IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/retrec/v69y2018icp501-511.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A new approach to accessibility – Examining perceived accessibility in contrast to objectively measured accessibility in daily travel

Author

Listed:
  • Lättman, Katrin
  • Olsson, Lars E.
  • Friman, Margareta

Abstract

Accessibility has conventionally been measured and evaluated ignoring user perceptions in favor of focusing on travel time and distance to a number of pre-determined destinations. Acknowledging this gap, we recently developed a scale for perceived accessibility PAC (Lättman, Friman, & Olsson 2016b) aimed at capturing the individual perspective of accessibility with a certain travel mode. In this paper, we 1) further develop the PAC measure of perceived accessibility in order to capture how easy it is to live a satisfactory life with the help of the transport system, 2) compare levels of perceived accessibility between residential areas and main travel modes, and 3) compare residents’ perceived accessibility to the objective accessibility level for the same residential area. Data from 2711 residents of Malmö, Sweden show that perceived accessibility is consistently different from objective accessibility across 13 residential areas, with minor differences in levels of perceived accessibility between areas. Surprisingly, bicycle users rate their accessibility significantly higher than those who mainly use the car or public transport for daily travel, contrary to objective accessibility assumptions. These differences point at the importance of including perceived accessibility as a complementary tool when planning for and evaluating transport systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Lättman, Katrin & Olsson, Lars E. & Friman, Margareta, 2018. "A new approach to accessibility – Examining perceived accessibility in contrast to objectively measured accessibility in daily travel," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 501-511.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:retrec:v:69:y:2018:i:c:p:501-511
    DOI: 10.1016/j.retrec.2018.06.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0739885917302445
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.retrec.2018.06.002?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. van Wee, Bert, 2016. "Accessible accessibility research challenges," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 9-16.
    2. Karen Lucas & Bert Wee & Kees Maat, 2016. "A method to evaluate equitable accessibility: combining ethical theories and accessibility-based approaches," Transportation, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 473-490, May.
    3. Van Exel, N.J.A. & Rietveld, P., 2009. "Could you also have made this trip by another mode? An investigation of perceived travel possibilities of car and train travellers on the main travel corridors to the city of Amsterdam, The Netherland," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 374-385, May.
    4. Wong, Sandy, 2018. "The limitations of using activity space measurements for representing the mobilities of individuals with visual impairment: A mixed methods case study in the San Francisco Bay Area," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 300-308.
    5. Shay, Elizabeth & Combs, Tabitha S. & Findley, Daniel & Kolosna, Carl & Madeley, Michelle & Salvesen, David, 2016. "Identifying transportation disadvantage: Mixed-methods analysis combining GIS mapping with qualitative data," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 129-138.
    6. Lättman, Katrin & Olsson, Lars E. & Friman, Margareta, 2016. "Development and test of the Perceived Accessibility Scale (PAC) in public transport," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 257-263.
    7. Katrin Lättman & Margareta Friman & Lars E. Olsson, 2016. "Perceived Accessibility of Public Transport as a Potential Indicator of Social Inclusion," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(3), pages 36-45.
    8. Jonas De Vos & Tim Schwanen & Veronique Van Acker & Frank Witlox, 2013. "Travel and Subjective Well-Being: A Focus on Findings, Methods and Future Research Needs," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(4), pages 421-442, July.
    9. Dong, Xiaojing & Ben-Akiva, Moshe E. & Bowman, John L. & Walker, Joan L., 2006. "Moving from trip-based to activity-based measures of accessibility," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 163-180, February.
    10. S Hanson & M Schwab, 1987. "Accessibility and Intraurban Travel," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 19(6), pages 735-748, June.
    11. Schwanen, Tim & Lucas, Karen & Akyelken, Nihan & Cisternas Solsona, Diego & Carrasco, Juan-Antonio & Neutens, Tijs, 2015. "Rethinking the links between social exclusion and transport disadvantage through the lens of social capital," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 123-135.
    12. Pyrialakou, V. Dimitra & Gkritza, Konstantina & Fricker, Jon D., 2016. "Accessibility, mobility, and realized travel behavior: Assessing transport disadvantage from a policy perspective," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 252-269.
    13. Church, A. & Frost, M. & Sullivan, K., 2000. "Transport and social exclusion in London," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 195-205, July.
    14. Sedigheh Lotfi & M. Koohsari, 2009. "Analyzing Accessibility Dimension of Urban Quality of Life: Where Urban Designers Face Duality Between Subjective and Objective Reading of Place," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 94(3), pages 417-435, December.
    15. Lars Olsson & Tommy Gärling & Dick Ettema & Margareta Friman & Satoshi Fujii, 2013. "Happiness and Satisfaction with Work Commute," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 111(1), pages 255-263, March.
