danilović Hristić, N. (2025). Participatory urban planning: Gender-responsive approaches for inclusive city spaces. Journal of Urban and Regional Planning, 11(1), 22–39. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Dalu, M. T. B., & Manyani, A. (2020). Mainstreaming gender in urban planning for inclusive cities. Journal of Planning Literature, 35(3), 299–313. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Daly, M. (2005). Gender mainstreaming in theory and practice. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 12(3), 433–450. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxi023 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Datta, A. (2021). Gender, urban spaces and gendered resistances: towards inclusive and fear free cities in India. Reflections on 21st Century Human Habitats in India: Felicitation Volume in Honour of Professor MH Qureshi. 327–43. doi: 10.1007/978-981-16-3100-9_13 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Datta, A. (2022). Gendering the smart city: From surveillance to inclusion. Urban Geography, 43(1), 88–109. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. de Madariaga, I. S. (2004). Urban planning and gender equality: The role of gender in shaping the city. Gender, Place & Culture, 11(3), 289–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369042000258660 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. de Madariaga, I. S., & Neuman, M. (2020). Engendering cities: Designing sustainable urban spaces for all. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Dymén, C., & Ceccato, V. (2012). Gendered mobility and the spatiality of fear: A study of women's fear in public spaces in Sweden. Urban Studies, 49(13), 2881–2899. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098012439112 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Economic Planning Unit. (2021). Twelfth Malaysia Plan, 2021–2025: A prosperous, inclusive, sustainable Malaysia. Prime Minister's Department, Malaysia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Elias, J. (2020). Gender, security, and climate change: Observing global discourses through a feminist lens. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 22(3), 366–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616742.2019.1664928 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Esra Banu Sipahi, & Erhan Örselli. (2019). The women-friendly city approach and an evaluation of Eskişehir, Turkey. Megaron, 14(1), 52–63. https://doi.org/10.5505/megaron.2019.40630 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Fedorenko, I., & Kolos, A. (2023). Smart transport solutions for women's safety: Lessons from Dubai. International Journal of Urban Sciences, 27(2), 225–240. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Feng, Y., Wang, S., & Yang, S. (2023). Urban sustainability and the role of SDG 11: A critical review. Sustainability, 15(3), 1156. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Fenster, T. (2005). The right to the gendered city: Different formations of belonging in everyday life. Journal of Gender Studies, 14(3), 217–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589230500264109 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. German, S., Metternicht, G., Laffan, S., and Hawken, S. (2023). Intelligent spatial technologies for gender inclusive urban environments in today’s smart cities. Intellig. Environm. 2023, 285–322. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-820247-0.00012-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Gilbert, A. (1997). The new urban economy: A review of the literature. Urban Studies, 34(5–6), 953–970. https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098975853 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Greed, C., & Reeves, D. (2005). Mainstreaming equality into strategic spatial policy making: Are town planners losing sight of gender? Town Planning Review, 76(3), 267–288. https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.76.3.3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Gendered Innovations Initiative. (2020). Gendered innovations in science, health & medicine, engineering, and environment. Stanford University. https://genderedinnovations.stanford.edu/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Gül, Z., Demirtaş-Milz, N., & Arslan, M. (2023). Rethinking gender and space in urban infrastructure: A feminist critique of inclusive planning. Urban Studies Review, 60(3), 401–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980221103778 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Gutiérrez Mozo, M. E. (2020). Gender, safety, and urban spaces: A global analysis. Urban Design International, 25(2), 80–95. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Hanson, S. (2023). Feminist geography and the challenge to androcentric urban planning. Gender, Place & Culture, 30(1), 1–15. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Harvey, D. (1996). Justice, nature and the geography of difference. Blackwell. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Hayden, D. (1980). What would a non-sexist city be like? Speculations on housing, urban design, and human work. Signs, 5(3), S170–S187. https://doi.org/10.1086/495718 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Hernes, H. M. (1987). Welfare state and woman power: Essays in state feminism. Norwegian University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Itair, M., Shahrour, I., and Hijazi, I. (2023). The use of the smart technology for creating an inclusive urban public space. Smart Cities. 6, 2484–98. doi: 10.3390/smartcities6050112 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Kiper, P., İlhan, A., & Kiper, G. (2016). Gender-responsive urban planning for safer public spaces: A case study of Ankara. Urban Planning International, 31(3), 89–96. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. KWDI (Korean Women's Development Institute). (2010). Policy measures for the promotion of women-friendly cities. KWDI. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Kusumastuti, R., Wibowo, A., & Gunawan, Y. (2022). Building urban resilience through smart city initiatives in Indonesia: The case of Tangerang City. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 71, 102802. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.102802 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Kyttä, M., Broberg, A., & Tuominen, P. (2022). Everyday mobility and spatial needs: A gendered perspective on inclusive city planning. Journal of Transport Geography, 102, 103356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2022.103356 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Leal Maldonado, J. (2002). Urban restructuring and changing patterns of socio-economic segregation in Madrid. In Inequality and rising levels of socio-economic segregation (pp. 214–237). Amsterdam University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Leal, J., & Sorando, D. (2015). Economic crisis, social change and segregation processes in Madrid. In Inequality and rising levels of socio-economic segregation (pp. 214–237). Amsterdam University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Liang, X., Lu, Y., Yang, R., & Wu, W. (2022). Inclusive cities: A conceptual framework and empirical analysis. Cities, 125, 103582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103582 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Liang, X., Shen, J., & Liu, H. (2022). Inclusive cities: Concept, measurement, and implications for urban governance. Cities, 129, 103839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103839 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. Lindkvist, C. (2024). Gendered mobility strategies and challenges to sustainable travel—patriarchal norms controlling women’s everyday transportation. Front. Sustain.Cities 6:1367238. doi: 10.3389/frsc.2024.1367238 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. Listerborn, C. (2007). Who speaks? And who listens? The relationship between planners and women’s participation in local planning in a multi-cultural urban environment. GeoJournal, 70(1), 61–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-007-9114-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

