IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v18y2026i1p485-d1832316.html

Walking, Jogging, and Cycling: What Differs? Explainable Machine Learning Reveals Differential Responses of Outdoor Activities to Built Environment

Author

Listed:
  • Musong Xiao

    (School of Architecture and Art, Central South University, No. 68 Shaoshan South Road, Tianxin District, Changsha 410075, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Peng Zhong

    (School of Architecture and Art, Central South University, No. 68 Shaoshan South Road, Tianxin District, Changsha 410075, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Runjiao Liu

    (School of Architecture and Art, Central South University, No. 68 Shaoshan South Road, Tianxin District, Changsha 410075, China)

Abstract

The development of street-based outdoor physical activities plays a vital role in improving public health issues and advancing the goals of the “Healthy China” initiative, and the built environment is widely considered a key factor in promoting such activities and urban sustainability. Existing studies have paid limited attention to the nonlinear relationships between the built environment and outdoor physical activity and have mostly focused on a single type of activity (such as walking or cycling), with few comparative analyses across different activity types. With the purpose of addressing these limitations and providing cross-sectional empirical evidence for sustainable street design and active-transport policy, this study examines streets within the Second Ring Road of Changsha and uses large-scale street-level outdoor activity trajectory data to investigate associations between built environment indicators and outdoor activity flows. A Random Forest model, followed by the application of SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP), is used to characterize the nonlinear associations and interactions among variables, capturing patterns relevant to sustainable mobility, public health and urban form. The results indicate the following: (1) The built environment indicators are associated with walking, jogging, and cycling in distinctly different patterns—walking shows stronger associations with population density and access to bus stops; jogging demonstrates stronger associations with the accessibility of large open spaces; and cycling is more associated with land use mix and road intersection density. (2) Nonlinear associations and threshold-like patterns commonly exist between built environment variables and activity flows, with indicators such as bus stop density and walking continuity exhibiting pronounced effects within specific intervals. (3) Interaction effects among variables contribute importantly to model predictions, especially for jogging where their influence can even exceed the main effects of individual factors. These results underscore the potential value of implementing tailored street design strategies for different activity types and provide empirical evidence relevant to health-oriented urban planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Musong Xiao & Peng Zhong & Runjiao Liu, 2026. "Walking, Jogging, and Cycling: What Differs? Explainable Machine Learning Reveals Differential Responses of Outdoor Activities to Built Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-35, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:18:y:2026:i:1:p:485-:d:1832316
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/18/1/485/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/18/1/485/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:18:y:2026:i:1:p:485-:d:1832316. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.