Geographic barriers to essential services remain invisible in conventional statistical reporting, yet they fundamentally determine whether millions of people can access healthcare and education. This study provides a replicable spatial accessibility framework for national statistical offices, using Zimbabwe as a case example. Integrating WorldPop 2020 population data, government facility records, and OpenStreetMap road networks, we calculate enhanced two-step floating catchment area (E2SFCA) scores for 1,654 health facilities, 5,618 primary schools and 2,249 secondary schools in 64 districts. Population-weighted results reveal 3.45 million people (23 %) live >5 km from the nearest health facility and 2.25 million (15 %) from a primary school. “Dual service deserts” clusters lacking both health and education access are identified via Local Moran’s I. Inequality metrics show health services display the highest Gini (0.47) versus primary schools (0.31). Compliance analysis finds only 20.9 % of health facilities meet a 5 km standard despite 81.9 % satisfying 30-minute travel times. Our open–source, hexagon-grid approach provides actionable insights for targeted infrastructure investment and continuous Sustainable Development Goals monitoring, translating statistical outputs into real-world service equity planning.
LuoWQiY. An enhanced two-step floating catchment area (E2SFCA) method for measuring spatial accessibility to primary care physicians. Health Place2019; 15: 1100–1107.
MahuniKZivanomoyoJSiyakiyaP, et al.Early years of post-independence Zimbabwe. In: Zimbabwe’s Economy: Four Decades in Perspective (1980–2020), 1993. pp.19–53. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-81588-1_2.
7.
NyazemaNZ. The Zimbabwe crisis and the provision of social services: health and education. J Dev Soc2010; 26: 233–261.
8.
ChipunzaTNhamoS. Health and healthcare delivery in Zimbabwe: past and present. In: Post-Independence Development in Africa: Decolonisation and Transformation Prospects, 2023, pp.171–194. Cham: Springer International Publishing.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30541-2_10.
MahuniKZivanomoyoJSiyakiyaP, et al.Zimbabwe’s Economy. Cham: Springer International Publishing AG, 2025.
11.
Global Education Monitoring Report 2020: Inclusion and education: All means all. Paris. 2020 Jan 1; Available from: https://doi.org/10.54676/jjnk6989.
12.
UN-Habitat. The State of African Cities 2014: Re-imagining Sustainable Urban Transitions. Nairobi: UN-Habitat; 2014. Available from: https://doi.org/10.18356/828eba2e-en.
13.
SeidlerVUtaziECFinaretAB, et al.Subnational variations in the quality of household survey data in sub-saharan Africa. Nat Commun2025; 16: 3771. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-025-58776-5
14.
BurgertCRColstonJRoyT, et al.Improving the Use of GPS Data in DHS Surveys. (DHS Spatial Analysis Reports No. 8). Rockville, MD: ICF International; 2013. Available from: https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/SAR8/SAR8.pdf.
15.
McGrailMRHumphreysJS. The index of rural access: an innovative integrated approach for measuring primary care access. BMC Health Serv Res2009; 9: 124. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-9-124
16.
BissonnetteLWilsonKBellS, et al.Neighbourhoods and potential access to health care: The role of spatial and aspatial factors. Health Place2012; 18: 841–853.
17.
LuoWQiY. An enhanced two-step floating catchment area (E2SFCA) method for measuring spatial accessibility to primary care physicians. Health Place2009; 15: 1100–1107.
18.
LuoWWhippoT. Variable catchment sizes for the two-step floating catchment area (2SFCA) method. Health Place2012; 18: 789–795.
19.
McGrailMR. Spatial accessibility of primary health care utilising the two step floating catchment area method: an assessment of recent improvements. Int J Health Geogr2012; 11: 50.
20.
TatemAJ. WorldPop, open data for spatial demography. Sci Data2017; 4: 170004. DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2017.4
21.
KanugantiSSarkarAKSinghAP. Quantifying accessibility to health care using two-step floating catchment area method (2SFCA): A case study in rajasthan. Transport Res Proc2016; 17: 391–399.
22.
PenchanskyRThomasJW. The concept of access. Med Care1981; 19: 127–140.
23.
RayNEbenerS. AccessMod 3.0: computing geographic coverage and accessibility to health care services using anisotropic movement of patients. Int J Health Geogr2008; 7: 63.
24.
UNESCO, “Education 2030: Incheon declaration and framework for action for the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 4,” Paris: UNESCO, 2016. Available: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000245656.
25.
SaurmanE. Improving access: modifying penchansky and thomas’s theory of access. J Health Serv Res Policy2015; 21: 36–39.
WeissDJNelsonAVargas-RuizCA, et al.Global maps of travel time to healthcare facilities. Nat Med2020; 26: 1835–1838.
28.
WeissDJNelsonAGibsonHS, et al.A global map of travel time to cities to assess inequalities in accessibility in 2015. Nature2018; 553: 333–336.
29.
NelsonAWeissDJvan EttenJ, et al.A suite of global accessibility indicators. Sci Data2019; 6: 266(2019). DOI: 10.1038/s41597-019-0265-5
30.
OumaPOMainaJThuraniraPN, et al.Access to emergency hospital care provided by the public sector in sub-saharan Africa in 2015: a geocoded inventory and spatial analysis. Lancet Global Health2018; 6: e342–e350.
31.
HierinkFOkiroEAFlahaultA, et al.The winding road to health: A systematic scoping review on the effect of geographical accessibility to health care on infectious diseases in low- and middle-income countries. Marotta C, editor. PLoS ONE2021; 16: e0244921.
32.
MachariaPMMumoEOkiroEA. Modelling geographical accessibility to urban centres in Kenya in 2019. Fèvre E, editor. PLoS ONE2021; 16: e0251624.
33.
SalzePBanosAOppertJM, et al.Estimating spatial accessibility to facilities on the regional scale: an extended commuting-based interaction potential model. Int J Health Geogr2011; 10: 2.
34.
DelamaterPLMessinaJPShortridgeAM, et al.Measuring geographic access to health care: raster and network-based methods. Int J Health Geogr2012; 11: 15.
