时代周刊:做一个平等的城市(2)（打印版）

The five-year, $2 million project is well under way, with 13 playgrounds overhauled since 2015.

为期五年、耗资200万美元的该项目目前正在落实，自2015年以来，他们已经对13个游乐场进行了全面检修。

Jones says property values are already going up around the parks,

据琼斯透露，修缮带动了公园周边房价的上涨，

and because each site has different equipment, people are visiting areas they otherwise wouldn't.

同时，由于每个地点的设施各不相同，居民们破天荒地开始交叉使用那些设施了。

"It forces you to go into a community," Jones says.

“这样大家就不得不跟社区的其他人互动了，”琼斯说。

"It forces people to be one city."

“整个城市就变成了一个整体。”

In January, Acevedo-Garcia and her team published the latest edition of the Child Opportunity Index,

今年1月，Acevedo-Garcia和她的团队发布了最新一期的儿童机会指数报告，

an ambitious project that takes a deep look at 47,000 neighborhoods across the 100 largest U.S. metro areas,

这个项目非常庞大，报告深入考察了美国前100个大都会地区的4.7万个社区，

scoring them from 1 to 100, where a higher number means more childhood opportunity based on 29 key measures.

根据29项关键指标给它们打分，从1分到100分，数字越高意味着儿童能获得的机会越多。

Acevedo-Garcia's data evaluating children's access focuses on how the next generation is faring.

Acevedo-Garcia这一数据，表面评测的是儿童能获得的机会的大小，背后关注的则是整个下一代的成长情况。

But children are, of course, a proxy for the community as a whole.

不过，儿童显然也是整个社会的一个缩影。

The life expectancy of residents in neighborhoods with very low scores on her child-opportunity scale is 75 years, for example.

打个比方，儿童机会得分较低社区居民的预期寿命是75岁。

In very high-opportunity neighborhoods, it's 82.

儿童机会得分较高的社区居民预期寿命则能达到82岁。

TIME worked with Acevedo-Garcia to see if her neighborhood data

为考察Acevedo-Garcia的社区数据是否还能筛选出机会平等程度较高的大都会地区，

could point us to metropolitan areas with comparatively high levels of equal opportunity.

《时代周刊》与Acevedo-Garcia达成了一项合作。

That meant searching for areas with relatively small gaps between the highest- and lowest-ranked neighborhoods.

这就意味着我们要找的是得分最高和得分最低的两个社区得分差距相对较小的地区。

This information is useful because, even when places have the same opportunity level overall,

这一信息其实是非常有用的，因为即便两个地方总体的机会得分相同，

actually living in those cities can be a very different experience.

两个地方的不同城市的生活体验也有很大区别。

For example, Colorado Springs and Detroit both score an overall opportunity level of 55.

举个例子，科罗拉多州的斯普林斯和（密歇根州的）底特律两个城市总体的儿童机会得分都是55分。

But in Colorado Springs, a typical high-opportunity neighborhood scores an 87 and a typical low-opportunity one scores 24.

但在斯普林斯，一个具有代表性的机会较多的社区的得分是87分，具有代表性的机会较少的社区得分是24分。

That might seem like a huge gap.

你可能会觉得，两个社区的机会差距好大！

But Detroit's high is 95 and its low is 2: a much less equal city.

但在底特律，前者得分可能高达95分，后者得分则可能低至2分：很明显，这个城市的机会（要比斯普林斯的）不平等得多。

The problem was, when we found areas with small gaps between neighborhoods,

问题是，即便我们真的找到了社区之间机会差距很小的地区，

those cities tended to be racially homogenous.

这些地区往往也是种族比较统一的城市。