OPEN ACCESS
Measures to encourage non-motorized transport have received increasing attention among congestion mitiga-tion strategies. This paper examines the relationship between walking trips in Porto Alegre and attributes of the built environment, analyzing the effect of trip purpose. To do so, binomial logit models were estimated. Variables were stratified according to mode (motorized and walking trips) and according to trip purpose: work, study and others. Independent variables considered in this research include population density, land use, street design, accessibility of shops and service, and accessibility of public transport and parking supply. This study shows that the effect of urban characteristics depends mainly on the purpose of the trip. On work and study trips, socioeconomic variables have greater predictive power in explaining the decision to walk than the built environment variables. However, on other purpose trips, built environment variables were shown to be stronger predictors. Neighborhoods with mixed land use, grid street networks and shops/services close to households encourage walking for recreational and shopping purposes, whereas free public parking and transit availability discourage this mode.
Built environment, walking, travel behavior, pedestrian
[1] Baran, P., Rodríguez, D. & Khattak, A., Space syntax and walking in a new urbanist and suburban neighborhoods. Journal of Urban Design, 13(1), pp. 5–28, 2008. doi: http://dx.doi. org/10.1080/13574800701803498
[2] Cao, X., Handy, S. & Mokhtarian, P., The influences of the built environment and residential self-selection on pedestrian behavior, Tx. Transportation, 33(1), pp. 1–20, 2006. doi: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11116-005-7027-2
[3] Cervero, R. & Duncan, M., Walking, bicycling, and urban landscapes: evidence from San Francisco Bay Area. American Journal of Public Health, 93(9), pp. 1478–1483, 2003. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.93.9.1478
[4] Crane, R., The influence of urban form on travel: an interpretive review. Journal of Planning Literature, 15, pp. 3–23, 2000. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/08854120022092890
[5] Ewing, R. & Cervero, R., Travel and the built environment. Journal of the American Planning Association, 76, pp. 265–294, 2010. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01944361003766766
[6] Frank, L.D. & Engelke, P.O., The built environment and human activity patterns: exploring the impacts of urban form on public health. Journal of Planning Literature, 16, pp. 202–218, 2001. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/08854120122093339
[7] Lee, C. & Moudon, A.V., Correlates of walking for transportation or recreation purposes. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 3(1), pp. 77–98, 2006.
[8] Denatran, www.denatran.gov.br/frota.htm, 2012.
[9] IBGE-Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, www.ibge.gov.br/home/estatistica/pes-quisas/indicadores.php, 2012.
[10] Vargas, J.C.B., Advanced capitalism and contemporary urban form: Porto Alegre in the XXI Century. Proc of the International Seminar on Urban Form 2007, ISUF: Ouro Preto, 2007.
[11] Cervero, R. & Kockelman, K., Travel demand and the 3Ds: density, diversity, and design. Transportation Research D, 2(3), pp. 199–219, 1997. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1361-9209(97)00009-6
[12] Krizek, K., Operationalizing neighborhood accessibility for land use travel behavior research and regional modeling. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 22(3), pp. 270–287, 2003. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0739456X02250315
[13] Boarnet, M.G., Greenwald, M. & McMillan, T., Walking, urban design, and health: toward a cost-benefit analysis framework. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 27(3), pp. 341–358, 2008. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0739456X07311073
[14] Chatman, D.G., Residential self-selection, the built environment, and nonwork travel: evidence using new data and methods. Environment and Planning A, 41(5), pp. 1072–1089, 2009. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a4114
[15] Ewing, R., Greenwald, M.J., Zhang, M., Walters, J., Feldman, M., Cervero, R. & Thomas, J., Measuring the impact of urban form and transit access on mixed use site trip generation rates— Portland pilot study. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC, 2009.
[16] Frank, L.D., Kavage, S., Greenwald, M., Chapman, J. & Bradley, M., I-places health & climate en-hancements and their application in King County. King County HealthScape: Seattle, WA, 2009.
[17] Naes, P., Residential location affects travel behavior—but how and why? The case of Copen-hagen metropolitan area. Progress in Planning, 63(2), pp. 167–257, 2005. doi: http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.progress.2004.07.004
[18] Cervero, R. & Radisch, C., Travel choices in pedestrian versus automobile oriented neighborhoods. Transport Policy, 3(3), pp. 127–141, 1996. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0967-070X(96)00016-9
[19] Hess, P.M. & Ong, P., Traditional neighborhoods and auto ownership. The Ralph and Goldy Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies. Working Paper Series. Paper 37, 2001.
[20] Kitamura, R., Mokhtarian, P. & Laidet, A., Micro-analysis of land use and travel in five neigh-borhoods in the San Francisco Bay Area. Transportation, 24, pp. 125–158, 1997. doi: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1017959825565
[21] Handy, S.L. & Clifton, K., Evaluating neighborhood accessibility: issues and methods using geo-graphic information systems, Report SWUTC/00/167202-1. Southwest Region University Trans-portation Center, Center for Transportation Research, The University of Texas at Austin, 2000.
[22] Lawton, T.K., The urban environment effects and a discussion of travel time budget. Portland Transportation Summit: Portland, OR, 1997.
[23] Boarnet, M.G. & Sarmiento, S., Can land-use policy really affect travel behaviour? A study of the link between non-work travel and land-use characteristics. Urban Studies, 35(7), pp. 1155–1169, 1998. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0042098984538
[24] Greenwald, M.J., SACSIM modeling-elasticity results: draft. Unpublished manuscript, Fehr & Peers Associates, Walnut Creek, CA, 2009.
[25] Targa, F. & Clifton, K., The built environment and trip generation for non-motorized travel. Journal of Transportation and Statistics, 8(3), pp. 55–70, 2005.
[26] Secretaria de Mobilidade Urbana de Porto Alegre, Origin and Destination Survey of Porto Alegre - EDOM 2003. Technical Report, Porto Alegre, 2004.
[27] Rood, T., The local index of transit availability: an implementation manual. The Local Government Commission: Sacramento, CA, 1998.
[28] SPSS Inc., SPSS Base 10.0 Applications Guide. SPSS: Chicago, 1999.
[29] Larrañaga, A.M., Ribeiro, J.L.D. & Cybis, H.B., Fatores que afetam as decisões individuais de realizar viagens a pé: um estudo qualitativo. Transportes, Rio de Janeiro, 2009.