perceived neighbourhood walkability (PNW); deep neural network; survey design; Brussels; sense perception
Abstract :
[en] Walkability has become a research topic of great concern for preserving public health,
especially in the era of the COVID-19 outbreak. Today more than ever, urban and transport policies, constrained by social distancing measures and travel restrictions, must be conceptualized and implemented with a particular emphasis on sustainable walkability. Most of the walkability models apply observation and subjective methods to measure walkability, whereas few studies address walkability based on sense perception. To fill this gap, we aim at investigating the perceived neighbourhood walkability (PNW) based on sense perception in a neighbourhood of Brussels. We designed a survey that integrates 22 items grouped into 5 dimensions (cleanness, visual aesthetics, landscape and nature, feeling of pressure, feeling of safety), as well as the socio-demographic attributes of the participants. Using various statistical methods, we show that socio-demographics have almost no effects on perceived neighbourhood walkability. Nonetheless, we found significant differences between groups of different educational backgrounds. Furthermore, using a binomial regression model, we found strong associations between PNW and at least one item from each grouping dimension. Finally, we show that based on a deep neural network for classification, the items have good predictive capabilities (78% of classification accuracy). These findings can help integrate sense perception into objective measurement methods of walkable environments. Additionally, policy recommendations should be targeted based on differences of perception across socio-demographic groups.
Research center :
UEE - Urban and Environmental Engineering - ULiège
Disciplines :
Engineering, computing & technology: Multidisciplinary, general & others
Author, co-author :
Saadi, Ismaïl ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département ArGEnCo > Transports et mobilité
Aganze, Roger
Moeinaddini, Mehdi
Asadi-Shekari, Zohreh
Cools, Mario ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département ArGEnCo > Transports et mobilité
Language :
English
Title :
A participatory assessment of perceived neighbourhood walkability in a small urban environment
Publication date :
2022
Journal title :
Sustainability
eISSN :
2071-1050
Publisher :
Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI), Basel, Switzerland
Volume :
14
Issue :
1
Pages :
1-16
Peer reviewed :
Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi
Funders :
F.R.S.-FNRS - Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique [BE]
Kim, E.J.; Kim, J.; Kim, H. Neighborhood walkability and active transportation: A correlation study in leisure and shopping purposes. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2178.
Smith, K.R.; Brown, B.B.; Yamada, I.; Kowaleski-Jones, L.; Zick, C.D.; Fan, J.X. Walkability and body mass index: Density, design, and new diversity measures. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2008, 35, 237–244.
Chibane, S.R.; Gwiazdzinski, L. La marche enjeu de santé publique et de qualité de vie. Importance d’une analyse spatialisée de la «marchabilité». Le cas de l’agglomération grenobloise. Géocarrefour 2015, 90, 203–216.
Lo, R.H. Walkability: What is it? J. Urban. 2009, 2, 145–166.
Shashank, A.; Schuurman, N. Unpacking walkability indices and their inherent assumptions. Health Place 2019, 55, 145–154.
Arellana, J.; Saltarín, M.; Larrañaga, A.M.; Alvarez, V.; Henao, C.A. Urban walkability considering pedestrians’ perceptions of the built environment: A 10-year review and a case study in a medium-sized city in Latin America. Transp. Rev. 2020, 40, 183–203.
Peiravian, F.; Derrible, S.; Ijaz, F. Development and application of the Pedestrian Environment Index (PEI). J. Transp. Geogr. 2014, 39, 73–84.
Yameqani, A.S.; Alesheikh, A.A. Predicting subjective measures of walkability index from objective measures using artificial neural networks. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2019, 48, 101560.
McCormack, G.R.; Friedenreich, C.; Sandalack, B.A.; Giles-Corti, B.; Doyle-Baker, P.K.; Shiell, A. The relationship between cluster-analysis derived walkability and local recreational and transportation walking among Canadian adults. Health Place 2012, 18, 1079–1087. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2012.04.014.
Manaugh, K.; Kreider, T. What is mixed use? Presenting an interaction method for measuring land use mix. J. Transp. Land Use 2013, 6, 63–72. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.v6i1.291.
Asadi-Shekari, Z.; Moeinaddini, M.; Shah, M.Z. Non-motorised Level of Service: Addressing Challenges in Pedestrian and Bicycle Level of Service. Transp. Rev. 2013, 33, 166–194. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2013.775613.
Zohreh, A.-S.; Mehdi, M.; Muhammad, Z.S. Disabled Pedestrian Level of Service Method for Evaluating and Promoting Inclusive Walking Facilities on Urban Streets. J. Transp. Eng. 2013, 139, 181–192. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000492.
Fruin, J.J. Pedestrian Planning and Design; Metropolitan Assn. of Urban Designers and Environmental Planners: New York, NY, USA, 1971.
Landis, B.W.; Vattikuti, V.R.; Ottenberg, R.M.; McLeod, D.S.; Guttenplan, M. Modeling the Roadside Walking Environment: Pedestrian Level of Service. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2001, 1773, 82–88. https://doi.org/10.3141/1773-10.
Dixon, L.B. Bicycle and Pedestrian Level-of-Service Performance Measures and Standards for Congestion Management Systems. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 1996, 1538, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198196153800101.
Jensen, S.U. Pedestrian and Bicyclist Level of Service on Roadway Segments. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2007, 2031, 43–51. https://doi.org/10.3141/2031-06.
Sarkar, S. Qualitative evaluation of comfort needs in urban walkways in major activity centers. Transp. Q. 2003, 57, 39–59.
