An Interpretable Spatio-Temporal Graph Neural Framework Integrating Urban Economic Theory for Data-Driven Investment Prioritization in Regeneration
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study designs and implements a novel data-driven framework for dynamically mapping investment alignment in urban regeneration, bridging the gap between urban economic theory and computational planning practice. The framework integrates parcel-level microdata on ownership, land use, building characteristics, and structural condition with contextual economic, social, and morphological data, modeling the city as a dynamic, multi-scale system. Methodologically, this research advances the state-of-the-art by combining Spatio-Temporal Graph Neural Networks with Explainable AI to simultaneously capture spatial dependencies, temporal dynamics, and provide transparent decision pathways. The proposed approach reveals four distinct investment archetypes—Heritage-Led Development Cores, Strategic Redevelopment Corridors, Transition Zones, and Stable Residential Areas—through unsupervised learning applied to Spatio-Temporal Graph Neural Networks embeddings. A key innovation lies in operationalizing theoretical concepts from Rent Gap theory and Institutional Economics into quantifiable machine learning features, enabling causal-like explanations via SHAP analysis. The framework outputs dynamic priority maps and an interactive geospatial dashboard that enables scenario testing and evidence-based resource allocation. Empirical validation demonstrates that model-generated investment archetypes showed 85% spatial concordance with areas independently identified as high-priority by a panel of senior urban planners. Additionally, the model achieved a Silhouette Score of 0.62 in cluster validation and R² of 0.92 in surrogate model performance, indicating strong analytical robustness. This research contributes to both urban science and planning practice by providing a scalable, interpretable approach for investment prioritization in complex urban environments.
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
References
- Anselin, L. (1988). Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Models (Vol. 4). Springer Science & Business Media.
- Batty, M. (2018). Inventing Future Cities. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11923.001.0001
- Bettencourt, L. M. A. (2021). Introduction to Urban Science. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/13909.001.0001
- Bronstein, M. M., Bruna, J., LeCun, Y., Szlam, A., & Vandergheynst, P. (2017). Geometric Deep Learning: Going beyond Euclidean data. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 34(4), 18–42. https://doi.org/10.1109/msp.2017.2693418
- Glaeser, E. (2020). Urbanization and its Discontents. National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w26839
- Glaeser, E. L., Gorback, C., & Redding, S. J. (2022). JUE Insight: How much does COVID-19 increase with mobility? Evidence from New York and four other U.S. cities. Journal of Urban Economics, 127, 103292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2020.103292
- Green, B. (2019). The Smart Enough City. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11555.001.0001
- Healey, P. (1997). Collaborative Planning. Macmillan Education UK. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-25538-2
- Hui, E. C. M., Li, X., & Chen, T. (2020). From housing inequality to neighborhood displacement: The role of urban redevelopment in Shanghai. Urban Studies, 57(16), 3328-3345.
- Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2010). Planning with Complexity: An Introduction to Collaborative Rationality for Public Policy. Routledge.
- Kitchin, R. (2021). The Data Revolution: A Critical Analysis of Big Data, Open Data and Data Infrastructures. Sage.
- Kitchin, R., Lauriault, T. P., & McArdle, G. (2015). Knowing and governing cities through urban indicators, city benchmarking and real-time dashboards. Regional Studies, Regional Science, 2(1), 6–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681376.2014.983149
- Lees, L., Slater, T., & Wyly, E. (2008). Gentrification. Routledge.
- Liang, X., Liu, Y., & Qiu, T. (2022). Data-driven urban regeneration: A systematic literature review. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science, 49(3), 1009-1027.
- Lundberg, S. M., & Lee, S. I. (2017). A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 30.
- Madanipour, A. (2017). Cities in Time (, Ed.). Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350014275
- Molnar, C. (2022). Interpretable Machine Learning: A Guide for Making Black Box Models Explainable. Chapman and Hall/CRC. https://christophm.github.io/interpretable-ml-book
- Ostrom, E. (2010). Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems. American Economic Review, 100(3), 641–672. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.100.3.641
- Pearl, J. (2019). The book of why: The new science of cause and effect. Basic Books.
- Rudin, C. (2019). Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(5), 206–215. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0048-x
- Smith, N. (1979). Toward a Theory of Gentrification A Back to the City Movement by Capital, not People. Journal of the American Planning Association, 45(4), 538–548. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944367908977002
- Webster, C., & Lai, L. W. C. (2003). Property Rights, Planning and Markets: Managing Spontaneous Cities. Edward Elgar.
- Wyly, E. K., & Hammel, D. J. (1999). Islands of decay in seas of renewal: Housing policy and the resurgence of gentrification. Housing Policy Debate, 10(4), 711–771. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.1999.9521348
- Zhang, J., & Zheng, Y. (2020). Spatio-Temporal Data Mining: A Survey. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.


