Target 11.7: Safe, inclusive public spaces
By 2030, provide universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces, in particular for women and children, older persons and persons with disabilities
Owners voting their values help. Others must carry most of it.
Why shareholder democracy is helpful
Public and green space is provided mainly through municipal land, budgets and park management, so most of this target lies with local governments. Developers and property owners hold a real but secondary lever. They build privately owned public spaces in exchange for permission to build bigger, and they decide whether those spaces are open. A New York City Comptroller follow-up review re-inspected previously cited sites among the city's 333 such spaces and found more than 94 percent remained non-compliant, with fences, chains and missing amenities. Suppose listed developers, real estate investment trusts and retail landlords treated inclusive, accessible open space as a core objective and supported rather than resisted public-space requirements in planning codes. Cities would then gain space at the margin in dense districts. The universal-access outcome is still a public planning and funding matter, especially in low-income cities where green space is scarce and informal.
How this was scoredHelpful
Helpful. Owners voting their values help. Others must carry most of it.
We have not yet written down the two answers behind this rating. Recording them on every item, so a reader can check the reasoning and not only the conclusion, is work in progress.
Every rating is the higher of two answers, one for what companies do and one for what they spend to stop the outcome, because the same vote reaches both. See the full method.
Sources
No shareholder advocacy found yet
We looked and found nothing that met our standard, which is a source we opened and confirmed. No shareholder proposal, investor letter or coalition engagement was located asking a listed developer, real estate investment trust or retail landlord about privately owned public space compliance, public access, accessibility or green space provision.
How this rating was made
Every item on every one of our maps is read against one question: how far does this depend on the people who own companies voting their values? We answer it twice, once for what companies do and once for what they spend to stop the outcome, and take whichever answer is higher, since the same vote reaches both. The score carries its reasoning and its sources so that a reader can check it rather than take it.
- Pivotal. Owners voting their values can deliver most of the outcome.
- Necessary. Owners remove an obstacle nothing else removes, and others must also act.
- Helpful. Owners voting their values help, and others carry most of it.
- Independent. This moves without owners. Other levers carry it.
The advocacy record on this page holds only what a source we opened says happened. Where we searched and found nothing, the page says so rather than leaving a silence. Where a campaign names a filer the source does not name, it says that too. Ratings are ours; the list of subjects is UN Sustainable Development Goals's, and we link to their original.
How we score dependency, in full.