    16. Stanley, Janet & Stanley, John & Vella-Brodrick, Dianne & Currie, Graham, 2010. "The place of transport in facilitating social inclusion via the mediating influence of social capital," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 280-286.
    17. S L Handy & D A Niemeier, 1997. "Measuring Accessibility: An Exploration of Issues and Alternatives," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 29(7), pages 1175-1194, July.
    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. Lättman, Katrin & Olsson, Lars E. & Friman, Margareta, 2016. "Development and test of the Perceived Accessibility Scale (PAC) in public transport," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 257-263.
    2. Pot, Felix Johan & van Wee, Bert & Tillema, Taede, 2021. "Perceived accessibility: What it is and why it differs from calculated accessibility measures based on spatial data," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    3. Hamidi, Zahra & Camporeale, Rosalia & Caggiani, Leonardo, 2019. "Inequalities in access to bike-and-ride opportunities: Findings for the city of Malmö," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 673-688.
    4. Ben-Elia, Eran & Benenson, Itzhak, 2019. "A spatially-explicit method for analyzing the equity of transit commuters' accessibility," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 31-42.
    5. Kim, Junghwa & Schmöcker, Jan-Dirk & Nakamura, Toshiyuki & Uno, Nobuhiro & Iwamoto, Takenori, 2020. "Integrated impacts of public transport travel and travel satisfaction on quality of life of older people," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 15-27.
    6. Rui Xiao & Guofeng Wang & Meng Wang, 2018. "Transportation Disadvantage and Neighborhood Sociodemographics: A Composite Indicator Approach to Examining Social Inequalities," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 29-43, May.
    7. Wong, Sandy, 2018. "The limitations of using activity space measurements for representing the mobilities of individuals with visual impairment: A mixed methods case study in the San Francisco Bay Area," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 300-308.
    8. Xia, Jianhong(Cecilia) & Nesbitt, Joshua & Daley, Rebekah & Najnin, Arfanara & Litman, Todd & Tiwari, Surya Prasad, 2016. "A multi-dimensional view of transport-related social exclusion: A comparative study of Greater Perth and Sydney," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 205-221.
    9. Margareta Friman & Katrin Lättman & Lars E. Olsson, 2020. "Public Transport Quality, Safety, and Perceived Accessibility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-14, April.
    10. Tiznado-Aitken, Ignacio & Lucas, Karen & Muñoz, Juan Carlos & Hurtubia, Ricardo, 2020. "Understanding accessibility through public transport users' experiences: A mixed methods approach," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    11. Md. Kamruzzaman & Tan Yigitcanlar & Jay Yang & Mohd Afzan Mohamed, 2016. "Measures of Transport-Related Social Exclusion: A Critical Review of the Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-30, July.
    12. Cohen-Blankshtain, Galit, 2021. "On another track: Differing views of experts and politicians on rail investments in peripheral localities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    13. Hamidi, Zahra, 2021. "Decomposing cycling potentials employing the motility framework," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    14. Luz, Gregorio & da Silva Portugal, Licinio, 2021. "Understanding Transport-Related Social Exclusion Through the Lens of Capabilities Approach," OSF Preprints 4d3uy, Center for Open Science.
    15. Guzman, Luis A. & Oviedo, Daniel & Rivera, Carlos, 2017. "Assessing equity in transport accessibility to work and study: The Bogotá region," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 236-246.
    16. Katrin Lättman & Margareta Friman & Lars E. Olsson, 2016. "Perceived Accessibility of Public Transport as a Potential Indicator of Social Inclusion," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(3), pages 36-45.
    17. Tiznado-Aitken, Ignacio & Muñoz, Juan Carlos & Hurtubia, Ricardo, 2021. "Public transport accessibility accounting for level of service and competition for urban opportunities: An equity analysis for education in Santiago de Chile," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    18. Lades, Leonhard K. & Kelly, Andrew & Kelleher, Luke, 2020. "Why is active travel more satisfying than motorized travel? Evidence from Dublin," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 318-333.
    19. Bocarejo S., Juan Pablo & Oviedo H., Daniel Ricardo, 2012. "Transport accessibility and social inequities: a tool for identification of mobility needs and evaluation of transport investments," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 142-154.
    20. David Perez-Barbosa & Junyi Zhang, 2017. "Transport-Based Social Exclusion in Rural Japan: A Case Study on Schooling Trips of High School Students," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(4), pages 235-250.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Perceived accessibility; Accessibility; Accessibility measure; Transport planning; Sustainable transport;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R0 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General
    • R2 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Household Analysis
    • D1 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior

    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:eee:retrec:v:69:y:2018:i:c:p:501-511. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/620614/description#description .

    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.