IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirb/v48y2021i8p2418-2435.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Walkability scoring: Why and how does a three-dimensional pedestrian network matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Jianting Zhao
  • Guibo Sun
  • Chris Webster

Abstract

Previous walkability scoring systems are all based on road networks, even though roads are not designed for pedestrians. To calculate an accurate walking score, we need pedestrian network data. This is especially the case in cities such as Hong Kong, where pedestrians are separated from vehicles by footbridges, underpasses or surface sidewalks. In this paper, we investigate why and how a three-dimensional pedestrian network makes a difference in walkability scoring, using Hong Kong as a case city. We developed a walkability scoring system based on networks and amenities, using multiple open-source programming platforms and languages. Separately, we calculated walkability scores (on a scale of 0–100) using the three-dimensional pedestrian network and road network of the city, comparing the differences between the two. A GIS raster analysis was conducted to extract walkability scoring differences from the two walkability surfaces, followed by a univariate linear model to examine how the scores were underestimated if without using the three-dimensional pedestrian network. Results show that streets were considered twice as walkable if rated by pedestrian network rather than road network. Walkability scores were 92% higher on average. The fitted model shows that the mean score underestimations were significantly different for different three-dimensional network elements. Surface sidewalks had an average underestimation of 33.75 (p 

Suggested Citation

  • Jianting Zhao & Guibo Sun & Chris Webster, 2021. "Walkability scoring: Why and how does a three-dimensional pedestrian network matter?," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 48(8), pages 2418-2435, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirb:v:48:y:2021:i:8:p:2418-2435
    DOI: 10.1177/2399808320977871
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2399808320977871
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2399808320977871?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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:sae:envirb:v:48:y:2021:i:8:p:2418-2435. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.