Brown, A.L.; Khattak, A.J.; Rodriguez, D.A. Neighbourhood Types, Travel and Body Mass: A Study of New Urbanist and Suburban Neighbourhoods in the US. Urban Stud. 2008, 45, 963–988. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098007088477.
Cao, X.; Handy, S.L.; Mokhtarian, P.L. The Influences of the Built Environment and Residential Self-Selection on Pedestrian Behavior: Evidence from Austin, TX. Transportation 2006, 33, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-005-7027-2.
Ewing, R.; Cervero, R. Travel and the Built Environment: A Synthesis. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2001, 1780, 87–114. https://doi.org/10.3141/1780-10.
Kitamura, R.; Mokhtarian, P.L.; Laidet, L. A micro-analysis of land use and travel in five neighborhoods in the San Francisco Bay Area. Transportation 1997, 24, 125–158. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017959825565.
Shriver, K. Influence of Environmental Design on Pedestrian Travel Behavior in Four Austin Neighborhoods. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 1997, 1578, 64–75. https://doi.org/10.3141/1578-09.
Moeinaddini, M.; Asadi-Shekari, Z.; Sultan, Z.; Zaly Shah, M. Analyzing the relationships between the number of deaths in road accidents and the work travel mode choice at the city level. Saf. Sci. 2015, 72, 249–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2014.09.015.
Hoogendoorn, S.P.; Daamen, W. Pedestrian behavior at bottlenecks. Transp. Sci. 2005, 39, 147–159.
Kwon, Y.I.; Morichi, S.; Yai, T. Analysis of Pedestrian Behavior and Planning Guidelines with Mixed Traffic for Narrow Urban Streets. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 1998, 1636, 116–123. https://doi.org/10.3141/1636-19.
Petritsch, T.A.; Landis, B.W.; McLeod, P.S.; Huang, H.F.; Challa, S.; Skaggs, C.L.; Guttenplan, M.; Vattikuti, V. Pedestrian Level-of-Service Model for Urban Arterial Facilities with Sidewalks. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2006, 1982, 84–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198106198200111.
Asadi-Shekari, Z.; Moeinaddini, M.; Zaly Shah, M. A pedestrian level of service method for evaluating and promoting walking facilities on campus streets. Land Use Policy 2014, 38, 175–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.11.007.
Moeinaddini, M.; Asadi-Shekari, Z.; Ismail, C.R.; Zaly Shah, M. A practical method for evaluating parking area level of service. Land Use Policy 2013, 33, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.11.014.
Asadi-Shekari, Z.; Moeinaddini, M.; Aghaabbasi, M.; Cools, M.; Zaly Shah, M. Exploring effective micro-level items for evaluating inclusive walking facilities on urban streets (applied in Johor Bahru, Malaysia). Sustain. Cities Soc. 2019, 49, 101563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101563.
Aghaabbasi, M.; Moeinaddini, M.; Zaly Shah, M.; Asadi-Shekari, Z.; Arjomand Kermani, M. Evaluating the capability of walkability audit tools for assessing sidewalks. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2018, 37, 475–484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2017.12.001.
Liao, B.; van den Berg, P.E.; van Wesemael, P.J.; Arentze, T.A. Empirical analysis of walkability using data from the Netherlands. Transp. Res. Part Transp. Environ. 2020, 85, 102390.
Saelens, B.E.; Sallis, J.F.; Black, J.B.; Chen, D. Neighborhood-based differences in physical activity: An environment scale evaluation. Am. J. Public Health 2003, 93, 1552–1558.
Cerin, E.; Saelens, B.E.; Sallis, J.F.; Frank, L.D. Neighborhood Environment Walkability Scale: Validity and development of a short form. Med. Sci. Sport. Exerc. 2006, 38, 1682.
Moura, F.; Cambra, P.; Gonçalves, A.B. Measuring walkability for distinct pedestrian groups with a participatory assessment method: A case study in Lisbon. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2017, 157, 282–296.
Zhang, X.; Mu, L. The perceived importance and objective measurement of walkability in the built environment rating. Environ. Plan. B Urban Anal. City Sci. 2020, 47, 1655–1671.
Golan, Y.; Wilkinson, N.; Henderson, J.M.; Weverka, A. Gendered walkability: Building a daytime walkability index for women. J. Transp. Land Use 2019, 12, 501–526. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2019.1472.
King, K.E.; Clarke, P.J. A disadvantaged advantage in walkability: Findings from socioeconomic and geographical analysis of national built environment data in the United States. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2015, 181, 17–25.
Aghaabbasi, M.; Moeinaddini, M.; Zaly Shah, M.; Asadi-Shekari, Z. A new assessment model to evaluate the microscale sidewalk design factors at the neighbourhood level. J. Transp. Health 2017, 5, 97–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2016.08.012.
Asadi-Shekari, Z.; Moeinaddini, M.; Zaly Shah, M. Pedestrian safety index for evaluating street facilities in urban areas. Saf. Sci. 2015, 74, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2014.11.014.
Asadi-Shekari, Z.; Moeinaddini, M.; Shah, M.Z. A Bicycle Safety Index for Evaluating Urban Street Facilities. Traffic Inj. Prev. 2015, 16, 283–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2014.936010.
Khisty, C. Evaluation of pedestrian facilities: Beyond the level-of-service concept. Transp. Res. Rec. 1994, 45–50.
Lautso, K.; Murole, P. A study of pedestrian traffic in Helsinki: Methods and results. Traffic Eng. Control 1974, 15, 446–469.
Tan, D.; Wang, W.; Lu, J.; Bian, Y. Research on Methods of Assessing Pedestrian Level of Service for Sidewalk. J. Transp. Syst. Eng. Inf. Technol. 2007, 7, 74–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1570-6672(07)60041-5.