IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i3p1880-d743567.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do University Students’ Security Perceptions Influence Their Walking Preferences and Their Walking Activity? A Case Study of Granada (Spain)

Author

Listed:
  • Carmen Lizárraga

    (Department of Applied Economics, Campus Cartuja s/n, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

  • Cathaysa Martín-Blanco

    (Department of Civil Engineering, Campus Fuentenueva s/n, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

  • Isabel Castillo-Pérez

    (Department of Applied Economics, Campus Cartuja s/n, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

  • Jorge Chica-Olmo

    (Department of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business, Campus Cartuja s/n, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

Abstract

A sustainable city must be a safe place for its inhabitants when walking, with the absence of fear of crime being one of its main attributes. Although perceived insecurity is one of the main deterrents of walking activity, this relationship requires some clarification in environments which are walkable and safe, with low crime rates. This article contributes to the evidence for the influence of perceived security on walking activity and, as a novel aspect, also analyzes the effects of perceived security on walking as the preferred travel mode. In order to study this relationship, we use a method that combines non-linear principal component analysis (NLPCA) and a logit model (LM). The data are taken from a survey of university students carried out in the city of Granada. Results show that gender and perceived security have a greater effect on the choice of walking as the preferred travel mode, while location factors have significantly more weight in the explanation of the choice of walking as the most usual travel mode. These findings may be extended to other urban areas and can be of use for the implementation of urban policies aimed at designing the built environment to develop more sustainable cities.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:3:p:1880-:d:743567
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/3/1880/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/3/1880/
    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. Brand, Christian & Goodman, Anna & Ogilvie, David, 2014. "Evaluating the impacts of new walking and cycling infrastructure on carbon dioxide emissions from motorized travel: A controlled longitudinal study," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 284-295.
    3. repec:cdl:uctcwp:qt07q5p340 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. 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.
    5. Kelly, C.E. & Tight, M.R. & Hodgson, F.C. & Page, M.W., 2011. "A comparison of three methods for assessing the walkability of the pedestrian environment," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 1500-1508.
    6. Ferrer, Sheila & Ruiz, Tomás, 2018. "The impact of the built environment on the decision to walk for short trips: Evidence from two Spanish cities," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 111-120.
    7. Dalit Shach-Pinsly & Tamar Ganor, 2021. "A New Approach for Assessing Secure and Vulnerable Areas in Central Urban Neighborhoods Based on Social-Groups’ Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-25, January.
    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. Marcus Cardoso & Tálita Santos & Luiza Gagno Azolin Tessarolo & Vicente Aprigliano & Antônio Nélson Rodrigues da Silva & Marcelino Aurélio Vieira da Silva, 2023. "Exploring the Resilience of Public Transport Trips in the Face of Urban Violence from a Gender Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-24, December.
    2. Asal Kamani Fard & Mohammad Paydar & Verónica Gárate Navarrete, 2023. "Urban Park Design and Pedestrian Mobility—Case Study: Temuco, Chile," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-13, October.
    3. Natalia Distefano & Salvatore Leonardi, 2023. "Fostering Urban Walking: Strategies Focused on Pedestrian Satisfaction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-17, 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. 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.
    2. Haseeb, Attiya & Mitra, Raktim, 2024. "Travel behaviour changes among young adults and associated implications for social sustainability," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    3. Calvin P Tribby & Harvey J Miller & Barbara B Brown & Carol M Werner & Ken R Smith, 2017. "Analyzing walking route choice through built environments using random forests and discrete choice techniques," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 44(6), pages 1145-1167, November.
    4. Liu, Yanan & Yang, Dujuan & Timmermans, Harry J.P. & de Vries, Bauke, 2020. "Analysis of the impact of street-scale built environment design near metro stations on pedestrian and cyclist road segment choice: A stated choice experiment," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    5. Millward, Hugh & Spinney, Jamie & Scott, Darren, 2013. "Active-transport walking behavior: destinations, durations, distances," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 101-110.
    6. Peiravian, Farideddin & Derrible, Sybil & Ijaz, Farukh, 2014. "Development and application of the Pedestrian Environment Index (PEI)," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 73-84.
    7. Eldeeb, Gamal & Mohamed, Moataz & Páez, Antonio, 2021. "Built for active travel? Investigating the contextual effects of the built environment on transportation mode choice," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    8. Ivan Blečić & Tanja Congiu & Giovanna Fancello & Giuseppe Andrea Trunfio, 2020. "Planning and Design Support Tools for Walkability: A Guide for Urban Analysts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-18, May.
    9. Trichês Lucchesi, Shanna & Larranaga, Ana Margarita & Bettella Cybis, Helena Beatriz & Abreu e Silva, João António de & Arellana, Julian Alberto, 2021. "Are people willing to pay more to live in a walking environment? A multigroup analysis of the impact of walkability on real estate values and their moderation effects in two Global South cities," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    10. Fernando Fonseca & Elisa Conticelli & George Papageorgiou & Paulo Ribeiro & Mona Jabbari & Simona Tondelli & Rui Ramos, 2021. "Levels and Characteristics of Utilitarian Walking in the Central Areas of the Cities of Bologna and Porto," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-22, March.
    11. Fernando T Lima & Nathan C Brown & José P Duarte, 2022. "A grammar-based optimization approach for walkable urban fabrics considering pedestrian accessibility and infrastructure cost," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 49(5), pages 1489-1506, June.
    12. Maria Johansson & Catharina Sternudd & Mattias Kärrholm, 2016. "Perceived urban design qualities and affective experiences of walking," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 256-275, April.
    13. Antonio Zumelzu & Mariana Estrada & Marta Moya & Jairo Troppa, 2022. "Experiencing Public Spaces in Southern Chile: Analysing the Effects of the Built Environment on Walking Perceptions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-20, October.
    14. 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.
    15. Dena Kasraian & Sneha Adhikari & David Kossowsky & Michael Luubert & G Brent Hall & Jason Hawkins & Khandker Nurul Habib & Matthew J Roorda, 2021. "Evaluating pedestrian perceptions of street design with a 3D stated preference survey," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 48(7), pages 1787-1805, September.
    16. Mehzabin Tuli, Farzana & Mitra, Suman & Crews, Mariah B., 2021. "Factors influencing the usage of shared E-scooters in Chicago," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 164-185.
    17. 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.
    18. Marie Geraldine Herrmann-Lunecke & Cristhian Figueroa-Martínez & Francisca Parra Huerta & Rodrigo Mora, 2022. "The Disabling City: Older Persons Walking in Central Neighbourhoods of Santiago de Chile," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-19, September.
    19. 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.
    20. Ding, Chuan & Wang, Donggen & Liu, Chao & Zhang, Yi & Yang, Jiawen, 2017. "Exploring the influence of built environment on travel mode choice considering the mediating effects of car ownership and travel distance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 65-80.

    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:14:y:2022:i:3:p:1880-:d:743567. 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.