IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i7p1339-d1186420.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Walkability Perceptions and Gender Differences in Urban Fringe New Towns: A Case Study of Shanghai

Author

Listed:
  • Wenjing Gong

    (College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Xiaoran Huang

    (School of Architecture and Art, North China University of Technology, Beijing 100144, China
    Centre for Design Innovation, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, VIC 3122, Australia)

  • Marcus White

    (Centre for Design Innovation, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, VIC 3122, Australia)

  • Nano Langenheim

    (Melbourne School of Design, University of Melbourne, Masson Rd., Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia)

Abstract

Urban fringe areas, characterized by relatively larger community sizes and lower population densities compared to central areas, may lead to variations in walkability as well as gender differences, such as safety perception. While objective measurements have received considerable attention, further research is needed to comprehensively assess subjective perceptions of walking in the urban periphery. As a case study, we evaluated survey responses of community perceptions of “Imageability”, “Enclosure”, “Human scale”, “Complexity” and “Safety” of Shanghai’s five new towns, comparing these with responses from the central area in terms of gender difference, and analyzed influencing factors and prediction performance of machine learning (ML) models. We developed a TrueSkill-based rating system to dynamically collect audits of street view images (SVIs) from professional students and used the result to integrate with Geographic Information Systems (GIS), Computer Vision (CV), Clustering analysis, and ML algorithm for further investigation. Results show that most of the new towns’ communities are perceived as moderately walkable or higher, with the city center’s community exhibiting the best walkability perceptions in general. Male and female perceptions of the “Human scale” and the factors that affect it differ little, but there are significant disparities in the other four perceptions. The best-performing ML models were effective at variable explanations and generalizations, with Random Forest Regression (RFR) performing better on more perception predictions. Responses also suggest that certain street design factors, such as street openness, can positively influence walkability perceptions of women and could be prioritized in new town development and urban renewal for more inclusive and walkable cities.

Suggested Citation

  • Wenjing Gong & Xiaoran Huang & Marcus White & Nano Langenheim, 2023. "Walkability Perceptions and Gender Differences in Urban Fringe New Towns: A Case Study of Shanghai," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-21, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:7:p:1339-:d:1186420
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/7/1339/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/7/1339/
    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. Luca Barbarossa, 2020. "The Post Pandemic City: Challenges and Opportunities for a Non-Motorized Urban Environment. An Overview of Italian Cases," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-19, September.
    3. repec:cdl:uctcwp:qt3d41w1jw is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Veerle Van Holle & Jelle Van Cauwenberg & Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij & Benedicte Deforche & Nico Van de Weghe & Delfien Van Dyck, 2016. "Interactions between Neighborhood Social Environment and Walkability to Explain Belgian Older Adults’ Physical Activity and Sedentary Time," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-14, June.
    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. Qian Wang & Guie Li & Min Weng, 2024. "Unraveling the Dynamic Relationship between Neighborhood Deprivation and Walkability over Time: A Machine Learning Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-19, May.
    2. Tanmoy Malaker & Qingmin Meng, 2024. "Urban Disparity Analytics Using GIS: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(14), pages 1-26, July.
    3. Weiting Xiong & Junyan Yang, 2023. "Delineating and Characterizing the Metropolitan Fringe Area of Shanghai—A Spatial Morphology Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-22, November.
    4. Roosmayri Lovina Hermaputi & Chen Hua, 2024. "Unveiling the Trajectories and Trends in Women-Inclusive City Related Studies: Insights from a Bibliometric Exploration," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-24, June.
    5. Changming Yu & Xinyu Wang & Ziao Zheng & Stephen Siu Yu Lau, 2024. "How Do Urban Environments Impact Walkability? An Analysis Using Multi-Source Data of Beijing," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-20, December.

