Evaluation of walkability on Gulangyu based on residents' perceptions

• Autorzy: Shi Yi , Harumain Yong Adilah Shamsul , Mohidin Hazrina Haja Bava

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.20858/tp.2023.18.1.17

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

As a heritage site, Gulangyu has a unique character and importance in its community function. Most heritage sites in China are car-free destinations where walking is the primary mode of transport and a medium of interaction in residents' daily lives. This study investigates residents' perceived evaluations of the landscape environment and residents' walking behaviour using descriptive statistics, correlation and logistic regression analysis to derive relationship between landscape and walking behaviour. The aim is to derive the landscape factors that influence walking behaviour and improve the basis for enhancing the walkability of Gulangyu. The results show that function is most strongly correlated with purposeful walking. And the recreational walkers are influenced by a combination of function, safety, comfort, aesthetics and pleasantness.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

pedestrian perception; landscape environment; heritage area

PL

percepcja pieszych

• Wydawca: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Śląskiej
• Czasopismo: Transport Problems
• Rocznik: 2023
• Tom: T. 18, z. 1
• Strony: 203--216
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 35 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Shi Yi

• University of Malaya, Faculty of Built Environment; Jln Profesor Diraja Ungku Aziz, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4919-1357

autor

Harumain Yong Adilah Shamsul

• University of Malaya, Faculty of Built Environment; Jln Profesor Diraja Ungku Aziz, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3980-532X

autor

Mohidin Hazrina Haja Bava

• University of Malaya, Faculty of Built Environment; Jln Profesor Diraja Ungku Aziz, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1439-1896

