Accessibility Measures to Opportunities in Urban Studies

Medidas de Accesibilidad a Oportunidades en Estudios Urbanos

Published 2021-01-10

Open | Download
PDF (Portuguese) FLIP Epub (Portuguese) audio/mpeg MP3 (Spanish)
Issue
Vol. 8 No. 1 (2021): Procesos Urbanos. Volumen 8 Número 1
Section
Artículos
How to Cite
Hishiyama, J. ., & Gonzales Taco, P. W. . (2021). Accessibility Measures to Opportunities in Urban Studies. Procesos Urbanos, 8(1), e514. https://doi.org/10.21892/2422085X.514
DOI

https://doi.org/10.21892/2422085X.514
Dimensions
PlumX
license

Creative Commons License
Revista Procesos Urbanos is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License .
Based on a work at http://revistas.cecar.edu.co/index.php/procesos-urbanos.

Jefferson Hishiyama
Universidade de Brasília (UnB), Brasilia, Brasil
Author
Pastor Willy Gonzales Taco
Universidade de Brasília (UnB), Brasilia, Brasil
Author
Show authors biography

This study aims to identify the approaches to measure accessibility, their indicators and main application themes in land use and transport systems. Through a hybrid method of systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis of bibliographic coupling networks, 54 publications were selected and 7 application themes were identified (public transport, transport systems, urban planning, land use, built environment, economic analysis and new technologies). The versatility of accessibility measures in urban studies was verified and there was a greater opportunity for scientific contribution in emerging themes related to new technologies and their implications for urban and transport planning.

Article visits 13718 | PDF visits 471

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
  1. Acheampong, R. A., & Silva, E. A. (2015). Land use–transport interaction modeling: A review of the literature and future research directions. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 8(3), 11–38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2015.806
  2. Broadus, R. N. (1987). Toward a definition of “bibliometrics”. Scientometrics, 12(5–6), 373–379. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016680
  3. Cao, K., Batty, M., Huang, B., Liu, Y., Yu, L., & Chen, J. (2011). Spatial multi-objective land use optimization: Extensions to the non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm-II. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 25(12), 1949–1969. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13658816.2011.570269
  4. Cao, K., Huang, B., Wang, S., & Lin, H. (2012). Sustainable land use optimization using Boundary-based Fast Genetic Algorithm. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 36(3), 257–269. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2011.08.001
  5. Cerin, E., Leslie, E., Toit, L. du, Owen, N., & Frank, L. D. (2007). Destinations that matter: Associations with walking for transport. Health and Place, 13(3), 713–724. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2006.11.002
  6. Coombes, E., Jones, A. P., & Hillsdon, M. (2010). The relationship of physical activity and overweight to objectively measured green space accessibility and use. Social Science and Medicine, 70(6), 816–822. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.11.020
  7. Currie, G. (2010). Quantifying spatial gaps in public transport supply based on social needs. Journal of Transport Geography, 18(1), 31–41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2008.12.002
  8. Di, Z., Yang, L., Qi, J., & Gao, Z. (2018). Transportation network design for maximizing flow-based accessibility. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 110, 209–238. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2018.02.013
  9. Geurs, K., & Ritsema van Eck, J. R. (2001). Accessibility measures: review and applications. RIVM. Urban Research Centre, Utrecht University.
  10. Geurs, K., & van Wee, B. (2004). Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: Review and research directions. Journal of Transport Geography, 12(2), 127–140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2003.10.005
  11. Gutiérrez, J. (2001). Location, economic potential and daily accessibility: An analysis of the accessibility impact of the high-speed line Madrid-Barcelona-French border. Journal of Transport Geography, 9(4), 229–242. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6923(01)00017-5
  12. Hamidi, S., & Ewing, R. (2014). A longitudinal study of changes in urban sprawl between 2000 and 2010 in the United States. Landscape and Urban Planning, 128, 72–82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.04.021
  13. Handy, S. L., & Niemeier, D. A. (1997). Measuring accessibility: An exploration of issues and alternatives. Environment and Planning A, 29(7), 1175–1194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1068/a291175
  14. Hansen, W. G. (1959). How Accessibility Shapes Land Use. Journal of the American Planning Association, 25(2), 73–76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01944365908978307
  15. Kii, M., Nakanishi, H., Nakamura, K., & Doi, K. (2016). Transportation and spatial development: An overview and a future direction. Transport Policy, 49, 148–158. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.04.015
  16. Kitamura, R., & Mokhtarian, P. L. (1997). A micro-analysis of land use and travel in five neighborhoods in the San Impacts of travel-based multitasking on mode choice and value of time View project Travel satisfaction View project. Transportation, 24, 125–158. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017959825565
  17. Kitchenham, B., & Charters, S. (2007). Guidelines for performing Systematic Literature Reviews in Software Engineering. In EBSE: Vol. 2.3.
  18. Murray, A. T., Davis, R., Stimson, R. J., & Ferreira, L. (1998). Public transportation access. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 3(5), 319–328. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1361-9209(98)00010-8
  19. Najmi, A., Rashidi, T. H., Abbasi, A., & Travis Waller, S. (2017). Reviewing the transport domain: an evolutionary bibliometrics and network analysis. Scientometrics, 110(2), 843–865. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2171-3
  20. Páez, A., Scott, D. M., & Morency, C. (2012). Measuring accessibility: Positive and normative implementations of various accessibility indicators. Journal of Transport Geography, 25, 141–153. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2012.03.016
  21. Sousa, F. F. L. de M., Loureiro, C. F. G., & Lopes, A. S. (2017). Representação do fenômeno urbano por meio de modelos integrados dos transportes e uso do solo: revisão da literatura e discussão conceitual. Transportes, 25(4), 96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14295/transportes.v25i4.1319
  22. Su, S., Zhou, H., Xu, M., Ru, H., Wang, W., & Weng, M. (2019). Auditing street walkability and associated social inequalities for planning implications. Journal of Transport Geography, 74(129), 62–76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2018.11.003
  23. Verburg, P. H., Ritsema van Eck, J. R., de Nijs, T. C. M., Dijst, M. J., & Schot, P. (2004). Determinants of land-use change patterns in the Netherlands. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 31(1), 125–150. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1068/b307
  24. Vickerman, R., Spiekermann, K., & Wegener, M. (1999). Accessibility and economic development in Europe. Regional Studies, 33(1), 1–15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00343409950118878
Tutorials

Autors:

How send article?

Evaluator pair

How to evaluate an article?

Google Scholar Profile

Keywords

QR code

Information