    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. Yang Cao & Hao Wu & Hongbin Wang & Yawei Qu & Yan Zeng & Xiyu Mu, 2022. "How Do Block Built Environments Affect Daily Leisure Walking among the Elderly? A Empirical Study of Gaoyou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-22, December.
    2. John Stanley & Janet Stanley, 2023. "Improving Appraisal Methodology for Land Use Transport Measures to Reduce Risk of Social Exclusion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-18, August.
    3. Li, Jingjing & Kim, Changjoo & Sang, Sunhee, 2018. "Exploring impacts of land use characteristics in residential neighborhood and activity space on non-work travel behaviors," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 141-147.
    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. Toşa, Cristian & Sato, Hitomi & Morikawa, Takayuki & Miwa, Tomio, 2018. "Commuting behavior in emerging urban areas: Findings of a revealed-preferences and stated-intentions survey in Cluj-Napoca, Romania," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 78-93.
    6. Regine Gerike & Caroline Koszowski & Bettina Schröter & Ralph Buehler & Paul Schepers & Johannes Weber & Rico Wittwer & Peter Jones, 2021. "Built Environment Determinants of Pedestrian Activities and Their Consideration in Urban Street Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-21, August.
    7. Chetan Doddamani & M. Manoj, 2023. "Analysis of the influences of built environment measures on household car and motorcycle ownership decisions in Hubli-Dharwad cities," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 205-243, February.
    8. Jie Gao & Dick Ettema & Marco Helbich & Carlijn B. M. Kamphuis, 2019. "Travel mode attitudes, urban context, and demographics: do they interact differently for bicycle commuting and cycling for other purposes?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 2441-2463, December.
    9. He, Mingwei & He, Chengfeng & Shi, Zhuangbin & He, Min, 2022. "Spatiotemporal heterogeneous effects of socio-demographic and built environment on private car usage: An empirical study of Kunming, China," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    10. Mouratidis, Kostas & Ettema, Dick & Næss, Petter, 2019. "Urban form, travel behavior, and travel satisfaction," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 306-320.
    11. 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.
    12. Kevin Credit & Elizabeth Mack, 2019. "Place-making and performance: The impact of walkable built environments on business performance in Phoenix and Boston," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 46(2), pages 264-285, February.
    13. Boeing, Geoff, 2017. "OSMnx: New Methods for Acquiring, Constructing, Analyzing, and Visualizing Complex Street Networks," SocArXiv q86sd, Center for Open Science.
    14. Steven Spears & Marlon G Boarnet & Douglas Houston, 2017. "Driving reduction after the introduction of light rail transit: Evidence from an experimental-control group evaluation of the Los Angeles Expo Line," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(12), pages 2780-2799, September.
    15. Ahmad Adeel & Bruno Notteboom & Ansar Yasar & Kris Scheerlinck & Jeroen Stevens, 2021. "Sustainable Streetscape and Built Environment Designs around BRT Stations: A Stated Choice Experiment Using 3D Visualizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-21, June.
    16. repec:cdl:uctcwp:qt0d84c2f4 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Yongsheng Jiang & Dong Zhao & Andrew Sanderford & Jing Du, 2018. "Effects of Bank Lending on Urban Housing Prices for Sustainable Development: A Panel Analysis of Chinese Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-16, February.
    18. Thi Mai Chi Nguyen & Hironori Kato & Le Binh Phan, 2020. "Is Built Environment Associated with Travel Mode Choice in Developing Cities? Evidence from Hanoi," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-16, July.
    19. Yu, Haitao & Peng, Zhong-Ren, 2019. "Exploring the spatial variation of ridesourcing demand and its relationship to built environment and socioeconomic factors with the geographically weighted Poisson regression," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 147-163.
    20. Ozbilen, Basar & Wang, Kailai & Akar, Gulsah, 2021. "Revisiting the impacts of virtual mobility on travel behavior: An exploration of daily travel time expenditures," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 49-62.
    21. Li, Shanjun & Liu, Yanyan & Purevjav, Avralt-Od & Yang, Lin, 2019. "Does subway expansion improve air quality?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 213-235.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:7:p:1339-:d:1186420. 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.