Built environment impacts on walking for transport in Brisbane, Australia

Abstract

This study examines the association between urban form and walking for transport in Brisbane, Australia based on both panel and cross-sectional data. Cross-sectional data are used to determine whether urban form was associated with walking for transport in 2011. Panel data are used to evaluate whether changes in the built environment altered walking behaviour between 2009 and 2011. Results from the cross-sectional data suggest that individuals are significantly more likely to be walkers if they live in an area with a well-connected street network and an accessible train station. The longitudinal analysis confirms these relationships; there also was however, a significant impact of travel attitudes and perceptions on walking behaviour. The findings suggest that the built environment continues to be an important factor to encourage walking; however, interventions are also required to change social norms in order to increase the receptiveness for and participation in walking.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. Aditjandra, P.T., Cao, X., Mulley, C.: Understanding neighbourhood design impact on travel behaviour: an application of structural equations model to a British metropolitan data. Transp. Res. Part A 46, 22–32 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bagley, M., Mokhtarian, P.: The impact of residential neighborhood type on travel behavior: a structural equations modeling approach. Ann. Reg. Sci. 36, 279–297 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bhat, C., Guo, J.: A comprehensive analysis of built environment characteristics on household residential choice and auto ownership levels. Transp. Res. Part B 41, 506–526 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 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 Stud. 35, 1155–1169 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Brisbane City Council Brisbane active transport strategy: walking and cycling plan 2005–2010, Brisbane (2005)

  6. Brisbane City Council Transport Plan for Brisbane 2008–2026, Brisbane (2008)

  7. Brown, W., Burton, N., Marshall, A., Miller, Y.: Reliability and validity of a modified selfadministered version of the active Australia physical activity survey in a sample of mid-age women. Aust. N. Z. J. Public Health 32, 535–541 (2008)

  8. Cao, X., Mokhtarian, P.L., Handy, S.L.: Do changes in neighborhood characteristics lead to changes in travel behavior? A structural equations modeling approach. Transportation 34, 535–556 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cerin, E., Leslie, E., Owen, N.: Explaining socio-economic status differences in walking for transport: an ecological analysis of individual, social and environmental factors. Soc. Sci. Med. 68, 1013–1020 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cervero, R., Duncan, M.: Residential self-selection and rail commuting: a nested logit analysis. University of California Transportation Center (2008)

