IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i23p16077-d990924.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Priority-Setting Methodology of Qualitative and Quantitative Analyses for Pedestrian Road Construction: Case Study of a National Highway in South Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Woo Hoon Jeon

    (Department of Highway & Transportation Research, Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building Technology, Ilsanseo-gu, Goyang 411-712, Republic of Korea)

Abstract

This study aimed to propose a priority-setting methodology for the construction of pedestrian roads using a set of evaluation methods distinguished from the conventional system using social overhead capital(SOC) evaluation with a focus on economic analysis. Four evaluation indicators were selected in this study: pedestrian fatality risk, surrounding infrastructure, potential pedestrian demand, and manager’s opinion, with a total of 12 attributes across the indicators. Each attribute was designed to allow a quantitative or qualitative evaluation and had a method of estimating and scoring each attribute for set criteria. Regarding the weighting of evaluation indicators, the Analytic Hierarchy Process was applied as the most widely used method in multi-criteria decision making. The highest weightage was placed on pedestrian fatality risk and surrounding infrastructure among the evaluation indicators and traffic accidents of pedestrian fatality risk among the attributes. To determine the practical application of the proposed methodology, a single-site evaluation was conducted, followed by 385 sites in a similar manner for priority setting. The methodology of priority setting for pedestrian roads proposed in this study can be applied to the priority setting for pedestrian roads, smaller-scale SOC projects including bicycle roads.

Suggested Citation

  • Woo Hoon Jeon, 2022. "Priority-Setting Methodology of Qualitative and Quantitative Analyses for Pedestrian Road Construction: Case Study of a National Highway in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-18, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:23:p:16077-:d:990924
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/23/16077/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/23/16077/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mateo-Babiano, Iderlina, 2016. "Pedestrian's needs matter: Examining Manila's walking environment," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 107-115.
    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. Natalia Distefano & Salvatore Leonardi & Nilda Georgina Liotta, 2023. "Walking for Sustainable Cities: Factors Affecting Users’ Willingness to Walk," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-18, March.
    2. Haris Murwadi & Bart Dewancker, 2017. "Study of Quassessment Model for Campus Pedestrian Ways, Case Study: Sidewalk of the University of Lampung," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-16, December.
    3. Hyung Min Kim & Iderlina Mateo-Babiano, 2018. "Pedestrian Crossing Environments in an Emerging Chinese City: Vehicle Encountering, Seamless Walking, and Sensory Perception Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, June.
    4. Pawinee Iamtrakul & Sararad Chayphong & Derlie Mateo-Babiano, 2023. "The Transition of Land Use and Road Safety Studies: A Systematic Literature Review (2000–2021)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-20, May.
    5. Kaplan, Sigal & Wrzesinska, Dagmara K. & Prato, Carlo G., 2018. "The role of human needs in the intention to use conventional and electric bicycle sharing in a driving-oriented country," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 138-146.
    6. Jesper Bláfoss Ingvardson & Mikkel Thorhauge & Sigal Kaplan & Otto Anker Nielsen & Sebastián Raveau, 2022. "Incorporating psychological needs in commute mode choice modelling: a hybrid choice framework," Transportation, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 1861-1889, December.
    7. Anik, Md Asif Hasan & Sadeek, Soumik Nafis & Hossain, Moinul & Kabir, Shafquat, 2020. "A framework for involving the young generation in transportation planning using social media and crowd sourcing," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 1-18.
    8. Nabipour, Mohammad & Rosenberg, Mark W. & Nasseri, Seyed Hadi, 2022. "The built environment, networks design, and safety features: An analysis of pedestrian commuting behavior in intermediate-sized cities," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 14-23.
    9. Le Pira, Michela & Marcucci, Edoardo & Gatta, Valerio, 2021. "Roman holiday: Tourist heterogeneous preferences for walking path elements," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    10. Jesper Bláfoss Ingvardson & Sigal Kaplan & João de Abreu e Silva & Floridea Ciommo & Yoram Shiftan & Otto Anker Nielsen, 2020. "Existence, relatedness and growth needs as mediators between mode choice and travel satisfaction: evidence from Denmark," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 337-358, February.
    11. Mona Jabbari & Fernando Fonseca & Rui Ramos, 2018. "Combining multi-criteria and space syntax analysis to assess a pedestrian network: the case of Oporto," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 23-41, January.
    12. Loo, Becky P.Y., 2021. "Walking towards a happy city," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    13. Fernando Fonseca & George Papageorgiou & Simona Tondelli & Paulo Ribeiro & Elisa Conticelli & Mona Jabbari & Rui Ramos, 2022. "Perceived Walkability and Respective Urban Determinants: Insights from Bologna and Porto," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-19, July.
    14. G. R. Bivina & Manoranjan Parida, 2020. "Prioritizing pedestrian needs using a multi-criteria decision approach for a sustainable built environment in the Indian context," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 4929-4950, June.

    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:14:y:2022:i:23:p:16077-:d:990924. 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.