Active accessibility: A review of operational measures of walking and cycling accessibility
Active travel is enthusiastically promoted in the Western world due to its clear and demonstrated individual and collective benefits. While active travel has been shown to be associated with features of the built environment such as density and land-use mix, it is also associated with walking and cy...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
University of Minnesota
2015-06-01
|
Series: | Journal of Transport and Land Use |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://www.jtlu.org/index.php/jtlu/article/view/593 |
id |
doaj-8523ad450ebe447ba8586b2f5385fd24 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-8523ad450ebe447ba8586b2f5385fd242021-08-31T04:38:08ZengUniversity of MinnesotaJournal of Transport and Land Use1938-78492015-06-019110.5198/jtlu.2015.593Active accessibility: A review of operational measures of walking and cycling accessibilityDavid S. Vale0Miguel Saraiva1Mauro Pereira2Universidade de Lisboa CIAUD, Faculty of ArchitectureUniversidade de LisboaUniversidade de LisboaActive travel is enthusiastically promoted in the Western world due to its clear and demonstrated individual and collective benefits. While active travel has been shown to be associated with features of the built environment such as density and land-use mix, it is also associated with walking and cycling accessibility—which we designate as active accessibility. However, the measurement of active accessibil- ity is not straightforward and it can represent significantly different features of the built environment. This paper presents an extensive review of published research that measures active accessibility. We classified the literature into four categories based on the methodology used: distance-based, gravity-based or potential, topological or infra- structure-based, and walkability and walk score-type measures. A fifth category was created to classify outliers consisting of distinct methodological approaches or hybrids of the four main categories. We argue that almost all of these methods have conceptual and computational limitations, and that there are inconsistencies in the use of concepts and terms. Furthermore, no sensitivity analysis was carried out on the selected parameters. We conclude by presenting some guidelines that might improve the value and clarity of active accessibility research, theory, and practice.https://www.jtlu.org/index.php/jtlu/article/view/593accessibilityactive travelwalkingcyclingnon-motorized accessibilitypedestrian accessibility |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
David S. Vale Miguel Saraiva Mauro Pereira |
spellingShingle |
David S. Vale Miguel Saraiva Mauro Pereira Active accessibility: A review of operational measures of walking and cycling accessibility Journal of Transport and Land Use accessibility active travel walking cycling non-motorized accessibility pedestrian accessibility |
author_facet |
David S. Vale Miguel Saraiva Mauro Pereira |
author_sort |
David S. Vale |
title |
Active accessibility: A review of operational measures of walking and cycling accessibility |
title_short |
Active accessibility: A review of operational measures of walking and cycling accessibility |
title_full |
Active accessibility: A review of operational measures of walking and cycling accessibility |
title_fullStr |
Active accessibility: A review of operational measures of walking and cycling accessibility |
title_full_unstemmed |
Active accessibility: A review of operational measures of walking and cycling accessibility |
title_sort |
active accessibility: a review of operational measures of walking and cycling accessibility |
publisher |
University of Minnesota |
series |
Journal of Transport and Land Use |
issn |
1938-7849 |
publishDate |
2015-06-01 |
description |
Active travel is enthusiastically promoted in the Western world due to its clear and demonstrated individual and collective benefits. While active travel has been shown to be associated with features of the built environment such as density and land-use mix, it is also associated with walking and cycling accessibility—which we designate as active accessibility. However, the measurement of active accessibil- ity is not straightforward and it can represent significantly different features of the built environment. This paper presents an extensive review of published research that measures active accessibility. We classified the literature into four categories based on the methodology used: distance-based, gravity-based or potential, topological or infra- structure-based, and walkability and walk score-type measures. A fifth category was created to classify outliers consisting of distinct methodological approaches or hybrids of the four main categories. We argue that almost all of these methods have conceptual and computational limitations, and that there are inconsistencies in the use of concepts and terms. Furthermore, no sensitivity analysis was carried out on the selected parameters. We conclude by presenting some guidelines that might improve the value and clarity of active accessibility research, theory, and practice. |
topic |
accessibility active travel walking cycling non-motorized accessibility pedestrian accessibility |
url |
https://www.jtlu.org/index.php/jtlu/article/view/593 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT davidsvale activeaccessibilityareviewofoperationalmeasuresofwalkingandcyclingaccessibility AT miguelsaraiva activeaccessibilityareviewofoperationalmeasuresofwalkingandcyclingaccessibility AT mauropereira activeaccessibilityareviewofoperationalmeasuresofwalkingandcyclingaccessibility |
_version_ |
1721184427123408896 |