  11. Cools, M., Moons, E., Janssens, B., Wets, G.: Shifting towards environment-friendly modes: profiling travelers using Q-methodology. Transportation 36, 437–453 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. De Vos, J., Derudder, B., Van Acker, V., Witlox, F.: Reducing car use: changing attitudes or relocating? The influence of residential dissonance on travel behavior. J. Transp. Geogr. 22, 1–9 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Duncan, M.J., Winkler, E., Sugiyama, T., Cerin, E., duToit, L., Leslie, E., Owen, N.: Relationships of land use mix with walking for transport: do land uses and geographical scale matter? J. Urban Health 87, 782–795 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Elias, W., Shiftan, Y.: The influence of individual’s risk perception and attitudes on travel behavior. Transp. Res. Part A 46, 1241–1251 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ewing, R., Cervero, R.: Travel and the built environment. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 76, 265–294 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Frank, L.D., Schmid, T.L., Sallis, J.F., Chapman, J., Saelens, B.E.: Linking objectively measured physical activity with objectively measured urban form: findings from SMARTRAQ. Am. J. Prev. Med. 28, 117–125 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Giles-Corti, B.: People or places: what should be the target? J. Sci. Med. Sport 9, 357–366 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Giles-Corti, B., Bull, F., Knuiman, M., McCormack, G., Van Niel, K., Timperio, A., Christian, H., Foster, S., Divitini, M., Middleton, N., Boruff, B.: The influence of urban design on neighbourhood walking following residential relocation: longitudinal results from the RESIDE study. Soc. Sci. Med. 77, 20–30 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Greenwald, M., Boarnet, M.: The built environment as a determinant of walking behavior: analyzing non-work pedestrian travel in Portland, Oregon. Transp. Res. Rec. 1780, 33–42 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Greenwald, M.J.: The relationship between land use and intrazonal trip making behaviors: evidence and implications. Transp. Res. Part D 11, 432–446 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Guo, J.Y., Chen, C.: The built environment and travel behavior: making the connection. Transportation 34, 529–533 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Guo, Z.: Does the pedestrian environment affect the utility of walking? A case of path choice in downtown Boston. Transp. Res. Part D 14, 343–352 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Handy, S., Cao, X., Mokhtarian, P.: Correlation or causality between the built environment and travel behavior? Evidence from Northern California. Transp. Res. Part D 10, 427–444 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Handy, S., Cao, X., Mokhtarian, P.: Self-selection in the relationship between the built environment and walking—empirical evidence from northern California. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 72, 55–74 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Handy, S., Clifton, K.: Local shopping as a strategy for reducing automobile travel. Transportation 28, 317–346 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Humpel, N., Owen, N., Iverson, D., Leslie, E., Bauman, A.: Perceived environment attributes, residential location, and walking for particular purposes. Am. J. Prev. Med. 26, 119–125 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kamruzzaman, M., Baker, D., Washington, S., Turrell, G.: Residential dissonance and mode choice. J. Transp. Geogr. 33, 12–28 (2013a)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kamruzzaman, M., Baker, D., Washington, S., Turrell, G.: Advance transit oriented development typology: case study in Brisbane, Australia. J. Transp. Geogr. 34, 54–70 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kamruzzaman, M., Hine, J.: Participation index: a measure to identify rural transport disadvantage? J. Transp. Geogr. 19, 882–899 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kamruzzaman, M., Washington, S., Baker, D., Turrell, G.: Does residential dissonance affect residential mobility? Transp. Res. Rec. 2344, 59–67 (2013b)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Khattak, A.J., Rodriguez, D.: Travel behavior in neo-traditional neighborhood developments: a case study in USA. Transp. Res. Part A 39, 481–500 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Krizek, K.J.: Residential relocation and changes in urban travel: does neighborhood-scale urban form matter? J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 69, 265–281 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Krizek, K.J., Handy, S.L., Forsyth, A.: Explaining changes in walking and bicycling behavior: challenges for transportation research. Environ. Plan. 36, 725–740 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Lee, C., Moudon, A.V.: The 3Ds+R: quantifying land use and urban form correlates of walking. Transp. Res. Part D 11, 204–215 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Lee, I.M., Ewing, R., Sesso, H.D.: The built environment and physical activity levels: the harvard alumni health study. Am. J. Prev. Med. 37, 293–298 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Leslie, E., Coffee, N., Frank, L., Owen, N., Bauman, A., Hugo, G.: Walkability of local communities: using geographical information systems to objectively assess relevant environmental attributes. Health Place 13, 111–122 (2007a)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Leslie, E., McCrea, R., Cerin, E., Stimson, R.: Regional variations in walking for different purposes: the South East Queensland quality of life study. Environ. Behav. 39, 557–577 (2007b)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Leslie, E., Saelens, B., Frank, L., Owen, N., Bauman, A., Coffee, N., Hugo, G.: Residents’ perceptions of walkability attributes in objectively different neighbourhoods: a pilot study. Health Place 11, 227–236 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Manaugh, K., El-Geneidy, A.M.: Does distance matter? Exploring the links among values, motivations, home location, and satisfaction in walking trips. Transp. Res. Part A 50, 198–208 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Matthies, E., Kuhn, S., Klöckner, C.A.: Travel mode choice of women: the result of limitation, ecological norm, or weak habit? Environ. Behav. 34, 163–177 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Meurs, H., Haaijer, R.: Spatial structure and mobility. Transp. Res. Part D 6, 429–446 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Mokhtarian, P.L., Cao, X.: Examining the impacts of residential self-selection on travel behavior: a focus on methodologies. Transp. Res. Part B 42, 204–228 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Nkurunziza, A., Zuidgeest, M., MarkBrussel, Maarseveen, M.V.: Examining the potential for modal change: motivators and barriers for bicycle commuting in Dar-es-Salaam. Transp. Policy 24, 249–259 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Oakes, J.M., Forsyth, A., Schmitz, K.H.: The effects of neighborhood density and street connectivity on walking behavior: the Twin Cities walking study. Epidemiol. Perspect. Innov. 4 (2007)

