IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i19p10725-d644246.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identification of Factors Affecting Pedestrian Satisfaction toward Land Use and Street Type

Author

Listed:
  • Soongbong Lee

    (Big Data Platform and Data Economy, The Korea Transport Institute, 370 Sicheong-daero, Sejong 30147, Korea)

  • Myungjoo Han

    (Gyeonggi Public Investment Management Center, Gyeonggi Research Institute, Suwon City 16207, Korea)

  • Kyoungah Rhee

    (Naeil Engineering & Consultants, Anyang 14056, Korea)

  • Bumjoon Bae

    (Center for Privately-Financed Highway Studies, The Korea Transport Institute, 370 Sicheong-daero, Sejong 30147, Korea)

Abstract

Walking is an essential sustainable mode of transportation. Encouraging to increase walking trips can bring various social and economic benefits to our society. Since the policy paradigm has been shifting from car-oriented to pedestrian-oriented, interest in securing pedestrian rights and improving walking environments is increasing significantly. This study aims to examine factors affecting pedestrian satisfaction according to land use and street type. A pedestrian satisfaction survey was conducted in an industrial city with a mid-size population in the city of Changwon, South Korea. Based on the survey data from 500 respondents, factors affecting pedestrian satisfaction were analyzed by land use (commercial or residential areas) and street type (non-separated or separated sidewalks). The analysis results, using binary and ordered logit models, showed that the less illegal parking, the more pedestrian space, pedestrian guidance facility, and green space, the higher the pedestrian satisfaction. Factors positively affecting the satisfaction of pedestrian paths according to land use were physical environmental variables, such as the separated sidewalk variable. In commercial areas, pedestrian guidance facilities and street cleanliness were included as major influencing factors, implying differences in land use influencing factors. A common factor affecting the satisfaction of separated or non-separated sidewalk cases was also identified as the sufficiency of walking space. Therefore, the most urgent policy measure for improving pedestrian satisfaction for the city was to install a sidewalk or expand the pedestrian space. In the pedestrian-vehicle separation models, green space and cleanliness were included as significant variables, and in the non-separated models, variables of pedestrian guidance facilities and sidewalk conditions were included.

