IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i6p3406-d770925.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effect of Distance Intervals on Walking Likelihood in Different Trip Purposes

Author

Listed:
  • Elżbieta Macioszek

    (Department of Transport Systems, Traffic Engineering and Logistics, Faculty of Transport and Aviation Engineering, Silesian University of Technology, Krasińskiego 8 Street, 40-019 Katowice, Poland)

  • Ali Karami

    (Faculty of Civil Engineering, K.N. Toosi University of Technology, Tehran 19967, Iran)

  • Iman Farzin

    (Faculty of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Transportation Planning Department, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran 14117, Iran)

  • Mohammadhossein Abbasi

    (Faculty of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Transportation Planning Department, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran 14117, Iran)

  • Amir Reza Mamdoohi

    (Faculty of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Transportation Planning Department, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran 14117, Iran)

  • Cristiana Piccioni

    (Faculty of Civil, Building and Environmental Engineering, Sapienza University of Rome, 00184 Rome, Italy)

Abstract

Increasing private car ownership and car dependency has led to a low share of walking as an active mode as well as congestion, air pollution, and health problems in developing countries. This paper aims to identify and compare the impacts of a selection of socio-economic, travel-related, and built environment variables on walking likelihood and respondents’ sensitivity to the walking distance, both for discretionary and mandatory trips. The analysis drew its origin from 14,463 responses acquired through an extensive travel survey conducted in the city of Qazvin, Iran. The estimated binary logit coefficients show people’s heterogeneity in the walking behavior for discretionary and mandatory trips. The results report a higher likelihood of walking on mandatory trips at almost all distances than the discretionary ones. Furthermore, investigating individual heterogeneity in different trip distances reveals that people aged less than 14 are more likely to choose walking on mandatory trips longer than 2400 m. Besides, those aged 25–44 years old or above 65 have less tendency to choose walking on mandatory trips with distances of 2000–2400 m and 800–1200 m, respectively. These findings are almost different on discretionary trips; compared to other age groups, people aged 15–24 years are less likely to choose walking on discretionary trips with a distance of 800–1200 m. Moreover, in trip distances of 1200–1600 m, the elderlies have a greater tendency to choose walking compared to other age groups. Some implications for more sustainable mobility in human-oriented urban environments are also presented and critically discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Elżbieta Macioszek & Ali Karami & Iman Farzin & Mohammadhossein Abbasi & Amir Reza Mamdoohi & Cristiana Piccioni, 2022. "The Effect of Distance Intervals on Walking Likelihood in Different Trip Purposes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-17, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:6:p:3406-:d:770925
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/6/3406/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/6/3406/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kevin Krizek, 2003. "Neighborhood services, trip purpose, and tour-based travel," Transportation, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 387-410, November.
    2. 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.
    3. Park, Hyunsoo & Noland, Robert B. & Lachapelle, Ugo, 2013. "Active school trips: associations with caregiver walking frequency," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 23-28.
    4. Mohammad Paydar & Asal Kamani Fard & Mohammad Mehdi Khaghani, 2020. "Walking toward Metro Stations: the Contribution of Distance, Attitudes, and Perceived Built Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-19, December.
    5. Pucher, J. & Dijkstra, L., 2003. "Promoting Safe Walking and Cycling to Improve Public Health: Lessons from The Netherlands and Germany," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 93(9), pages 1509-1516.
    6. 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.
    7. Piccioni, Cristiana & Valtorta, Marco & Musso, Antonio, 2019. "Investigating effectiveness of on-street parking pricing schemes in urban areas: An empirical study in Rome," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 136-147.
    8. McMillan, Tracy E., 2007. "The relative influence of urban form on a child's travel mode to school," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 69-79, January.
    9. Mohammadhossein Abbasi & Cristiana Piccioni & Grzegorz Sierpiński & Iman Farzin, 2022. "Analysis of Crash Severity of Texas Two Lane Rural Roads Using Solar Altitude Angle Based Lighting Condition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-17, February.
    10. Elżbieta Macioszek, 2020. "Roundabout Entry Capacity Calculation—A Case Study Based on Roundabouts in Tokyo, Japan, and Tokyo Surroundings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-21, February.
    11. Sehatzadeh, Bahareh & Noland, Robert B. & Weiner, Marc D., 2011. "Walking frequency, cars, dogs, and the built environment," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 741-754, October.