55. Lombardo, E., Meier, P., & Verloo, M. (2017). Policymaking from a gender+ equality perspective. Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 38(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554477X.2016.1198207 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

56. Manzoor, M. A., Hassan, S. U., Muazzam, A., Tuarob, S., and Nawaz, R. (2023). Social mining for sustainable cities: thematic study of gender-based violence coverage in news articles and domestic violence in relation to COVID-19. J. Ambient Intell. Humaniz. Comput. 14, 14631–42. doi: 10.1007/s12652-021-03401-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

57. Meysam Zekavat, & Arezoo Momenian. (2018). Gender justice in urban spaces: Women’s experiences in Iranian cities. Journal of Urban Management, 7(1), 40–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jum.2018.02.002 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

58. MBSJ. (2022). Subang Jaya: Malaysia’s first women-friendly city initiative. Majlis Bandaraya Subang Jaya Official Report. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

59. McDowell, L. (1983). Towards an understanding of the gender division of urban space. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 1(1), 59–72. https://doi.org/10.1068/d010059 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

60. McDowell, L. (2000). Gender, identity and place: Understanding feminist geographies. Polity Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

61. Meena, M. S., & Singh, K. M. (2010). Inclusive urban development: Concept and indicators. Indian Journal of Social Development, 10(1), 19–30. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

62. Ministry of Women, Family, and Community Development. (2019). National Policy on Women 2009. Government of Malaysia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

63. Morrow, O. (2018). Designing urban spaces for women's empowerment: Participatory approaches. Cities, 76, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

64. Mostofi, H. (2022). The frequency use and the modal shift to ICT-based mobility services. Resources, Environm. Sustainab. 9:100076. doi: 10.1016/j.resenv.2022.10 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

65. Ngulube, T., Banda, L., & Mbewe, S. (2024). Gender equality and economic transformation: A case study of Lusaka. Journal of African Urban Studies, 6(1), 23–38. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

66. Orozco, A. (2014). The sexual division of labor and the urban space: A feminist perspective. Gender, Place & Culture, 21(7), 857–874. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2013.810601 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

67. Otero-Hermida, P., & Lorenzo, A. A. (2020). Mainstreaming gender in public policies: Transformations, limits, and difficulties. Gender, Place & Culture, 27(9), 1259–1277. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2019.1681363 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

