![[PDF]](/pb-assets/Icons/adobe-pdf-icon-1498649896243.png){kind=icon}
Abstract
Pedestrian accessibility has been growing in importance as an urban planning objective. Assessing it with gravity-based or potential accessibility measures requires the selection of an impedance function in order to reflect the friction of distance. The choice of impedance function is crucial to pedestrian accessibility assessment due to the level of spatial data detail required and also because perceived distances differ from physical distances. Here, we measure and compare 20 gravity-based measures, varying the impedance function and associated parameters. Correlation analysis revealed a significant and strong correlation between the measures. Factor analysis extracted two groups of measures, differing mainly in their maximum cutoff travel distance, i.e. the distance at which the impedance function reaches zero. Spatial analysis revealed that all measures produce similar spatial results in terms of identifying high and low accessibility locations but different values for medium accessibility locations. Places located at between 200 and 400 m from an opportunity are especially sensitive to the impedance function used. We promote a cumulative–Gaussian approach to measure pedestrian accessibility, as it explicitly includes the travel tolerance concept and we found it to be the most robust measure in terms of data variability.
References
| Agrawal, AW, Schlossberg, M, Irvin, K (2008) How far, by which route and why? A spatial analysis of pedestrian preference. Journal of Urban Design 13, 81–98. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Anable, J, Gatersleben, B (2005) All work and no play? The role of instrumental and affective factors in work and leisure journeys by different travel modes. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 39, 163–181. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Anselin, L (1995) Local indicators of spatial association – LISA. Geographical Analysis 27, 93–115. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Apparicio, P, Abdelmajid, M, Riva, M (2008) Comparing alternative approaches to measuring the geographical accessibility of urban health services: Distance types and aggregation-error issues. International Journal of Health Geographics 7:7. Google Scholar | |
| Atash, F (1994) Redesigning suburbia for walking and transit: Emerging concepts. Journal of Urban Planning and Development 120, 48–57. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Breheny, MJ (1978) The measurement of spatial opportunity in strategic planning. Regional Studies 12, 463–479. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Burnett P and Briggs R (1975) Distance cognition and intra-urban movement. In: Proceedings of the Association of American Geographers, West Lake Meeting, Carbondale, Illinois. Google Scholar | |
| Daniels, R, Mulley, C (2013) Explaining walking distance to public transport: The dominance of public transport supply. Journal of Transport and Land Use 6, 5–20. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| El-Geneidy, A, Grimsrud, M, Wasfi, R (2014) New evidence on walking distances to transit stops: Identifying redundancies and gaps using variable service areas. Transportation 41, 193–210. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Ewing, R, Cervero, R (2010) Travel and the built environment: A meta-analysis. Journal of the American Planning Association 76, 265–294. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Fishbein, M, Ajzen, I (2010) Predicting and Changing Behavior: The Reasoned Action Approach, New York: Taylor and Francis. Google Scholar | |
| Frank, LD, Sallis, JF, Conway, TL (2006) Many pathways from land use to health: Associations between neighborhood walkability and active transportation, body mass index, and air quality. Journal of the American Planning Association 72, 75–87. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Frank, LD, Schmid, TL, Sallis, JF (2005) Linking objectively measured physical activity with objectively measured urban form: Findings from SMARTRAQ. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 28, 117–125. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
| Garcia-Palomares, JC, Gutiérrez, J, Cardozo, OD (2013) Walking accessibility to public transport: An analysis based on microdata and GIS. Environment and Planning B 40, 1087–1102. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
| Gebel, K, Bauman, AE, Sugiyama, T (2011) Mismatch between perceived and objectively assessed neighborhood walkability attributes: Prospective relationships with walking and weight gain. Health and Place 17, 519–524. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
| Getis A (1969) Residential location and the journey from work. Proceedings of the Association of American Geographers, pp.55–59. Google Scholar | |
| Golledge, RG, Stimson, RJ (1997) Spatial Behavior: A Geographic Perspective, New York: Guilford Press. Google Scholar | |
