Utilising Dedicated Pedestrian Networks to Understand the Relationship Between Accessibility and Pedestrian Density in Asian Cities

Utilising Dedicated Pedestrian Networks to Understand the Relationship Between Accessibility and Pedestrian Density in Asian Cities

Daniel M. Pearce Ryoji Matsunaka Tetsuharu Oba Shota Yamamoto

Department of Urban Management, Kyoto University, Japan

Available online: 
| Citation



As pedestrian networks tie together all transportation modes, their accessibility is crucial to supporting public transportation and fostering more sustainable and liveable cities. Nevertheless, most studies have relied on street networks when calculating pedestrian accessibility. While street networks can substitute for pedestrian networks in some cases, they fail to capture all paths available to pedestrians. Recent studies argue that this may distort our understanding of connectivity, accessibility and consequently the walkability of an area. This study sought to understand the effect of pedestrian network accessibility on segment-scale pedestrian density. To achieve this goal, dedicated pedestrian networks were constructed for two 400 m2  areas in Bangkok and Osaka. In each site, the effect of accessibility variables, namely reach and gravity, were assessed first before controlling for other environmental factors addressing con- nectivity, transit proximity and path conditions. Measures were evaluated using ArcGIS and the Urban Network Analysis toolbox using data obtained from OpenStreetMap databases and field surveys. The results show that accessibility variables alone can account for up to 33% and 35% of observed pedes- trian densities in Bangkok and Osaka, respectively. Accessibility to retail land uses is the biggest driver in this relationship. However, when controlling for all variables, only in the denser, more connected Osaka site did accessibility to retail remain significant, helping to explaining up to 45% of observed pedestrian densities, while in Bangkok, its effect was minimal with proximity to rail transit being the only significant variable.


built environment, connectivity, dedicated pedestrian networks, OpenStreetMap, pedestrian accessibility, pedestrian density, Urban Network Analysis


[1] Speck, J., Walkable City: How Downtown Can Save America One Step at a Time, Farrar, Straus and Giroux: New York, 2012.

[2] Frumkin, H., Frank, L. & Jackson, R.J., Urban Sprawl and Public Health: Design, Planning, and Building Health Communities, Island Press: Washington DC, 2004.

[3] Davis, S.C., Diegel, S.W. & Boundy, R.G., Transportation Energy Data Book: Edition 35, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 6992, 2016.

[4] Leather, J., Fabian, H., Gota, S. & Mejia, A., Walkability and Pedestrian Facilities in Asian Cities: State and Issue, Asian Development Bank, 17, 2011.

[5] Kang, C.-D., The S + 5Ds: Spatial access to pedestrian environments and walking in Seoul, Korea, Cities, 77, pp. 130–141, 2018.

[6] Brownson, R.C., Hoehner, C.M., Day, K., Forsyth, A. & Sallis, J.F., Measuring the built environment for physical activity: state of the science. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 36(4), pp. 99–123, 2009.

[7] Saelens, B.E. & Handy, S., Built environment correlates of walking: a review. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 40(7), pp. 550–566, 2008.

[8] Bauman, A.E. & Bull, F.C., Environmental Correlates of Physical Activity and Walking in Adults and Children: A Review of Reviews, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE): Loughborough, 2007.

[9] Cervero, R. & Kockelman, K., Travel demand and the 3Ds: density, diversity, and design. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2(3), pp. 199–219, 1997.

[10] Ewing, R. & Cervero, R., Travel and the built environment. Journal of the American Planning Association, 76(3), pp. 265–294, 2010.

[11] Ozbil, A., Gurleyen, T., Yesiltepe, D. & Zunbuloglu, E., Comparative associations of street network design, streetscape attributes and land-use characteristics on pedestrian flows in peripheral neighbourhoods. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(1846), pp. 1–23, 2019.

[12] Nawrocki, J., Nakagawa, D., Matsunaka, R. & Oba, T., Measuring walkability and its effect on light rail usage: a comparative study of the USA and Japan. WIT Transactions on the Built Environment, 138, pp. 305-316, 2014.

[13] Hess, P., Moudon, A., Snyder, M. & Stanilov, K., Site design and pedestrian travel. Transportation Research Record, 1674(1), pp. 9–19, 1999.

[14] Handy, S. & Clifton, K., Evaluating neighborhood accessibility: possibilities and practicalities. Journal of Transportation Statistics, 4(2), pp. 67–78, 2001.