68. Owais, S., Yuliani, N., & Hakim, A. (2024). Evaluating multimodal public transportation from a gender lens: The case of Jakarta. Transportation and Gender Equity Journal, 2(1), 55–70. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

69. Othman, A., AlMutawaa, A., Al Tamimi, A., and AlMansouri,M. (2023). Assessing the readiness of government and semi-government institutions in qatar for inclusive and sustainable ICT accessibility: introducing the MARSAD tool. Sustainability 15:3853. doi: 10.3390/su15043853 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

70. Oudshoorn, N., Rommes, E., & Stienstra, M. (2004). Configuring the user as everybody: Gender and design cultures in information and communication technologies. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 29(1), 30–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243903259190 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

71. Pain, R. (2001). Gender, race, age and fear in the city. Urban Studies, 38(5–6), 899–913. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980120046590 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

72. Pirra, M., Kalakou, S., Carboni, A., Costa, M., Diana, M., Lynce, A. R. A., et al. (2021). preliminary analysis on gender aspects in transport systems and mobility services: Presentation of a survey design. Sustainability 13:2676. doi: 10.3390/su13052676 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

73. Pollack, M. A., & Hafner-Burton, E. (2000). Mainstreaming gender in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy, 7(3), 432–456. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760050086116 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

74. Rampaul, C., & Magidimisha-Chipungu, S. S. (2022). Safe cities for women: A gender perspective in urban design. International Planning Studies, 27(2), 156–172. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

75. Rauf, M. A., Amin, R., & Afzal, M. (2023). Sustainable urban development and the integration of SDGs: Policy implications for smart cities. Journal of Urban Management, 12(1), 67–78. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

76. Rees, T. (2005). Reflections on the uneven development of gender mainstreaming in Europe. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 7(4), 555–574. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616740500284532 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

77. Robin, E. (2014). The urban politics of climate change: Policy and planning in global cities. Geography Compass, 8(3), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12118 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

78. Roberts, M. (2023). Reclaiming urban space: Women’s safety and inclusive smart city initiatives in Europe. Urban Futures, 18(3), 201–217. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

79. Rose, G. (1993). Feminism and geography: The limits of geographical knowledge. University of Minnesota Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

80. Rossi, U., & Vanolo, A. (2010). Urban political geographies: A global perspective. Sage Massey, D. (1994). Space, place, and gender. University of Minnesota Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

81. Saad, S., Zulkifli, N., & Hassan, H. (2024). Gender-related barriers to effective public participation in land use planning: A study in Perlis, Malaysia. Journal of Planning and Development, 20(1), 45–58. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

82. Sánchez de Madariaga, I., & Neuman, M. (2021). Engendering cities: Planning for equity. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

83. Sayer, A. (2005). The moral significance of class. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

84. Selangor State Government. (2020). Women Empowerment Agenda (2020–2025). Selangor State Government. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

85. Schiebinger, L. (2019). Gendered innovations: How inclusive analysis contributes to research and innovation. European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/pub_gender_equality/gendered_innovations.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

86. Soja, E. W. (2000). Postmetropolis: Critical studies of cities and regions. Blackwell. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

87. Soja, E. W. (2010). Seeking spatial justice. University of Minnesota Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

88. Swyngedouw, E., Kaika, M., & Castro, J. E. (2002). Urban water: A political-ecology perspective. Built Environment, 28(2), 124–137. https://doi.org/10.2148/benv.28.2.124.14765 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

89. Taewook, K. (2015). Women-friendly cities for sustainable development: A study of Korean practices. Journal of Urban and Regional Analysis, 7(2), 123–137. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

90. Tayeng, D., Sharma, P., & Bhargava, A. (2024). Smart city governance and gendered participation: Insights from Pune, India. Asian Urban Governance Review, 9(1), 44–61. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

91. Terraza, H., Orlando, M. B., Lakovits, C., Janik, V. L., and Kalashyan, A. (2020). Handbook for Gender-Inclusive Urban Planning and Design. Washington, DC: World Bank. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