| Halás, M, Klapka, P, Kladivo, P (2014) Distance-decay functions for daily travel-to-work flows. Journal of Transport Geography 35, 107–119. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Handy, S (2005) Planning for accessibility: In theory and in practice. In: Levinson, DM, Krizek, KJ (eds) Access to Destinations, Oxford: Elsevier, pp. 131–147. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Handy, S, Cao, X, Mokhtarian, PL (2005) Correlation or causality between the built environment and travel behavior? Evidence from Northern California. Transportation Research Part D 10, 427–444. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Handy, S, Niemeier, DA (1997) Measuring accessibility: An exploration of issues and alternatives. Environment and Planning A 29, 1175–1194. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
| Hansen, WG (1959) How accessibility shapes land use. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 25, 73–76. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Hess, DB (2012) Walking to the bus: Perceived versus actual walking distance to bus stops for older adults. Transportation 39, 247–266. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Hjorthol, R (2001) Gendered aspects of time related to everyday journeys. Acta Sociologica 44, 37–49. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
| Horning J, El-Geneidy A and Krizek KJ (2008) Perceptions of walking distance to neighborhood retail and other public services. In: Eighty-seventh meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board. Google Scholar | |
| Hupkes, G (1982) The law of constant travel time and trip-rates. Futures 14, 38–46. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Iacono, M, Krizek, KJ, El-Geneidy, A (2008) Access to Destinations: How Close Is Close Enough? Estimating Accurate Distance Decay Functions for Multiple Modes and Different Purposes, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota. Google Scholar | |
| Iacono, M, Krizek, KJ, El-Geneidy, A (2010) Measuring non-motorized accessibility: Issues, alternatives, and execution. Journal of Transport Geography 18, 133–140. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| IMTT—Instituto da Mobilidade e dos Transportes Terrestres (2011) Mobilidade em Cidades Médias (Mobility in Medium-Sized Cities), Lisbon: IMTT. Google Scholar | |
| Ingram, DR (1971) The concept of accessibility: A search for a operational form. Regional Studies 5, 101–107. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Jain, J, Lyons, G (2008) The gift of travel time. Journal of Transport Geography 16, 81–89. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Johansson, B, Klaesson, J, Olsson, M (2003) Commuters’ non-linear response to time distances. Journal of Geographical Systems 5, 315–329. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Kwan, M-P (1998) Space-time and integral measures of individual accessibility: A comparative analysis using a point-based framework. Geographical Analysis 30, 191–216. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Kwan, M-P (2012) The uncertain geographic context problem. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 102, 958–968. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Larsen, J, El-Geneidy, A, Yasmin, F (2010) Beyond the quarter mile: Re-examining travel distances by active transportation. Canadian Journal of Urban Research: Canadian Planning and Policy (supplement) 19, 70–88. Google Scholar | |
| Lee, C, Moudon, AV (2004) Physical activity and environment research in the health field: Implications for urban and transportation planning practice and research. Journal of Planning Literature 19, 147–181. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
| Le Vine, S, Lee-Gosselin, M, Sivakumar, A (2013) A new concept of accessibility to personal activities: Development of theory and application to an empirical study of mobility resource holdings. Journal of Transport Geography 31, 1–10. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Levinson, DM, Gillen, D (2005) The machine for access. In: Levinson, DM, Krizek, KJ (eds) Access to Destinations, Oxford: Elsevier, pp. 1–10. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| MacEachren, AM (1980) Travel time as the basis of cognitive distance. Professional Geographer 32, 30–36. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Macintyre, S, MacDonald, L, Ellaway, A (2008) Lack of agreement between measured and self-reported distance from public green parks in Glasgow, Scotland. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 5, 1–8. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
| McNeil, N (2011) Bikeability and the 20-min neighborhood: How infrastructure and destinations influence bicycle accessibility. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2247, 53–63. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
| Manaugh, K, El-Geneidy, A (2012) What makes travel ‘local’: Defining and understanding local travel behaviour. Journal of Transport and Land Use 5, 15–27. Google Scholar | |
| Marchetti, C (1994) Anthropological invariants in travel behavior. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 47, 75–88. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Martínez, LM, Viegas, JM (2013) A new approach to modelling distance-decay functions for accessibility assessment in transport studies. Journal of Transport Geography 26, 87–96. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Metz, D (2004) Travel time – Variable or constant? Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 38, 333–344. Google Scholar | |
