IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/transp/v50y2023i2d10.1007_s11116-021-10247-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development of Pedestrian Level of Service (PLOS) model and satisfaction perception rating models for pedestrian infrastructure for mixed land-use urban areas

Author

Listed:
  • Jivesh Ujjwal

    (National Institute of Technology Patna)

  • Ranja Bandyopadhyaya

    (National Institute of Technology Patna)

Abstract

Existing pedestrian facilities are evaluated using a range of Pedestrian Level of Service (PLOS) assessment models. These models, available for well-defined facilities, consider factors like pedestrian volume and speed, physical infrastructure conditions and perceived satisfaction levels for comfort, safety and security of the facility. The satisfaction level, usually assessed using sample satisfaction survey, is subjective. No comprehensive PLOS assessment model conceptualized in this work is available for old cities having mixed land-use where well-defined pedestrian facilities might not have usually existed. This study eventually identifies relevant PLOS assessment factors for mixed land-use urban areas from literary narratives/previous research works and develops a comprehensive PLOS assessment model for them considering all these factors. The factors were initially grouped into factor groups or parameters using principal component analysis done with importance survey responses from 550 pedestrians from Patna and Gaya, two old cities of India. Six important parameters have been identified namely safety issues under pedestrian traffic interaction; condition of pedestrian infrastructure; pedestrian convenience and sense of security; night time walking; encroachment and walking comfort. The model considers pedestrians’ satisfaction for the parameters which is a function of actual conditions for the underlying factors and varies from person to person. To eliminate variability, the study develops pedestrian satisfaction rating models for each parameter through satisfaction survey, correlating existing pedestrian facility condition to perceived satisfaction level, using ordered probit model. Random conditions for each parameter was designed through D-Optimal experimental design considering four levels (best to worst) of factor conditions and survey was done with 780 participants, each participating in 16 experiments.

Suggested Citation

  • Jivesh Ujjwal & Ranja Bandyopadhyaya, 2023. "Development of Pedestrian Level of Service (PLOS) model and satisfaction perception rating models for pedestrian infrastructure for mixed land-use urban areas," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 355-381, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:transp:v:50:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1007_s11116-021-10247-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11116-021-10247-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11116-021-10247-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11116-021-10247-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mackett, R. L., 2001. "Policies to attract drivers out of their cars for short trips," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 295-306, October.
    2. 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.
    3. Daly, Andrew & Dekker, Thijs & Hess, Stephane, 2016. "Dummy coding vs effects coding for categorical variables: Clarifications and extensions," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 36-41.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Qihao Liu & Yuzheng Liu & Chia-Lin Chen & Enrica Papa & Yantao Ling & Mengqiu Cao, 2023. "Is It Possible to Compete With Car Use? How Buses Can Facilitate Sustainable Transport," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(3), pages 69-83.
    2. F. Ruth Wood & Melissa Burgan & Steve Dorling & Rachel Warren, 2007. "Opportunities for Air Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction through Local Transport Plannin," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 22(1), pages 40-61, February.
    3. Lehmann, Nico & Sloot, Daniel & Schüle, Christopher & Ardone, Armin & Fichtner, Wolf, 2023. "The motivational drivers behind consumer preferences for regional electricity – Results of a choice experiment in Southern Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    4. Jasper Grashuis & Theodoros Skevas & Michelle S. Segovia, 2020. "Grocery Shopping Preferences during the COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-10, July.
    5. Carole Ropars-Collet & Philippe Goffe & Qods Lefnatsa, 2021. "Does catch-and-release increase the recreational value of rivers? The case of salmon fishing," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 102(4), pages 393-424, December.
    6. Nocera, Silvio & Pungillo, Giuseppe & Bruzzone, Francesco, 2021. "How to evaluate and plan the freight-passengers first-last mile," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 56-66.
    7. Romero, Fernando & Gomez, Juan & Paez, Antonio & Vassallo, José Manuel, 2020. "Toll roads vs. Public transportation: A study on the acceptance of congestion-calming measures in Madrid," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 319-342.
    8. Jaung, Wanggi, 2022. "Digital forest recreation in the metaverse: Opportunities and challenges," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    9. Habibian, Meeghat & Kermanshah, Mohammad, 2013. "Coping with congestion: Understanding the role of simultaneous transportation demand management policies on commuters," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 229-237.
    10. Mona Jabbari & Fernando Fonseca & Rui Ramos, 2018. "Combining multi-criteria and space syntax analysis to assess a pedestrian network: the case of Oporto," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 23-41, January.
    11. Hammerle, Mara & White, Lee V. & Sturmberg, Bjorn, 2023. "Solar for renters: Investigating investor perspectives of barriers and policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    12. Roger Mackett, 2003. "Why do people use their cars for short trips?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 329-349, August.
    13. Hansen, Line Block & Termansen, Mette & Hasler, Berit, 2017. "Effectiveness Of Markets In Nitrogen Abatement: A Danish Case Study," 2017 International Congress, August 28-September 1, 2017, Parma, Italy 260887, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. 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.
    15. Neves, Carlos Eduardo Teixeira & da Silva, Alan Ricardo & Arruda, Fabiana Serra de, 2021. "Exploring the link between built environment and walking choice in São Paulo city, Brazil," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    16. Buckell, John & White, Justin S. & Shang, Ce, 2020. "Can incentive-compatibility reduce hypothetical bias in smokers’ experimental choice behavior? A randomized discrete choice experiment," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    17. Lundberg, Benjamin & Weber, Joe, 2014. "Non-motorized transport and university populations: an analysis of connectivity and network perceptions," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 165-178.
    18. Pooley, Colin G. & Horton, Dave & Scheldeman, Griet & Mullen, Caroline & Jones, Tim & Tight, Miles & Jopson, Ann & Chisholm, Alison, 2013. "Policies for promoting walking and cycling in England: A view from the street," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 66-72.
    19. Krah, Kwabena & Michelson, Hope & Perge, Emilie & Jindal, Rohit, 2019. "Constraints to adopting soil fertility management practices in Malawi: A choice experiment approach," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-1.
    20. Cordula Hinkes & Inken Christoph-Schulz, 2020. "No Palm Oil or Certified Sustainable Palm Oil? Heterogeneous Consumer Preferences and the Role of Information," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-26, 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:kap:transp:v:50:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1007_s11116-021-10247-8. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.