IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i24p10633-d465055.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Urban Vitality, Urban Form, and Land Use: Their Relations within a Geographical Boundary for Walkers

Author

Listed:
  • Suji Kim

    (Mechanical Engineering Research Institute, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, 291 Daehak-ro, Yuseoung-gu, Daejeon 34141, Korea)

Abstract

The aim of this study was to exmine the influence of combined urban form and land use on the vibrancy in urban areas within a geographical boundary for walkers. A geographical boundary is defined as a block group surrounded by expressways and arterials, based on findings in previous studies. Spatial regression was performed with mobile signal data representing the degree of vitality within the defined areal unit as a dependent variable, and explanatory variables measured by urban form hierarchy were used to consider both natural and built environments. The outcome helps comprehend the physical and functional forms of vibrant neighborhood environments. The result implies the importance of highly desirable features for walking- or transit-friendly neighborhoods. It also indicates the right combination of land uses needed to support the daily lives of local residents: little lost space, short blocks, well-connected streets, short distances to transit stations, and proximity to essential facilities. This study suggests a new way of defining a spatial unit for vitality analysis and shows the critical roles of both natural and built environments in activating local vitality. These findings establish the groundwork for designing better neighborhoods, especially for an area composed of local streets and collector roads.

Suggested Citation

  • Suji Kim, 2020. "Urban Vitality, Urban Form, and Land Use: Their Relations within a Geographical Boundary for Walkers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-14, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:24:p:10633-:d:465055
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/24/10633/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/24/10633/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cervero, Robert & Duncan, Michael, 2003. "Walking, Bicycling, and Urban Landscapes: Evidence from the San Francisco Bay Area," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt6zr1x95m, University of California Transportation Center.
    2. Chris Jacobs-Crisioni & Piet Rietveld & Eric Koomen & Emmanouil Tranos, 2014. "Evaluating the Impact of Land-Use Density and Mix on Spatiotemporal Urban Activity Patterns: An Exploratory Study Using Mobile Phone Data," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(11), pages 2769-2785, November.
    3. Cervero, R. & Duncan, M., 2003. "Walking, Bicycling, and Urban Landscapes: Evidence from the San Francisco Bay Area," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 93(9), pages 1478-1483.
    4. H. Kelejian, Harry & Prucha, Ingmar R., 2001. "On the asymptotic distribution of the Moran I test statistic with applications," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 219-257, September.
    5. Paul Elhorst & Solmaria Halleck Vega, 2013. "On spatial econometric models, spillover effects, and W," ERSA conference papers ersa13p222, European Regional Science Association.
    6. Kim, Suji & Park, Sungjin & Jang, Kitae, 2019. "Spatially-varying effects of built environment determinants on walking," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 188-199.
    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. Yunjing Wu & Jing Wang & Sunnie Sing-Yeung Lau & Stephen Siu Yu Lau & Yijia Miao, 2022. "An Improved Publicness Assessment Tool Based on a Combined Spatial Model: Case Study of Guangzhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-27, November.
    2. Nuria Vidal Domper & Gonzalo Hoyos-Bucheli & Marta Benages Albert, 2023. "Jane Jacobs’s Criteria for Urban Vitality: A Geospatial Analysis of Morphological Conditions in Quito, Ecuador," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-19, May.
    3. Yihao Jiang & Zhaojin Chen & Pingjun Sun, 2022. "Urban Shrinkage and Urban Vitality Correlation Research in the Three Northeastern Provinces of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-22, August.
    4. Jinghu Pan & Xiuwei Zhu & Xin Zhang, 2022. "Urban Vitality Measurement and Influence Mechanism Detection in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-24, 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. 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.
    2. Marina Lagune-Reutler & Andrew Guthrie & Yingling Fan & David Levinson, 2015. "Transit Riders' Perception of Waiting Time and Stops' Surrounding Environments," Working Papers 000142, University of Minnesota: Nexus Research Group.
    3. Devin McNally & Rachel Tillinghast & Hiroyuki Iseki, 2022. "Bicycle Accessibility GIS Analysis for Bike Master Planning with a Consideration of Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) and Energy Consumption," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    4. Peters, Luke & MacKenzie, Don, 2019. "The death and rebirth of bikesharing in Seattle: Implications for policy and system design," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 208-226.
    5. Singh, Abhilash C. & Faghih Imani, Ahmadreza & Sivakumar, Aruna & Luna Xi, Yang & Miller, Eric J., 2024. "A joint analysis of accessibility and household trip frequencies by travel mode," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    6. Irina Tumini & Paula Villagra-Islas & Geraldine Herrmann-Lunecke, 2017. "Evaluating reconstruction effects on urban resilience: a comparison between two Chilean tsunami-prone cities," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 85(3), pages 1363-1392, February.
    7. Chandra, Shailesh & Jimenez, Jose & Radhakrishnan, Ramalingam, 2017. "Accessibility evaluations for nighttime walking and bicycling for low-income shift workers," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 97-108.
    8. Paula Villagra & Carolina Quintana, 2017. "Disaster Governance for Community Resilience in Coastal Towns: Chilean Case Studies," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-24, September.
    9. Rybarczyk, Greg & Gallagher, Laura, 2014. "Measuring the potential for bicycling and walking at a metropolitan commuter university," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 1-10.
    10. Ding, Yue & Wang, Xiaokun (Cara) & Pérez-Guzmán, Sofía & Wojtowicz, Jeffrey & Conway, Alison, 2024. "Multi-criteria assessment and ranking framework for the potential of cargo cycle operation: Using New York city as an example," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    11. 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.
    12. Koh, Puay Ping & Wong, Yiik Diew, 2013. "Comparing pedestrians’ needs and behaviours in different land use environments," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 43-50.
    13. Steven R Gehrke & Kelly J Clifton, 2019. "An activity-related land use mix construct and its connection to pedestrian travel," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 46(1), pages 9-26, January.
    14. Hosseinzadeh, Aryan & Algomaiah, Majeed & Kluger, Robert & Li, Zhixia, 2021. "Spatial analysis of shared e-scooter trips," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    15. Ao, Yibin & Zhang, Yuting & Wang, Yan & Chen, Yunfeng & Yang, Linchuan, 2020. "Influences of rural built environment on travel mode choice of rural residents: The case of rural Sichuan," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    16. Ivan BleÄ ić & Arnaldo Cecchini & Tanja Congiu & Giovanna Fancello & Valentina Talu & Giuseppe A Trunfio, 2021. "Capability-wise walkability evaluation as an indicator of urban peripherality," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 48(4), pages 895-911, May.
    17. Spencer, Phoebe & Watts, Richard & Vivanco, Luis & Flynn, Brian, 2013. "The effect of environmental factors on bicycle commuters in Vermont: influences of a northern climate," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 11-17.
    18. Wang, Donggen & Lin, Tao, 2013. "Built environments, social environments, and activity-travel behavior: a case study of Hong Kong," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 286-295.
    19. Paul Downward & Peter Dawson, 2016. "Is it Pleasure or Health from Leisure that We Benefit from Most? An Analysis of Well-Being Alternatives and Implications for Policy," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 126(1), pages 443-465, March.
    20. Mohammad Paydar & Asal Kamani Fard & Marzieh Khaghani, 2020. "Pedestrian Walkways for Health in Shiraz, Iran, the Contribution of Attitudes, and Perceived Environmental Attributes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-19, September.

    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:12:y:2020:i:24:p:10633-:d:465055. 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.