  45. OECD: compact city policies: a comparative assessment. OECD publishing (2012)

  46. Pinjari, A., Pendyala, R., Bhat, C., Waddell, P.: Modeling residential sorting effects to understand the impact of the built environment on commute mode choice. Transportation 34, 557–573 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Queensland Government toward Q2: Tomorrow’s Queensland, Brisbane (2008)

  48. Queensland Government Action Plan for Walking 2008–2010, Brisbane (2009a)

  49. Queensland Government: South East Queensland Regional Plan 2009–2031. Queensland Department of Infrastructure and Planning, Brisbane (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Ramon, M.-R.: Walking accessibility to bus rapid transit: does it affect property values? The case of Bogotá, Colombia. Transp. Policy 17, 72–84 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Saelens, B., Sallis, J., Frank, L.: Environmental correlates of walking and cycling: findings from the transportation, urban design, and planning literatures. Ann. Behav. Med. 25, 80–91 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Salon, D.: Neighbourhoods, cars, and commuting in New York City: a discrete choice approach. Transp. Res. Part A 43, 180–196 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  53. Schwanen, T., Mokhtarian, P.: What affects commute mode choice: neighbourhood physical structure or preferences toward neighbourhoods? J. Transp. Geogr. 13, 83–99 (2005a)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Schwanen, T., Mokhtarian, P.: What if you live in the wrong neighborhood? The impact of residential neighborhood type dissonance on distance traveled. Transp. Res. Part D 10, 127–151 (2005b)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Shimura, H., Sugiyama, T., Winkler, E., Owen, N.: High neighborhood walkability mitigates declines in middle-to-older aged adults’ walking for transport. J. Phys. Act. Health 9, 1004–1008 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  56. Singleton, R.A., Straits, B.C.: Approaches to Social Research. Oxford University Press, New York and Oxford (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  57. Smith, P.N., Taylor, C.J.: A method for the rationalisation of a suburban railway network. Transp. Res. Part A 28, 93–107 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  58. Stangl, P., Guinn, J.M.: Neighbourhood design, connectivity assessment and obstruction. Urban Des. Int. 16, 285–296 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Thøgersen, J.: Understanding repetitive travel mode choices in a stable context: a panel study approach. Transp. Res. Part A 40, 621–638 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  60. Transportation Research Board.: Does the built environment influence physical activity? Examining the evidence. TRB Special Report 282, Washington, DC (2005)

  61. Turrell, G., Haynes, M., Burton, N., Giles-Corti, B., Oldenburg, B., Wilson, L.-A.M., Giskes, K.M., Brown, W.J.: Neighborhood disadvantage and physical activity: baseline results from the HABITAT multilevel longitudinal study. Ann. Epidemiol. 20, 171–181 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. UCLA: Academic Technology Services (2012) Stata FAQ: How can I use countfit in choosing a count model? Statistical Consulting Group. http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/faq/countfit.htm. 11.06.2012

  63. Van Cauwenberg, J., De Bourdeaudhuij, I., De Meester, F., Van Dyck, D., Salmon, J., Clarys, P., Deforche, B.: Relationship between the physical environment and physical activity in older adults: a systematic review. Health Place 17, 458–469 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Vance, C., Hedel, R.: The impact of urban form on automobile travel: disentangling causation from correlation. Transportation 34, 575–588 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Washington, S., Matthew, K., Mannering, F.: Statistical and Econometric Methods for Transportation Data Analysis. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton (2010)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Md. Kamruzzaman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kamruzzaman, M., Washington, S., Baker, D. et al. Built environment impacts on walking for transport in Brisbane, Australia. Transportation 43, 53–77 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-014-9563-0

Download citation

Keywords

  • Urban form
  • Residential self-selection
  • Walking for transport
  • Travel attitudes