IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/93h82_v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Methods and Measures for Analyzing Complex Street Networks and Urban Form

Author

Listed:
  • Boeing, Geoff

    (Northeastern University)

Abstract

Complex systems have been widely studied by social and natural scientists in terms of their dynamics and their structure. Scholars of cities and urban planning have incorporated complexity theories from qualitative and quantitative perspectives. From a structural standpoint, the urban form may be characterized by the morphological complexity of its circulation networks – particularly their density, resilience, centrality, and connectedness. This dissertation unpacks theories of nonlinearity and complex systems, then develops a framework for assessing the complexity of urban form and street networks. It introduces a new tool, OSMnx, to collect street network and other urban form data for anywhere in the world, then analyze and visualize them. Finally, it presents a large empirical study of 27,000 street networks, examining their metric and topological complexity relevant to urban design, transportation research, and the human experience of the built environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Boeing, Geoff, 2017. "Methods and Measures for Analyzing Complex Street Networks and Urban Form," SocArXiv 93h82_v1, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:93h82_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/93h82_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/59820574b83f69022a07fe1f/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/93h82_v1?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Krasny, Marianne E. & Russ, Alex & Tidball, Keith G. & Elmqvist, Thomas, 2014. "Civic ecology practices: Participatory approaches to generating and measuring ecosystem services in cities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 177-186.
    2. Marlon Boarnet, 2011. "A Broader Context for Land Use and Travel Behavior, and a Research Agenda," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 77(3), pages 197-213.
    3. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    4. J. Buhl & J. Gautrais & N. Reeves & R. V. Solé & S. Valverde & P. Kuntz & G. Theraulaz, 2006. "Topological patterns in street networks of self-organized urban settlements," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 49(4), pages 513-522, February.
    5. Glaeser, Edward L. & Kahn, Matthew E. & Rappaport, Jordan, 2008. "Why do the poor live in cities The role of public transportation," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 1-24, January.
    6. Timothy M. Baynes, 2009. "Complexity in Urban Development and Management," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 13(2), pages 214-227, April.
    7. Bhanu Yerra & David Levinson, 2005. "The emergence of hierarchy in transportation networks," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 39(3), pages 541-553, September.
    8. Matthew Carmona, 2015. "Re-theorising contemporary public space: a new narrative and a new normative," Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(4), pages 373-405, December.
    9. James M. Drinan, 2015. "Response to Talen et al.: Igniting the Dialogue: What Makes a Neighborhood Great?," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 81(2), pages 141-142, April.
    10. Handy, Susan & Cao, Xinyu & Mokhtarian, Patricia L., 2005. "Correlation or causality between the built environment and travel behavior? Evidence from Northern California," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt5b76c5kg, University of California Transportation Center.
    11. Camaren Peter & Mark Swilling, 2014. "Linking Complexity and Sustainability Theories: Implications for Modeling Sustainability Transitions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-29, March.
    12. Eric Dumbaugh & Wenhao Li, 2011. "Designing for the Safety of Pedestrians, Cyclists, and Motorists in Urban Environments," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 77(1), pages 69-88.
    13. Philip Speranza, 2016. "Using parametric methods to understand place in urban design courses," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(5), pages 661-689, September.
    14. M. T. Gastner & M. E.J. Newman, 2006. "The spatial structure of networks," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 49(2), pages 247-252, January.
    15. Boeing, Geoff, 2017. "OSMnx: A Python package to work with graph-theoretic OpenStreetMap street networks," SocArXiv fe4ra_v1, Center for Open Science.
    16. Boeing, Geoff, 2017. "OSMnx: A Python package to work with graph-theoretic OpenStreetMap street networks," SocArXiv fe4ra, Center for Open Science.
