IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i3p1874-d1040279.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating the Impact of COVID-19 on the Behaviour of Pedestrians

Author

Listed:
  • Deborah Paul

    (Department of Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia)

  • Sara Moridpour

    (Department of Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia)

  • Le Andrew Nguyen

    (Department of Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia)

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has considerably impacted pedestrians’ perceived comfort in a public setting. The virus’s transmissibility and social distancing restrictions have resulted in a shift in pedestrians’ perceived comfort, with more pedestrians becoming more conscious of other pedestrians and the distance between pedestrians. The changes in pedestrians’ perception have resulted in the Pedestrian Level Of Service (PLOS) models becoming outdated. The models may not accurately portray the actual status of pedestrians’ Level Of Service (LOS) according to the pedestrian needs during a pandemic, which generally lasts for a couple of years. These pandemics will happen in the future; hence, their impact on pedestrian comfort on sidewalks is worth considering. This research aims to analyse the effect of COVID-19 on PLOS by compiling data using a face-to-face questionnaire survey in the Melbourne Central Business District (CBD). From the 445 completed surveys, 72% of respondents extensively considered social distancing due to COVID-19 when commuting in the CBD, and 49% preferred a 1–1.5 m distance between pedestrians. In conjunction with an in-depth analysis of the data, an ordinal regression model has been used to analyse the factors that influence the perceived comfort of the pedestrians and estimate the PLOS. The model results show that pedestrian density, COVID-19 social distancing, continuous footpath, and pedestrian flow in opposite directions on the sidewalk greatly impacted the walking comfort of pedestrians during the pandemic.

Suggested Citation

  • Deborah Paul & Sara Moridpour & Le Andrew Nguyen, 2023. "Evaluating the Impact of COVID-19 on the Behaviour of Pedestrians," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-23, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:3:p:1874-:d:1040279
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/3/1874/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/3/1874/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Su, Shiliang & Zhou, Hao & Xu, Mengya & Ru, Hu & Wang, Wen & Weng, Min, 2019. "Auditing street walkability and associated social inequalities for planning implications," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 62-76.
    2. Shima Hamidi & Somayeh Moazzeni, 2019. "Examining the Relationship between Urban Design Qualities and Walking Behavior: Empirical Evidence from Dallas, TX," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-14, May.
    3. William Lam & Jodie Lee & C. Cheung, 2002. "A study of the bi-directional pedestrian flow characteristics at Hong Kong signalized crosswalk facilities," Transportation, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 169-192, May.
    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. Singleton, Patrick A. & Park, Keunhyun & Lee, Doo Hong, 2021. "Varying influences of the built environment on daily and hourly pedestrian crossing volumes at signalized intersections estimated from traffic signal controller event data," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    2. Seungwoo Han, 2022. "Spatial stratification and socio-spatial inequalities: the case of Seoul and Busan in South Korea," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-14, December.
    3. Regine Gerike & Caroline Koszowski & Bettina Schröter & Ralph Buehler & Paul Schepers & Johannes Weber & Rico Wittwer & Peter Jones, 2021. "Built Environment Determinants of Pedestrian Activities and Their Consideration in Urban Street Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-21, August.
    4. Sun, Lishan & Yuan, Guang & Yao, Liya & Cui, Li & Kong, Dewen, 2021. "Study on strategies for alighting and boarding in subway stations," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 583(C).
    5. Mohammad Hamed Abdi & Ali Soltani, 2022. "Which Fabric/Scale Is Better for Transit-Oriented Urban Design: Case Studies in a Developing Country," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-22, June.
    6. Tian Gao & Rui Song & Ling Zhu & Ling Qiu, 2019. "What Characteristics of Urban Green Spaces and Recreational Activities Do Self-Reported Stressed Individuals Like? A Case Study of Baoji, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-16, April.
    7. Hu, Yanghui & Zhang, Jun & Song, Weiguo, 2019. "Experimental study on the movement strategies of individuals in multidirectional flows," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 534(C).
    8. Soteropoulos, Aggelos & Mitteregger, Mathias & Berger, Martin & Zwirchmayr, Jakob, 2020. "Automated drivability: Toward an assessment of the spatial deployment of level 4 automated vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 64-84.
    9. Flötteröd, Gunnar & Lämmel, Gregor, 2015. "Bidirectional pedestrian fundamental diagram," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 194-212.
    10. Marija Nikolić & Michel Bierlaire & Matthieu de Lapparent & Riccardo Scarinci, 2019. "Multiclass Speed-Density Relationship for Pedestrian Traffic," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 642-664, May.
    11. Pereira, Mauro F. & Vale, David S. & Santana, Paula, 2023. "Is walkability equitably distributed across socio-economic groups? – A spatial analysis for Lisbon metropolitan area," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    12. Lili Lu, A. & Gang Ren, B. & Wei Wang, C. & Ching-Yao Chan, D., 2015. "Application of SFCA pedestrian simulation model to the signalized crosswalk width design," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 76-89.
    13. Zhang, Qi & Han, Baoming, 2011. "Simulation model of pedestrian interactive behavior," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 390(4), pages 636-646.
    14. Serge P. Hoogendoorn & W. Daamen, 2005. "Pedestrian Behavior at Bottlenecks," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(2), pages 147-159, May.
    15. Zhehao Zhang & Thomas Fisher & Haiming Wang, 2023. "Walk Score, Environmental Quality and Walking in a Campus Setting," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-19, March.
    16. Zhang, J. & Seyfried, A., 2014. "Comparison of intersecting pedestrian flows based on experiments," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 405(C), pages 316-325.
    17. Shi, Yuji & Blainey, Simon & Sun, Chao & Jing, Peng, 2020. "A literature review on accessibility using bibliometric analysis techniques," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    18. Hänseler, Flurin S. & Bierlaire, Michel & Farooq, Bilal & Mühlematter, Thomas, 2014. "A macroscopic loading model for time-varying pedestrian flows in public walking areas," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 60-80.
    19. Li, Zekun & Han, Zixuan & Xin, Jing & Luo, Xin & Su, Shiliang & Weng, Min, 2019. "Transit oriented development among metro station areas in Shanghai, China: Variations, typology, optimization and implications for land use planning," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 269-282.
    20. Lee, Jodie Y.S. & Lam, William H.K., 2008. "Simulating pedestrian movements at signalized crosswalks in Hong Kong," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 42(10), pages 1314-1325, December.

    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:15:y:2023:i:3:p:1874-:d:1040279. 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.