    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. Karami, Hossein & Abbasi, Mohammadhossein & Samadzad, Mahdi & Karami, Ali, 2024. "Unraveling behavioral factors influencing the adoption of urban air mobility from the end user's perspective in Tehran – A developing country outlook," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 74-84.
    2. Farha, Farzana Faiza & Shanto, Farabi Sarker & Khan, Fyrooz Anika & Mehrin, Maria & Khan, Asif & Tabassum, Nawshin & Nakshi, Paromita, 2024. "Exploring the changes in travel behavior between the first and second waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in Dhaka," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 24-35.
    3. Mohammadhossein Abbasi & Amir Reza Mamdoohi & Grzegorz Sierpiński & Francesco Ciari, 2023. "Usage Intention of Shared Autonomous Vehicles with Dynamic Ride Sharing on Long-Distance Trips," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-17, January.
    4. Bruno Jardim & Miguel de Castro Neto, 2022. "Walkability Indicators in the Aftermath of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-24, September.
    5. Zeng, Qian & Wu, Hao & Zhou, Luyao & Huang, Gonghu & Li, Yuting & Dewancker, Bart Julien, 2024. "Toward pedestrian-friendly cities: Nonlinear and interaction effects of building density on pedestrian volume," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Ta, Na & Zhao, Ying & Chai, Yanwei, 2016. "Built environment, peak hours and route choice efficiency: An investigation of commuting efficiency using GPS data," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 161-170.
    4. Guan, Xiaodong & Wang, Donggen, 2019. "Influences of the built environment on travel: A household-based perspective," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 710-724.
    5. Duncan, Michael, 2019. "Would the replacement of park-and-ride facilities with transit-oriented development reduce vehicle kilometers traveled in an auto-oriented US region?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 293-301.
    6. 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.
    7. Collins, Patricia A. & MacFarlane, Robert, 2018. "Evaluating the determinants of switching to public transit in an automobile-oriented mid-sized Canadian city: A longitudinal analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 682-695.
    8. Louis Merlin, 2015. "Can the built environment influence nonwork activity participation? An analysis with national data," Transportation, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 369-387, March.
    9. Buckley, Aaron & Lowry, Michael B. & Brown, Helen & Barton, Benjamin, 2013. "Evaluating safe routes to school events that designate days for walking and bicycling," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 294-300.
    10. Mitra, Raktim & Buliung, Ron N., 2012. "Built environment correlates of active school transportation: neighborhood and the modifiable areal unit problem," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 51-61.
    11. Dimitris Potoglou & Botakoz Arslangulova, 2017. "Factors influencing active travel to primary and secondary schools in Wales," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(1), pages 80-99, January.
    12. Naznin Sultana Daisy & Lei Liu & Hugh Millward, 2020. "Trip chaining propensity and tour mode choice of out-of-home workers: evidence from a mid-sized Canadian city," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 763-792, April.
    13. Andrew F. Clark & Darren M. Scott, 2016. "Barriers to Walking: An Investigation of Adults in Hamilton (Ontario, Canada)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-12, January.
    14. Ho, Chinh Q. & Mulley, Corinne, 2013. "Multiple purposes at single destination: A key to a better understanding of the relationship between tour complexity and mode choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 206-219.
    15. Chuan Ding & Yaowu Wang & Binglei Xie & Chao Liu, 2014. "Understanding the Role of Built Environment in Reducing Vehicle Miles Traveled Accounting for Spatial Heterogeneity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-13, January.
    16. Hudyeron Rocha & Manuel Filgueiras & José Pedro Tavares & Sara Ferreira, 2023. "Public Transport Usage and Perceived Service Quality in a Large Metropolitan Area: The Case of Porto," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-15, April.
    17. Lee, Yongsung & Guhathakurta, Subhrajit, 2018. "An analysis of the effects of suburban densification on vehicle use for shopping: Do existing residents respond to land-use changes in the same way as recent movers?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 193-204.
    18. 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.
    19. repec:cdl:itsdav:qt5rs1c6zm is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Idlir Licaj & Mouloud Haddak & Pascal Pochet & Mireille Chiron, 2011. "Contextual deprivation, daily travel and road traffic injuries among the young in the Rhône Département (France)," Post-Print halshs-00579719, HAL.
    21. Tao, Tao & Cao, Jason, 2023. "Exploring nonlinear and collective influences of regional and local built environment characteristics on travel distances by mode," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 109(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:14:y:2022:i:6:p:3406-:d:770925. 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.