Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Modeling and application of AHP approach for development of pedestrian safety index (PSI) model for safety of pedestrian flows in urban areas of developing countries

  • Technical paper
  • Published:
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The study aims at developing a hierarchy pedestrian safety index model that will help in decision-making by choosing, ranking and prioritizing the various safety dimensions and indicators. The model helps to decide the best criteria perceived by pedestrians affecting their safety. To develop the model and examine the decision of pedestrian safety using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), Prioritized Criteria Approach and Ranking Criteria Approach have been used. Ten different stretches of roads with side-walks, in and around CBD areas of Srinagar Metropolitan Area were selected for the study. The data were collected from the road stretches of 20 kms total length for the development of the model. The pedestrian safety dimension criteria selected are convenience (C1), connectivity (C2), comfort (C3), conviviality (C4), safety (S5) and security (S6). Various safety indicators explaining each of the safety dimensions are identified and coded. The AHP is then performed in a step by step procedure. Priority weights of pedestrian safety dimensions are determined, based on which ranking and priorities for the criteria are obtained. Local preferences are derived for the selected variables and overall priorities and overall rankings are determined. After estimating criteria priorities and overall priorities of pedestrian safety indicators, sensitivity analysis was conducted to check the model performance. It is seen that the convenience has the second criteria priority whereas comfort has the fourth criteria priority. The third best criteria priority was found to be for safety and security followed by conviviality. It is also seen that safety and security, the new criterion introduced in this study, is a very important criterion affecting the safety of pedestrians. The model is quite useful for application to any urban area especially in developing countries because of high number of variables affecting the pedestrian safety decisions and hence more number of criteria to be considered.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Source: Saaty’s [13])

Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All data, models, and code generated or used during the study appear in the submitted article. All the data used and provided in this research have already been presented in this article.

References

  1. Adinarayana B, Mir MS (2018) A review paper: study on safety of side walkability facilities in urban areas of developing countries. In: Urbanization challenges in emerging economies: energy and water infrastructure; transportation infrastructure; and planning and financing. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, pp. 590–597

  2. Adinarayana B, Mir MS (2020) Development of bicycle safety index models for safety of bicycle flow at 3-legged junctions on urban roads under mixed traffic conditions. Transp Res Proc 48:1227–1243

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brunelli M (2015) Introduction to the analytic hierarchy process. Learn Fail. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-416727-8.00003-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Michael FL, Noor ZZ, Zardari NH, Meza MJF (2013) Analytical hierarchy process application in urban sustainability indicators prioritization. Resour Environ 3:1–5

    Google Scholar 

  5. Omurbek N, Ustundag S, Helvacioglu OC (2013) Use of analytical hierarchy process (AHP) in location decision: a study in Isparta Region. J Adm Sci 21:101–116

    Google Scholar 

  6. Saaty TL (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15(3):57–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Vaidya OS, Kumar S (2006) Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications. Eur J Oper Res 169(1):1–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2004.04.028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Badveeti A, Mir MS (2019) Development of Pedestrian Safety Index Model at Mid-block Crossings for Urban Roads in Developing Countries using Multiple Linear Regression. International Journal on Emerging Technologies 10(4):395–405

    Google Scholar 

  9. Adinarayana B, Mir MS (2018) Study of Pedestrian Safety on Urban Roads under Mixed Traffic Conditions. International Journal of Engineering Science, Advanced Computing and Bio-Technology 9(4):120–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Piantanakulchai M, Saengkhao N (2003) Evaluation of alternatives in transportation planning using multi-stakeholders multi-objectives AHP modeling. Proc East Asia Soc Transp Stud 4:1613–1628

    Google Scholar 

  11. Pogarcic I, Francic M, Davidovic V (2008) Application of AHP method in traffic planning. In: Proceedings of the 16th international symposium on electronics in transport 2008

  12. Adinarayana B, Mir MS (2021) Development of pedestrian safety index models for safety of pedestrian flow at un-signalized junctions on urban roads under mixed traffic conditions using MLR. Innov Infrastruct Solut 6:54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-020-00409-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 579–606

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chen C (2006) Applying the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) approach to convention site selection. J Travel Res 45:167–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Bunruamkaew K (2012) How to do AHP analysis in Excel division of spatial information science graduate school of life and environmental sciences university of Tsukuba, (Retrieved March 17, 2013, from the site: http://giswin.geo.tsukuba.ac.jp/sis/gis_seminar/How%20to%20do%20AHP%20analysis%20in%20Excel.pdf)

  16. Saaty TL (2012) Decision making for leader: the analytic hierarchy process for decisions in complexworld, 3rd Revised edn. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh

    Google Scholar 

  17. Dixon LB et al (1996) Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 1538(1):1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Krambeck H, Shah JJ (2006) The global walkability index. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  19. Maghelal PK (2010) Walkability: a review of existing Pedestrian Indices. Journal of Urban and Regional Information System Association-accepted/in press

  20. Gallin N (2001) Quantifying Pedestrian Friendliness—Guidelines for Assessing Pedestrian Level of Service in Australia. Perth, Western Australia

  21. Landis BW, Vattikuti VR, Ottenberg RM, McLeod DS, Guttenplan M (2001) Modeling the roadside walking environment pedestrian level of service. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 1773(1):82–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Park S (2008) Defining, measuring, and evaluating path walkability, and testing its impacts on transit users’ mode choice and walking distance to the station. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California Transportation Center, Berkeley

  23. Evans G (2009) Accessibility, urban design and the whole journey environment. Built Environ 35(3):366–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Abley S, Turner S (2011) Predicting walkability: technical report. New Zealand Transport Agency

  25. Space Syntax Limited (2003) Towards a walkability index. Space Syntax Limited, Strasbourg

    Google Scholar 

  26. Steiner B, Miller S (2004) Future directions for multimodel areawide level of service handbook. Technical report. Florida Department of Transportation

  27. Archana G, Reshma EK (2013) Analysis of pedestrian level of service for crosswalk at intersections for urban condition. Int J Stud Res Technol Manag, 1 (6), 604–609. Retrieved from http://www.giapjournals.com/index.php/ijsrtm/article/view/103;files/302/103.html

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author gratefully thanks to National Institute of Technology, Srinagar to conduct survey and data collection was completed with the help of institute and the authors got no budgetary help for the exploration, creation, as well as production of this article.

Funding

The authors got no budgetary help for the exploration, creation, as well as making of this article and because of lower middle income (India) country.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology Srinagar, Srinagar, 190006, India

    Badveeti Adinarayana & Mohammad Shafi Mir

Authors
  1. Badveeti Adinarayana
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohammad Shafi Mir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

The authors checked and accept the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Badveeti Adinarayana.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors proclaimed that no potential conflicting situations regarding the examination, origin, as well as the production of this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Adinarayana, B., Mir, M.S. Modeling and application of AHP approach for development of pedestrian safety index (PSI) model for safety of pedestrian flows in urban areas of developing countries. Innov. Infrastruct. Solut. 6, 171 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-021-00520-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-021-00520-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation