IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v15y2018i3p555-d137048.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Transit-Oriented Developments (TODs) and Established Urban Neighborhoods Have Similar Walking Levels in Hong Kong?

Author

Listed:
  • Yi Lu

    (Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
    City University of Hong Kong Shenzhen Research Institute, Shenzhen 518057, China)

  • Zhonghua Gou

    (School of Engineering and Built Environment, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD 4215, Australia)

  • Yang Xiao

    (Department of Urban Planning, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Chinmoy Sarkar

    (Healthy High Density Cities Lab, HKUrbanLab, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China)

  • John Zacharias

    (College of Architecture and Landscape, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China)

Abstract

A sharp drop in physical activity and skyrocketing obesity rate has accompanied rapid urbanization in China. The urban planning concept of transit-oriented development (TOD) has been widely advocated in China to promote physical activity, especially walking. Indeed, many design features thought to promote walking—e.g., mixed land use, densification, and well-connected street network—often characterize both TODs and established urban neighborhoods. Thus, it is often assumed that TODs have similar physical activity benefits as established urban neighborhoods. To verify this assumption, this study compared walking behaviors in established urban neighborhoods and transit-oriented new towns in Hong Kong. To address the limitation of self-selection bias, we conducted a study using Hong Kong citywide public housing scheme, which assigns residents to different housing estates by flat availability and family size rather than personal preference. The results show new town residents walked less for transportation purpose than urban residents. New town residents far from the transit station (800–1200 m) walked less for recreational purpose than TOD residents close to a rail transit station (<400 m) or urban residents. The observed disparity in walking behaviors challenges the common assumption that TOD and established urban neighborhoods have similar impact on walking behavior. The results suggest the necessity for more nuanced planning strategies, taking local-level factors into account to promote walking of TOD residents who live far from transit stations.

Suggested Citation

  • Yi Lu & Zhonghua Gou & Yang Xiao & Chinmoy Sarkar & John Zacharias, 2018. "Do Transit-Oriented Developments (TODs) and Established Urban Neighborhoods Have Similar Walking Levels in Hong Kong?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-14, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:3:p:555-:d:137048
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/3/555/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/3/555/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Reid Ewing & Robert Cervero, 2010. "Travel and the Built Environment," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 76(3), pages 265-294.
    2. Cervero, Robert & Day, Jennifer, 2008. "Suburbanization and transit-oriented development in China," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(5), pages 315-323, September.
    3. Frank, Lawrence Douglas & Saelens, Brian E. & Powell, Ken E. & Chapman, James E., 2007. "Stepping towards causation: Do built environments or neighborhood and travel preferences explain physical activity, driving, and obesity?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(9), pages 1898-1914, November.
    4. Khattak, Asad J. & Rodriguez, Daniel, 2005. "Travel behavior in neo-traditional neighborhood developments: A case study in USA," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 481-500, July.
    5. Ng, Shu Wen & Norton, Edward C. & Popkin, Barry M., 2009. "Why have physical activity levels declined among Chinese adults? Findings from the 1991-2006 China health and nutrition surveys," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1305-1314, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yi Lu & Guibo Sun & Chinmoy Sarkar & Zhonghua Gou & Yang Xiao, 2018. "Commuting Mode Choice in a High-Density City: Do Land-Use Density and Diversity Matter in Hong Kong?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-13, May.
    2. Zengzeng Fan & Yuanyang Wang & Yanchao Feng, 2021. "Ecological Livability Assessment of Urban Agglomerations in Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-16, December.
    3. Congying Fang & Riken Homma & Qiang Liu & Hang Liu & Arbi Surya Satria Ridwan, 2022. "Research on the Factors of Pedestrian Volume in Different Functional Areas of Kumamoto City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-20, September.
    4. Yalcin Yildirim & Diane Jones Allen & Amy Albright, 2019. "The Relationship between Sound and Amenities of Transit-Oriented Developments," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-19, July.

    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. 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.
    2. Aguiléra, Anne & Voisin, Marion, 2014. "Urban form, commuting patterns and CO2 emissions: What differences between the municipality’s residents and its jobs?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 243-251.
    3. Janke, Julia, 2021. "Re-visiting residential self-selection and dissonance: Does intra-household decision-making change the results?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 379-401.
    4. Yi Lu & Guibo Sun & Chinmoy Sarkar & Zhonghua Gou & Yang Xiao, 2018. "Commuting Mode Choice in a High-Density City: Do Land-Use Density and Diversity Matter in Hong Kong?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-13, May.
    5. Kamruzzaman, Md. & Baker, Douglas & Washington, Simon & Turrell, Gavin, 2013. "Residential dissonance and mode choice," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 12-28.
    6. Hamdi Lemamsha & Chris Papadopoulos & Gurch Randhawa, 2018. "Perceived Environmental Factors Associated with Obesity in Libyan Men and Women," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-16, February.
    7. Ann Hartell, 2015. "Sprawl and Commuting: Exploring New Measures of United States Metro Regions," SRE-Disc sre-disc-2015_07, Institute for Multilevel Governance and Development, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    8. Kajosaari, Anna & Hasanzadeh, Kamyar & Kyttä, Marketta, 2019. "Residential dissonance and walking for transport," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 134-144.
    9. Wenjia Zhang & Ming Zhang, 2018. "Incorporating land use and pricing policies for reducing car dependence: Analytical framework and empirical evidence," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(13), pages 3012-3033, October.
    10. Miotti, Marco & Needell, Zachary A. & Jain, Rishee K., 2023. "The impact of urban form on daily mobility demand and energy use: Evidence from the United States," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 339(C).
    11. 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.
    12. Md. Kamruzzaman & Simon Washington & Douglas Baker & Wendy Brown & Billie Giles-Corti & Gavin Turrell, 2016. "Built environment impacts on walking for transport in Brisbane, Australia," Transportation, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 53-77, January.
    13. Faizeh Hatami & Jean-Claude Thill, 2022. "Spatiotemporal Evaluation of the Built Environment’s Impact on Commuting Duration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-19, June.
    14. Xinyu Cao & Patricia L. Mokhtarian, 2012. "The connections among accessibility, self- selection and walking behaviour: a case study of Northern California residents," Chapters, in: Karst T. Geurs & Kevin J. Krizek & Aura Reggiani (ed.), Accessibility Analysis and Transport Planning, chapter 5, pages 73-95, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Wang, Fenglong & Mao, Zidan & Wang, Donggen, 2020. "Residential relocation and travel satisfaction change: An empirical study in Beijing, China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 341-353.
    16. Andy Hong & Marlon G. Boarnet & Doug Houston, 2013. "Does light rail transit increase physical activity?," Working Paper 9212, USC Lusk Center for Real Estate.
    17. Neatt, Kevin & Millward, Hugh & Spinney, Jamie, 2017. "Neighborhood walking densities: A multivariate analysis in Halifax, Canada," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 9-16.
    18. Benjamin R Sperry & Mark W Burris & Eric Dumbaugh, 2012. "A Case Study of Induced Trips at Mixed-Use Developments," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 39(4), pages 698-712, August.
    19. Xiaoquan Wang & Weifeng Wang & Chaoying Yin, 2023. "Exploring the Relationships between Multilevel Built Environments and Commute Durations in Dual-Earner Households: Does Gender Matter?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(6), pages 1-17, March.
    20. Gerlinde Grasser & Delfien Dyck & Sylvia Titze & Willibald Stronegger, 2013. "Objectively measured walkability and active transport and weight-related outcomes in adults: a systematic review," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 58(4), pages 615-625, August.

    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:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:3:p:555-:d:137048. 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.