Identifying destination distances that support walking trips in local neighborhoods

Abstract When examining associations between local destinations and walking it is common to count local destinations using street network buffers measured at various distances to mitigate spatial data aggregation issues caused by scale and the Modifiable Areal Unit Problem. However, it remains unclear whether a particular buffer size is preferred since large buffers may mask important effects whilst small buffers may not accurately represent a neighborhood area. Furthermore, the use of various buffer distances in measuring destination counts does not yield specific information on distances where destinations could be placed in order to increase levels of walking. This paper extends current methods to address these issues by using a new method to define network buffers to identify threshold distances for walking to seven destination types using multilevel models. Donut-buffers are introduced as a method of counting destinations between distances of 401 m–800 m and 801 m–1200 m which are compared to standard network buffers at distances of 400 m, 800 m and 1200 m respectively. We found that destinations within 401 m–800 m could be responsible for associations found at a network buffer of 1200 m. Specifically, the odds of walking increased when local food outlets including supermarkets, cafes/takeaway stores, and small food stores, were located within 401 m–800 m but not 801 m–1200 m, suggesting that these destinations encourage walking when placed at 401 m–800 m away. Consequently we argue that donut-buffers offer greater specificity than standard network buffers for geographic measurement of destinations. This warrants further investigation to inform urban policy guidelines for designing walkable environments.

[1]  Fiona Bull,et al.  The influence of urban design on neighbourhood walking following residential relocation: longitudinal results from the RESIDE study. , 2013, Social science & medicine.

[2]  B. Giles-Corti,et al.  The relationship between destination proximity, destination mix and physical activity behaviors. , 2008, Preventive medicine.

[3]  Ahmed El-Geneidy,et al.  New evidence on walking distances to transit stops: identifying redundancies and gaps using variable service areas , 2014 .

[4]  S. O’sullivan,et al.  Walking Distances to and from Light-Rail Transit Stations , 1996 .

[5]  Hannah Badland,et al.  The development of policy-relevant transport indicators to monitor health behaviours and outcomes , 2015 .

[6]  Meghan Winters,et al.  Generating GPS activity spaces that shed light upon the mobility habits of older adults: a descriptive analysis , 2014, International Journal of Health Geographics.

[7]  A. El-geneidy,et al.  Access to Destinations: How Close Is Close Enough? Estimating Accurate Distance Decay Functions for Multiple Modes and Different Purposes , 2008 .

[8]  Jana A Hirsch,et al.  Changes in the built environment and changes in the amount of walking over time: longitudinal results from the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis. , 2014, American journal of epidemiology.

[9]  Tuuli Toivonen,et al.  Do suburban residents prefer the fastest or low-carbon travel modes? Combining public participation GIS and multimodal travel time analysis for daily mobility research , 2014 .

[10]  M. Kwan,et al.  Scale and accessibility: Implications for the analysis of land use-travel interaction , 2008 .

[11]  A. Kavanagh,et al.  Does the presence and mix of destinations influence walking and physical activity? , 2015, International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity.

[12]  A. Diez-Roux,et al.  Walking distance by trip purpose and population subgroups. , 2012, American journal of preventive medicine.

[13]  Reid Ewing,et al.  Travel and the Built Environment , 2010 .

[14]  Shigeru Inoue,et al.  Neighborhood environments and physical activity among adults in 11 countries. , 2009, American journal of preventive medicine.

[15]  D. Scott,et al.  Understanding the Impact of the Modifiable Areal Unit Problem on the Relationship between Active Travel and the Built Environment , 2014 .

[16]  Juan Carlos García-Palomares,et al.  Walking Accessibility to Public Transport: An Analysis Based on Microdata and GIS , 2013 .

[17]  Christine M. Hoehner,et al.  Measuring the built environment for physical activity: state of the science. , 2009, American journal of preventive medicine.

[18]  Stan Openshaw,et al.  Modifiable Areal Unit Problem , 2008, Encyclopedia of GIS.

[19]  N. Owen,et al.  Destinations that matter: associations with walking for transport. , 2007, Health & place.

[20]  David R Williams,et al.  Examination of how neighborhood definition influences measurements of youths' access to tobacco retailers: a methodological note on spatial misclassification. , 2014, American journal of epidemiology.

[21]  J. Dávila,et al.  Shaping cities for health: complexity and the planning of urban environments in the 21st century , 2012, The Lancet.

[22]  Anne M Kavanagh,et al.  Urban area disadvantage and physical activity: a multilevel study in Melbourne, Australia , 2005, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

[23]  D Crawford,et al.  Weight and place: a multilevel cross-sectional survey of area-level social disadvantage and overweight/obesity in Australia , 2006, International Journal of Obesity.

[24]  Paul Schimek,et al.  Extent and correlates of walking in the USA , 2007 .

[25]  F. Bull,et al.  Understanding Physical Activity Environmental Correlates: Increased Specificity for Ecological Models , 2005, Exercise and sport sciences reviews.

[26]  Bryan J Boruff,et al.  Using GPS technology to (re)-examine operational definitions of ‘neighbourhood’ in place-based health research , 2012, International Journal of Health Geographics.