Suggested Citation

  • Soongbong Lee & Myungjoo Han & Kyoungah Rhee & Bumjoon Bae, 2021. "Identification of Factors Affecting Pedestrian Satisfaction toward Land Use and Street Type," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-14, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:19:p:10725-:d:644246
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/19/10725/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/19/10725/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eun Jung Kim & Jaewoong Won & Jiyeong Kim, 2019. "Is Seoul Walkable? Assessing a Walkability Score and Examining Its Relationship with Pedestrian Satisfaction in Seoul, Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Tiziana Campisi & Socrates Basbas & Giovanni Tesoriere & Mirto Trouva & Thomas Papas & Iva Mrak, 2020. "How to Create Walking Friendly Cities. A Multi-Criteria Analysis of the Central Open Market Area of Rijeka," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-20, November.
    3. Jingyuan Zhang & Puay Yok Tan & Hui Zeng & Ye Zhang, 2019. "Walkability Assessment in a Rapidly Urbanizing City and Its Relationship with Residential Estate Value," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-20, April.
    4. Julian Arellana & María Saltarín & Ana Margarita Larrañaga & Vilma Alvarez & César Augusto Henao, 2020. "Urban walkability considering pedestrians’ perceptions of the built environment: a 10-year review and a case study in a medium-sized city in Latin America," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(2), pages 183-203, March.
    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. Carmen Lizárraga & Cathaysa Martín-Blanco & Isabel Castillo-Pérez & Jorge Chica-Olmo, 2022. "Do University Students’ Security Perceptions Influence Their Walking Preferences and Their Walking Activity? A Case Study of Granada (Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-17, February.
    2. Jiyun Lee & Donghyun Kim & Jina Park, 2022. "A Machine Learning and Computer Vision Study of the Environmental Characteristics of Streetscapes That Affect Pedestrian Satisfaction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-21, May.
    3. Cheranchery, Munavar Fairooz & Krishnan, Meenu G & A A, Alfiya & Nanda V S, Parvathy & Krishna A, Akhila & Samuel, Albin, 2024. "A user perception based approach to derive policy intervention areas for enhancing walkability of cities: Experience in Kerala, India," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 70-80.
    4. Mazzulla, Gabriella & Eboli, Laura & Forciniti, Carmen, 2024. "Do women perceive pedestrian path attractiveness differently from men?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    5. Irina Makarova & Larisa Gubacheva & Larisa Gabsalikhova & Vadim Mavrin & Aleksey Boyko, 2025. "Developing Intelligent Integrated Solutions to Improve Pedestrian Safety for Sustainable Urban Mobility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-31, October.
    6. Yuyao Ma & Jun Zhang & Xudong Yang, 2023. "Effects of Audio-Visual Environmental Factors on Emotion Perception of Campus Walking Spaces in Northeastern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-18, October.
    7. Yibang Zhang & Yukun Zou & Zhenjun Zhu & Xiucheng Guo & Xin Feng, 2022. "Evaluating Pedestrian Environment Using DeepLab Models Based on Street Walkability in Small and Medium-Sized Cities: Case Study in Gaoping, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-23, November.
    8. Eun Jung Kim & Suin Jin, 2023. "Walk Score and Neighborhood Walkability: A Case Study of Daegu, South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-12, February.
    9. Baoyue Kuang & Hao Yang & Taeyeol Jung, 2025. "The Impact of Visual Elements in Street View on Street Quality: A Quantitative Study Based on Deep Learning, Elastic Net Regression, and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-23, April.
    10. Sangwan Lee, 2022. "Satisfaction with the Pedestrian Environment and Its Relationship to Neighborhood Satisfaction in Seoul, South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-15, 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. Eun Jung Kim & Hyunjung Kim, 2020. "Neighborhood Walkability and Housing Prices: A Correlation Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-18, January.
    2. Eun Jung Kim & Young-Jae Kim, 2019. "A Reliability Check of Walkability Indices in Seoul, Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, December.
    3. Ismaïl Saadi & Roger Aganze & Mehdi Moeinaddini & Zohreh Asadi-Shekari & Mario Cools, 2021. "A Participatory Assessment of Perceived Neighbourhood Walkability in a Small Urban Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-16, December.
    4. Massingue, Suzanna Allen & Oviedo, Daniel, 2021. "Walkability and the Right to the city: A snapshot critique of pedestrian space in Maputo, Mozambique," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    5. Richard R. Shaker & Joseph Aversa & Victoria Papp & Bryant M. Serre & Brian R. Mackay, 2020. "Showcasing Relationships between Neighborhood Design and Wellbeing Toronto Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-24, January.
    6. Arellana, Julián & Saltarín, María & Larrañaga, Ana Margarita & González, Virginia I. & Henao, César Augusto, 2020. "Developing an urban bikeability index for different types of cyclists as a tool to prioritise bicycle infrastructure investments," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 310-334.
    7. Ruggeri, Aurora & Di Liddo, Felicia & Gabrielli, Laura & Tajani, Francesco & Morano, Pierluigi, 2025. "What is the “best” way to measure the relative location variables in the market value assessment? An econometric method applied to an Italian case study," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    8. Wang, Yongcheng & Wong, Yiik Diew & Du, Bo & Lum, Kit Meng & Goh, Kelvin, 2024. "Sociospatial inclusiveness of streets through the lens of urban pedestrian mobilities: Go-along interviews with less mobile pedestrians in Singapore," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    9. Lorea Mendiola & Pilar González, 2021. "Urban Development and Sustainable Mobility: A Spatial Analysis in the Buenos Aires Metropolitan Area," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-23, February.
    10. Haruka Kato & Atsushi Takizawa, 2021. "Which Residential Clusters of Walkability Affect Future Population from the Perspective of Real Estate Prices in the Osaka Metropolitan Area?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-20, December.
    11. Mohammed Mashary Alnaim & Abdelhakim Mesloub & Chaham Alalouch & Emad Noaime, 2025. "Reclaiming the Urban Streets: Evaluating Accessibility and Walkability in the City of Hail’s Streetscapes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-41, March.
    12. Eun Jung Kim & Jiyeong Kim & Hyunjung Kim, 2020. "Neighborhood Walkability and Active Transportation: A Correlation Study in Leisure and Shopping Purposes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-16, March.
    13. Pouya Molaei & Liyaning Tang & Mary Hardie, 2021. "Measuring Walkability with Street Connectivity and Physical Activity: A Case Study in Iran," World, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-13, January.
    14. Guzman, Luis A. & Peña, Javier & Carrasco, Juan Antonio, 2020. "Assessing the role of the built environment and sociodemographic characteristics on walking travel distances in Bogotá," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    15. Ginevra Balletto & Mara Ladu & Alessandra Milesi & Giuseppe Borruso, 2021. "A Methodological Approach on Disused Public Properties in the 15-Minute City Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-19, January.
    16. Shilpa Dogra & Nicholas O’Rourke & Michael Jenkins & Daniel Hoornweg, 2021. "Integrated Urban Mobility for Our Health and the Climate: Recommended Approaches from an Interdisciplinary Consortium," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-12, November.
    17. Márquez, Luis & Soto, Jose J., 2021. "Integrating perceptions of safety and bicycle theft risk in the analysis of cycling infrastructure preferences," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 285-301.
    18. Eun Jung Kim & Jiyeong Kim & Hyunjung Kim, 2020. "Does Environmental Walkability Matter? The Role of Walkable Environment in Active Commuting," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-17, February.
    19. 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.
    20. Arellana, Julián & Alvarez, Vilma & Oviedo, Daniel & Guzman, Luis A., 2021. "Walk this way: Pedestrian accessibility and equity in Barranquilla and Soledad, Colombia," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).

    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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:19:p:10725-:d:644246. 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.