Bibliografia

• 1. Handy, S.L. Urban form and pedestrian choices: study of Austin neighborhoods. Transportation Research Record. 1996. Vol. 1552(1). P. 135-144.
• 2. Forsyth, A. & Southworth, M. Cities afoot – Pedestrians, walkability and urban design. 2008. Taylor & Francis.
• 3. Li, Y. & et al. Research on walking environment satisfaction of residents based on ordered probit model – a case study of Gulangyu. Chinese Landscape Architecture. 2020. Vol. 36(11). P. 90-94.
• 4. Li, Y. & Yang, L. & Gao, X.H. Preference and spatial improvement strategies of street space of Gulangyu Island. Planners. 2019. Vol. 35(14). P. 24-31.
• 5. Li, Y. Gulangsu Landscape Architecture Heritage Value Assessment And protection and utilisation research. 2019. South China Agricultural University.
• 6. Gehl, J. & Gemzøe, L. Winning back public space. In: Sustainable Transport: Planning for Walking and Cycling in Urban Environments. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing. 2003.
• 7. Erna, W. & Amin, S.L. Convenience component of walkability in Malang City case study the street corridors around city squares. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2016. Vol. 227. P. 587-592.
• 8. Ariffin, R.N.R. & Zahari, R.K. Perceptions of the urban walking environments. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2013. Vol. 105. P. 589-597.
• 9. Clark, A.F. & Scott, D.M. & Yiannakoulias, N. Examining the relationship between active travel, weather, and the built environment: a multilevel approach using a GPS-enhanced dataset. Transportation. 2014. Vol. 41(2). P. 325-338.
• 10.Arellana, J. & et al. Urban walkability considering pedestrians’ perceptions of the built environment: a 10-year review and a case study in a medium-sized city in Latin America. Transport Reviews. 2020. Vol. 40(2). P. 183-203.
• 11.Koh, P.P. & Wong, Y.D. Comparing pedestrians’ needs and behaviours in different land use environments. Journal of Transport Geography. 2013. Vol. 26. P. 43-50.
• 12.Handy, S.L. & Cao, X. & Mokhtarian, P.L. Self-selection in the relationship between the built environment and walking: Empirical evidence from Northern California. Journal of the American Planning Association. 2006. Vol. 72(1). P. 55-74.
• 13.Peng, J. & Zhou, S.Y. Environmental perception and awareness building of Beijing citizens -a case study of Nansha River. Human Geography. 2001. Vol. 3. P. 21-25.
• 14.Wang, W.J. & et al. Exploring determinants of pedestrians’ satisfaction with sidewalk environments: Case study in Korea. Journal of Urban Planning and Development. 2012. Vol. 138(2). P. 166-172.
• 15.Duncan, M.J. & Spence, J.C. & Mummery, W.K. Perceived environment and physical activity: a meta-analysis of selected environmental characteristics. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. 2005. Vol. 2(1). P. 1-9.
• 16.Park, S. & Deakin, E. & Lee, J.S. Perception-based walkability index to test impact of microlevel walkability on sustainable mode choice decisions. Transportation Research Record. 2014. Vol. 2464(1). P. 126-134.
• 17.Cao, X.Y. & Handy, S.L. & Mokhtarian, P.L. The influences of the built environment and residential self-selection on pedestrian behavior: evidence from Austin, TX. Transportation. 2006. Vol. 33(1). P. 1-20.
• 18.Van Dyck, D. & et al. Perceived neighborhood environmental attributes associated with adults’ transport-related walking and cycling: Findings from the USA, Australia and Belgium. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. 2012. Vol. 9(1). P. 1-14.
• 19.Herbolsheimer, F. & et al. Perceptions of the neighborhood built environment for walking behavior in older adults living in close proximity. Journal of applied gerontology. 2020. Vol. 40(12).
• 20.Ewing, R. Handy, S. Measuring the unmeasurable: Urban design qualities related to walkability. Journal of Urban design. 2009. Vol. 14(1). P. 65-84.
• 21.Ma, L. &. Cao, J. How perceptions mediate the effects of the built environment on travel behavior? Transportation. 2019. Vol. 46(1). P. 175-197.
• 22.Rhodes, R.E. & Brown, S.G.& McIntyre, C.A. Integrating the perceived neighborhood environment and the theory of planned behavior when predicting walking in a Canadian adult sample. American Journal of Health Promotion. 2006. Vol. 21(2). P. 110-118.
• 23.Ding, D. & Gebel, K. Built environment, physical activity, and obesity: what have we learned from reviewing the literature? Health & place. 2012. Vol. 18(1). P. 100-105.
• 24.Ozbil, A. & et al. Comparative associations of street network design, streetscape attributes and land use characteristics on pedestrian flows in peripheral neighbourhoods. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2019. Vol. 16(10). No. 1846.
• 25.Giles-Corti, B. & Donovan, R.J. Socioeconomic status differences in recreational physical activity levels and real and perceived access to a supportive physical environment. Preventive medicine. 2002. Vol. 35(6). P. 601-611.
• 26.Alfonzo, M.A. To walk or not to walk? The hierarchy of walking needs. Environment and Behavior. 2005. Vol. 37(6). P. 808-836.
• 27.Pikora, T.J. & et al. Neighborhood environmental factors correlated with walking near home: Using SPACES. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 2006. Vol. 38(4). P. 708-714.
• 28.Southworth, M. Designing the walkable city. Journal of Urban Planning and Development. 2005. Vol. 131(4). P. 246-257.
• 29.Cain, K.L. & et al. Contribution of streetscape audits to explanation of physical activity in four age groups based on the Microscale Audit of Pedestrian Streetscapes (MAPS). Social Science & Medicine. 2014. Vol. 116. P. 82-92.
• 30.Carnegie, M., et al. Perceptions of the physical environment, stage of change for physical activity, and walking among Australian adults. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 2002. Vol. 73(2). P. 146-155.
• 31.Ball, K. & et al. Perceived environmental aesthetics and convenience and company are associated with walking for exercise among Australian adults. Preventive medicine. 2001. Vol. 33(5). P. 434- 440.
• 32.Yang, Y.Y. & et al. Association between street greenery and walking behavior in older adults in Hong Kong. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2019. Vol. 51. No. 101747.
• 33.Zang, P. & et al. Eye-level street greenery and walking behaviors of older adults. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020. Vol. 17. No. 6130. P. 1-9.
• 34.Middleton, J. The socialities of everyday urban walking and the ‘right to the city’. Urban Studies. 2018. Vol. 55(2). P. 296-315.
• 35.Zakaria, J. & Ujang, N. Comfort of walking in the city center of Kuala Lumpur. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2015. Vol. 170. P. 642-652.