[15] Kerr, J., Frank, L., Sallis J.F. & Chapman, J., Urban form correlates of pedestrian travel in youth: differences by gender, race-ethnicity and household attributes. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 12(3), pp. 177–182, 2007.

[16] Ozbil, A., Peponis, J. & Stone, B., Understanding the link between street connectivity, land use and pedestrian flows. Urban Design International, 16(2), pp. 125–141, 2011.

[17] Duncan, M.J., Spence, J.C. & Mummery, W.K., Perceived environment and physical activity: a meta-analysis of selected environmental characteristics. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 2(11), pp. 1–9, 2005.

[18] Evenson, K.R., Sotres-Alvarez, D., Herring, A.H., Messer, L., Laraia, B.A. & Rodríguez, D.A., Assessing urban and rural neighborhood characteristics using audit and GIS data: derivation and reliability of constructs. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 6(44), pp. 1–16, 2009.

[19] Mitra, R., Siva, H. & Kehler, M., Walk-friendly suburbs for older adults? Exploring the enablers and barriers to walking in a large suburban municipality in Canada. Journal of Aging Studies, 35, pp. 10–19, 2015.

[20] Ewing et al., Validating urban design measures. Transportation Research Board 92nd Annual Meeting, Washington DC, 2013.

[21] Tal, G. & Handy, S., Measuring non-motorized accessibility and connectivity in a robust pedestrian network. Transportation Research Record: Journal for Transportation Research Board, 2299(1), pp. 48–56, 2012.

[22] Ozer, O. & Kubat, A.S., Walking initiatives: a quantitative movement analysis. Proceedings, 6th International Space Syntax Symposium, Istanbul, pp. 1–16, 2007.

[23] Hajrasouliha, A. & Yin, L., The impact of street network connectivity on pedestrian volume. Urban Studies, 52(13), pp. 2483–2497, 2014.

[24] Porta, S. & Renne, J.L. Linking urban design to sustainability: formal indicators of social urban sustainability field research in Perth, Western Australia. Urban Design International, 10(1), pp. 51–64, 2005.

[25] Randall, T.A. & Baetz, B.W., Evaluating pedestrian connectivity for suburban sustainability. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 127(1), pp. 1–15, 2001.

[26] Hess, P.M., Measures of connectivity [streets: old paradigm, new investment]. Places, 11(2), pp. 58–65, 1997.

[27] Hansen, W.G., How accessibility shapes land use. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 25(2), pp. 73–76 1959.

[28] Pearce, D.M., Matsunaka, R. & Oba, T., Comparing accessibility and connectivity metrics derived from dedicated pedestrian networks and street networks in the context of Asian cities. Asian Transport Studies, 7, pp. 1–10, 2021.

[29] Zhang, H. & Zhang, Y., Pedestrian network analysis using a network consisting of formal pedestrian facilities: sidewalks and crosswalks. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2673(7), pp. 294–307, 2019.

[30] Ellis, G., Hunter, R., Tully, M.A., Donnelly, M., Kelleher, L. & Kee, F., Connectivity and physical activity: using footpath networks to measure the walkability of built environments. Environmental and Planning B: Planning and Design, 43(1), pp. 130–151, 2016.

[31] Cruise, S.M., Hunter, R.F., Kee, F., Donnelly, M., Ellis, G. & Tully, M.A., A comparison of road- and footpath-based walkability indices and their associations with active travel. Journal of Transport & Health, 6, pp. 119–127, 2017.

[32] United Nations Development Programme. Human Development Indices and Indicators: 2018 Statistical, New York, 2018.

[33] Tokyo Metropolitan Government, Department of Urban Development, Land Use in Tokyo: Overview of Land Use Survey for FY2012, 2012. In Japanese.

[34] Sevtsuk, A., & Mekonnen, M., Urban network analysis. A new toolbox for ArcGIS. Revue Internationale de Géomatique, 22(2), pp. 287–305, 2012.

[35] Handy, S.L. & Niemeier, D.A., Measuring accessibility: an exploration of issues and alternatives. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 29(7), pp. 1175–119, 1997.

[36] Peponis, J., Bafna, S. & Zhang, Z. The connectivity of streets: reach and directional distance. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 35(5), pp. 881–901, 2008.