92. Tierney, A. (2019). Smart city strategy in Toronto: Gender inclusion through urban data and civic engagement. Journal of Urban Affairs, 41(5), 629–648. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2018.1511799 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

93. Tokman, V. E. (2009). Advancing women’s participation in urban governance through women-friendly city initiatives. UNESCO International Social Science Journal, 60(195), 269–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2451.2009.01709.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

94. UN. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. United Nations. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

95. UN-Habitat. (2020). Gender equality in urban development: Current trends and perspectives. United Nations Human Settlements Programme. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

96. UN Women. (2023). Women-friendly cities in Southeast Asia: Progress and prospects. United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

97. UN-Habitat. (2016). World cities report 2016: Urbanization and development – Emerging futures. United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat). https://unhabitat.org/world-cities-report [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

98. UN-Habitat. (2016). New Urban Agenda. United Nations Human Settlements Programme. https://habitat3.org/the-new-urban-agenda/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

99. UN-Habitat. (1996). Women’s lives in urban places: UN-Habitat II. United Nations Centre for Human Settlements. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

100. Urban Development Vienna. (2021). Gender mainstreaming in urban planning: The Vienna model. City of Vienna. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

101. USAID. (2017). ADS Chapter 205: Integrating gender equality and female empowerment in USAID's program cycle. U.S. Agency for International Development. https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1870/205.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

102. Uteng, P., and Susilo, Y. (2021). Women and transport modes. Int. Encyclop. Transpor. doi: 10.1016/b978-0-08-102671-7.10600-1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

103. Vaidya, C., & Chatterji, T. (2020). Urban governance and the sustainable development goals: A gendered perspective. Environment and Urbanization ASIA, 11(1), 1–16. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

104. Valentine, G. (1989). The geography of women's fear. Area, 21(4), 385–390. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

105. Veloso, E., Martin, S., & Alvarez, M. (2024). Inclusive design in smart cities: Gender-responsive infrastructure in Amsterdam and Barcelona. Journal of Urban Innovation and Equity, 5(1), 88–104. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

106. Verloo, M. (2005). Mainstreaming gender equality in Europe. A critical frame analysis approach. The Greek Review of Social Research, 117, 11–34. https://doi.org/10.12681/grsr.9334 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

107. Wacquant, L. (2008). Urban outcasts: A comparative sociology of advanced marginality. Polity Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

108. Wajcman, J. (2023). The gender politics of smart cities. Information, Communication & Society, 26(1), 36–52. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

109. Walby, S. (2005). Gender mainstreaming: Productive tensions in theory and practice. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 12(3), 321–343. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxi018 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

110. World Bank. (2015a). Inclusive cities approach paper. The World Bank Group. https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/402451468169453117/inclusive-cities-approach-paper [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

111. World Bank. (2015a). Stocktaking of the housing sector in Sub-Saharan Africa: Challenges and opportunities. World Bank. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

112. World Bank. (2015b). Inclusion matters: The foundation for shared prosperity. World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/16195 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

113. Yadav, S., & Kumari, P. (2021). Urban planning and women's safety: A comparative study. Journal of Urban Studies Research, 2021, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

114. Young, A.W. (2024). Get Thee to a Smart City: a Study on Queer Urban Planning in Seestadt Aspern. Central European University. Available at: https://www.etd.ceu.edu/ 2024/young_alina.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

115. Young, K. (2024). Mainstreaming gender in urban development: Lessons from Vienna. Cities and Gender Policy Review, 7(2), 101–119. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Indirect Effect of Liquidity and Activity on Company Value with Profitability as an Intervening Variable
• Effect of Financial Skills, Knowledge, and Attitude on The Financial Behaviour of Clergy
• A Decade of Review: Trends in Budget Execution and Financial Performance of Development Projects in Tanzania (2014/15-2023/24)
• The Influence of Pre-Project Planning on the Budget Absorption Rate of Public Funded Infrastructure Projects in Kenya a Comparative Case Study of Narok, Migori, and Kisii County Government Projects
• Assessment of Factors Influencing Digital Transformation in Hotels’ Facility Management in Abuja Metropolis, Nigeria