    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. Boeing, Geoff, 2017. "Methods and Measures for Analyzing Complex Street Networks and Urban Form," SocArXiv 93h82, Center for Open Science.
    2. Rui Ding & Norsidah Ujang & Hussain Bin Hamid & Mohd Shahrudin Abd Manan & Rong Li & Safwan Subhi Mousa Albadareen & Ashkan Nochian & Jianjun Wu, 2019. "Application of Complex Networks Theory in Urban Traffic Network Researches," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 1281-1317, December.
    3. Emine Coruh & Faruk Urak & Abdulbaki Bilgic & Steven T. Yen, 2022. "The role of household demographic factors in shaping transportation spending in Turkey," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 3485-3517, March.
    4. Ding, Yu & Lu, Huapu, 2016. "Activity participation as a mediating variable to analyze the effect of land use on travel behavior: A structural equation modeling approach," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 23-28.
    5. van de Coevering, Paul & Maat, Kees & van Wee, Bert, 2018. "Residential self-selection, reverse causality and residential dissonance. A latent class transition model of interactions between the built environment, travel attitudes and travel behavior," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 466-479.
    6. Groote, Jesper De & Ommeren, Jos Van & Koster, Hans R.A., 2016. "Car ownership and residential parking subsidies: Evidence from Amsterdam," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 25-37.
    7. Nicolas, Jean-Pierre & Pelé, Nicolas, 2017. "Measuring trends in household expenditures for daily mobility. The case in Lyon, France, between 1995 and 2015," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 82-92.
    8. Boeing, Geoff, 2019. "Street Network Models and Measures for Every U.S. City, County, Urbanized Area, Census Tract, and Zillow-Defined Neighborhood," SocArXiv 7fxjz_v1, Center for Open Science.
    9. Geoff Boeing, 2020. "Planarity and street network representation in urban form analysis," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 47(5), pages 855-869, June.
    10. Aston, Laura & Currie, Graham & Kamruzzaman, Md. & Delbosc, Alexa & Teller, David, 2020. "Study design impacts on built environment and transit use research," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    11. Rahman, Mashrur & Sciara, Gian-Claudia, 2022. "Travel attitudes, the built environment and travel behavior relationships: Causal insights from social psychology theories," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 44-54.
    12. Ngoc Hong Nguyen & Khaled Alawadi & Sara Al Hinai, 2023. "A Grid Is Not a Tree: Toward a Reconciliation of Alexander’s and Martin’s Views of City Form," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(3), pages 172-184.
    13. Huang, Xiaoyan & (Jason) Cao, Xinyu & Yin, Jiangbin & Cao, Xiaoshu, 2019. "Can metro transit reduce driving? Evidence from Xi'an, China," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 350-359.
    14. Mengying Cui & David Levinson, 2015. "Accessibility and the Ring of Unreliability," Working Papers 000133, University of Minnesota: Nexus Research Group.
    15. Jiangping Zhou & Yin Wang & Jiangyue Wu, 2018. "Mode Choice of Commuter Students in a College Town: An Exploratory Study from the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-18, September.
    16. Ding, Chuan & Wang, Donggen & Liu, Chao & Zhang, Yi & Yang, Jiawen, 2017. "Exploring the influence of built environment on travel mode choice considering the mediating effects of car ownership and travel distance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 65-80.
    17. Liu, Yan & Wang, Siqin & Xie, Bin, 2019. "Evaluating the effects of public transport fare policy change together with built and non-built environment features on ridership: The case in South East Queensland, Australia," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 78-89.
    18. Nicolas, Jean-Pierre & Pelé, Nicolas, 2018. "Reprint of Measuring trends in household expenditures for daily mobility. The case in Lyon, France, between 1995 and 2015," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 19-29.
    19. Lin, Tao & Wang, Donggen & Guan, Xiaodong, 2017. "The built environment, travel attitude, and travel behavior: Residential self-selection or residential determination?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 111-122.
    20. Erick Guerra & Shengxiao Li & Ariadna Reyes, 2022. "How do low-income commuters get to work in US and Mexican cities? A comparative empirical assessment," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 59(1), pages 75-96, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:osf:socarx:93h82_v1. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    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.