| Milakis, D, Cervero, R, Van Wee, B (2015) Do people consider an acceptable travel time? Evidence from Berkeley, CA. Journal of Transport Geography 44, 76–86. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Miller, HJ (2005) Place-based versus people-based accessibility. In: Levinson, DM, Krizek, KJ (eds) Access to Destinations, Oxford: Elsevier, pp. 63–89. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Millward, H, Spinney, J, Scott, D (2013) Active-transport walking behavior: Destinations, durations, distances. Journal of Transport Geography 28, 101–110. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Moudon, AV, Lee, C (2003) Walking and bicycling: An evaluation of environmental audit instruments. American Journal of Health Promotion 18, 21–37. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
| Neutens, T, Schwanen, T, Witlox, F (2010) Equity of urban service delivery: A comparison of different accessibility measures. Environment and Planning A 42, 1613–1635. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
| Owen, N, Humpel, N, Leslie, E (2004) Understanding environmental influences on walking: Review and research agenda. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 27, 67–76. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
| Páez, A, Scott, DM (2004) Spatial statistics for urban analysis: A review of techniques with examples. Geojournal 61, 53–67. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Páez, A, Scott, DM, Morency, C (2012) Measuring accessibility: Positive and normative implementations of various accessibility indicators. Journal of Transport Geography 25, 141–153. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Páez, A, Whalen, KE (2010) Enjoyment of commute: A comparison of different transportation modes. Transportation Research Part A 44, 537–549. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Rahul, TM, Verma, A (2014) A study of acceptable trip distances using walking and cycling in Bangalore. Journal of Transport Geography 38, 106–113. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Reyer, M, Fina, S, Siedentop, S (2014) Walkability is only part of the story: Walking for transportation in Stuttgart, Germany. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 11, 5849–5865. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
| Tabachnick, BG, Fidell, LS (2007) Using Multivariate Statistics, 5th ed. Boston: Pearson International. Google Scholar | |
| Talen, E, Anselin, L (1998) Assessing spatial equity: An evaluation of measures of accessibility to public playgrounds. Environment and Planning A 30, 595–613. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
| Thorsen, I, Obøe, J, Naevdal, G (1999) A network approach to commuting. Journal of Regional Science 39, 73–101. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Tobler, WR (1970) A computer movie simulating urban growth in the Detroit region. Economic Geography 46, 234–240. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Vale, DS (2013) Does commuting time tolerance impede sustainable urban mobility? Analysing the impacts on commuting behaviour as a result of workplace relocation to a mixed-use centre in Lisbon. Journal of Transport Geography 32, 38–48. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Vale, DS, Saraiva, M, Pereira, M (2016) Active accessibility: A review of operational measures of walking and cycling accessibility. Journal of Transport and Land Use 9, 1–27. Google Scholar | |
| Van Eggermond M and Erath M (2016) Pedestrian and transit accessibility on a micro-level: Results & Challenges. Journal of Transport and Land Use 9: 1–16. Google Scholar | |
| Van Ommeren, J, Rietveld, P, Nijkamp, P (1997) Commuting: In search of jobs and residences. Journal of Urban Economics 42, 402–421. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Van Wee, B (2011) Evaluating the impact of land use on travel behaviour: The environment versus accessibility. Journal of Transport Geography 19, 1530–1533. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Van Wee, B, Hagoort, M, Annema, JA (2001) Accessibility measures with competition. Journal of Transport Geography 9, 199–208. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Van Wee, B, Handy, S (2016) Key research themes on urban space, scale, and sustainable urban mobility. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation 10, 18–24. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Witlox, F (2007) Evaluating the reliability of reported distance data in urban travel behaviour analysis. Journal of Transport Geography 15, 172–183. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
| Yang, Y, Diez-Roux, AV (2012) Walking distance by trip purpose and population subgroups. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 43, 11–19. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
| Zahavi Y (1979) The ‘UMOT’ project. Report prepared for the US Department of Transport, Washington, DC and for the Ministry of Transport, Federal Republic of Germany, Bonn. Google Scholar |
