Recently the domestic aviation industry has been influenced by rapidly growing ultra low-cost carriers (ULCCs). The pattern of airport markets served by ULCCs is incongruous with legacy carriers and low-cost airlines alike. Existing literature, however, is limited for North American ULCCs: research has only recently begun to identify them separately from mainstream low-cost carriers. This study sought to understand the market factors that influence ULCC service decisions. The relationship between ULCC operations and airport market factors was analyzed using three methods: mapping 2019 flight data for four ULCCs combined, two regression analyses to evaluate variables, and three case studies examining distinct scenarios through interviews with airport managers. Enplanement data were assembled for every domestic airport offering scheduled service in 2019. Independent variables were collected for each Part 139 airport. The first model estimated an ordinary least squares regression model to analyze ULCC enplanements. The second model estimated a binary logistic equation for presence of ULCC service. Case studies for Bellingham, Waco, and Lincoln were selected using compelling airport factors and relevant ULCC experience. Maps of ULCC enplanements revealed concentrations of operations on the East Coast. Both regression analyses showed strong relationships between population and non-ULCC enplanements (two measures of airport market size) and ULCC operations. A significant relationship also existed between tourism and enplanements. In the logit model, distance and competition variables were associated with ULCC presence. Case studies emphasized the importance of airport fees and competition in ULCC preferences, although aeronautical costs were generally not significant in the regressions.

Much of modern urban planning in the United States is concerned with making cities more walkable. However, this is occurring as the urban landscape of the U.S. is altered radically by changes in crime patterns after the summer of 2020. This paper seeks to find out what the relationship is between walkability and crime in major U.S. cities after 2020. Using multiple linear regressions at the city and neighborhood scale, walkability is found to be a significant, positive predictor of 2019 violent crime rate, 2020 violent crime rate, 2020 property crime rate, and 2020 total crime rate at the city level. It was found to be a positive, but not significant predictor at the neighborhood level. Walkability has no protective influence against crime/rising crime, and it appears that as crime gets worse it tends to get worse in the cities that are more walkable, but other variables such as African American population are better determinants of crime. Urban planners should seek to increase walkability while also finding a way to mitigate potential exposure to crime.

Cities in the Global South face rapid urbanization challenges and often suffer an acute lack of infrastructure and governance capacities. Smart Cities Mission, in India, launched in 2015, aims to offer a novel approach for urban renewal of 100 cities following an area‐based development approach, where the use of ICT and digital technologies is particularly emphasized. This article presents a critical review of the design and implementation framework of this new urban renewal program across selected case‐study cities. The article examines the claims of the so‐called “smart cities” against actual urban transformation on‐ground and evaluates how “inclusive” and “sustainable” these developments are. We quantify the scale and coverage of the smart city urban renewal projects in the cities to highlight who the program includes and excludes. The article also presents a statistical analysis of the sectoral focus and budgetary allocations of the projects under the Smart Cities Mission to find an inherent bias in these smart city initiatives in terms of which types of development they promote and the ones it ignores. The findings indicate that a predominant emphasis on digital urban renewal of selected precincts and enclaves, branded as “smart cities,” leads to deepening social polarization and gentrification. The article offers crucial urban planning lessons for designing ICT‐driven urban renewal projects, while addressing critical questions around inclusion and sustainability in smart city ventures.`