IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i2p598-d477826.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating Accessibility Benefits of Opening Gated Communities for Pedestrians and Cyclists in China: A Case Study of Shanghai

Author

Listed:
  • Senqi Yang

    (College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Wenken Tan

    (College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Longxu Yan

    (College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

Abstract

Opening gated communities (GCs) has been widely discussed for urban inclusion and revitalization. With the policies of opening GCs being promoted in China, the quantitative and comprehensive evaluation of the potential benefits is heavily needed. Taking Shanghai as an example, this study quantifies and analyzes the accessibility benefits and risks of opening GCs for pedestrians and cyclists considering two GC types, two opening levels, two travel modes, and different facilities. We found that (1) opening GCs can bring 50 m+ accessibility gains to 17% and 52% of the residents in moderate opening (MO) and complete opening (CO) scenarios, respectively. (2) Cyclists benefits more than pedestrians in all scenarios. (3) Conventional GCs have fewer benefits in MO but more in CO than newly established ones. Trips to bus stations demonstrate the largest accessibility gains. (4) The accessibility benefit of a residential building is highly determined by its closeness to the gates and relative location in the block. (5) Only 1% and 5–7% of external trips may penetrate the opened communities in MO and CO scenarios, respectively, which are far less than both the expectation and the benefits. Finally, several local design guidelines are proposed.

Suggested Citation

  • Senqi Yang & Wenken Tan & Longxu Yan, 2021. "Evaluating Accessibility Benefits of Opening Gated Communities for Pedestrians and Cyclists in China: A Case Study of Shanghai," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-14, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:2:p:598-:d:477826
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/2/598/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/2/598/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pu Miao, 2011. "Brave New City: Three Problems in Chinese Urban Public Space since the 1980s," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(2), pages 179-207, May.
    2. Zhigao Wang & Liang Li & Yinghao Li, 2015. "From super block to small block: urban form transformation and its road network impacts in Chenggong, China," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 20(5), pages 683-699, June.
    3. Shonani Makhale & Karina Landman, 2018. "Gating and conflicting rationalities: challenges in practice and theoretical implications," International Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 130-143, April.
    4. Liyun Lin & Haoying Han & Wanglin Yan & Shun Nakayama & Xianfan Shu, 2019. "Measuring Spatial Accessibility to Pick-Up Service Considering Differentiated Supply and Demand: A Case in Hangzhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-22, June.
    5. Sun, Guibo & Wallace, Dugald & Webster, Chris, 2020. "Unravelling the impact of street network structure and gated community layout in development-oriented transit design," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    6. Hongbing Wang & Dorina Pojani, 2020. "The challenge of opening up gated communities in Shanghai," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(4), pages 505-522, June.
    7. Kaihuai Liao & Rainer Wehrhahn & Werner Breitung, 2019. "Urban planners and the production of gated communities in China: A structure–agency approach," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(13), pages 2635-2653, October.
    8. Nora R. Libertun de Duren, 2007. "Gated communities as a municipal development strategy," Housing Policy Debate, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(3), pages 607-626, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zezhou Wu & Lu Yang & Kexi Xu & Jinming Zhang & Maxwell Fordjour Antwi-Afari, 2021. "Key Factors of Opening Gated Community in Urban Area: A Case Study of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-10, March.
    2. Omer Dogan & Jaewon Han & Sugie Lee, 2021. "Opening Gated Communities and Neighborhood Accessibility Benefits: The Case of Seoul, Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-15, April.
    3. Xin Li & Yongsheng Qian & Junwei Zeng & Xuting Wei & Xiaoping Guang, 2022. "Measurement of Street Network Structure in Strip Cities: A Case Study of Lanzhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-17, February.
    4. Yibang Zhang & Yukun Zou & Zhenjun Zhu & Xiucheng Guo & Xin Feng, 2022. "Evaluating Pedestrian Environment Using DeepLab Models Based on Street Walkability in Small and Medium-Sized Cities: Case Study in Gaoping, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-23, November.
    5. Xinxin Hao & Jilong Zhao & Qingtan Deng & Siyu Wang & Canyi Che & Yuxiang Chen, 2024. "The Influence of Morphological Elements of Urban Gated Communities on Road Network Connectivity: A Study of 120 Samples of the Central Districts of Jinan, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-21, September.
    6. Sonia Roitman & Nicholas Phelps, 2011. "Do Gates Negate the City? Gated Communities’ Contribution to the Urbanisation of Suburbia in Pilar, Argentina," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 48(16), pages 3487-3509, December.
    7. Ashu Kedia & Diana Kusumastuti & Alan Nicholson, 2019. "Establishing Collection and Delivery Points to Encourage the Use of Active Transport: A Case Study in New Zealand Using a Consumer-Centric Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-23, November.
    8. Yiru Jia & Nicky Morrison & Franziska Sielker, 2023. "Delivering common property in Chinese contractual communities: Law, power and practice," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 60(16), pages 3272-3293, December.
    9. Fangzhu Zhang & Calvin King Lam Chung & Zihan Yin, 2020. "Green infrastructure for China’s new urbanisation: A case study of greenway development in Maanshan," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(3), pages 508-524, February.
    10. Morten Nielsen & Jason Sumich & Bjørn Enge Bertelsen, 2021. "Enclaving: Spatial detachment as an aesthetics of imagination in an urban sub-Saharan African context," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 58(5), pages 881-902, April.
    11. Dror Kochan, 2015. "Placing the Urban Village: A Spatial Perspective on the Development Process of Urban Villages in Contemporary China," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 927-947, September.
    12. Geoffrey K Turnbull & Velma Zahirovic-Herbert, 2020. "Private government, property rights and uncertain neighbourhood externalities: Evidence from gated communities," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(4), pages 711-730, March.
    13. Dongsheng He & Guibo Sun & Ling Li & Chris Webster, 2024. "New metro and housing price and rent premiums: A natural experiment in China," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 61(7), pages 1371-1392, May.
    14. Ji, Shujuan & Wang, Xin & Lyu, Tao & Liu, Xiaojie & Wang, Yuanqing & Heinen, Eva & Sun, Zhenwei, 2022. "Understanding cycling distance according to the prediction of the XGBoost and the interpretation of SHAP: A non-linear and interaction effect analysis," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    15. Guarino Neto, Luigi & Geraldo Vidal Vieira, José, 2023. "An investigation of consumer intention to use pick-up point services for last-mile distribution in a developing country," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    16. Haoying Han & Thuy Van T. Nguyen & Noman Sahito, 2019. "Sidewalk Zoom-In: A Spatial–Temporal Negotiation and Self-Organization within a Sociable Space," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-15, November.
    17. Renata Lúcia Magalhães de Oliveira & Camila Soares Henrique Fontanele Garcia & Paulo Henrique Góes Pinto, 2020. "Accessibility to Food Retailers: The Case of Belo Horizonte, Brazil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-17, March.
    18. Tang, Yuk Ming & Chau, Ka Yin & Xu, Duo & Liu, Xiaoyun, 2021. "Consumer perceptions to support IoT based smart parcel locker logistics in China," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    19. Zhao, Jianting & Sun, Guibo & Webster, Chris, 2022. "Does China-Pakistan Economic Corridor improve connectivity in Pakistan? A protocol assessing the planned transport network infrastructure," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    20. Grazyna Chaberek, 2021. "The Possibility of Reducing Individual Motorised Traffic through the Location of Collection Points Using the Example of Gdańsk, Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-12, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:2:p:598-:d:477826. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.