4.7 Article

Residential dissonance and walking for transport

Journal

JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT GEOGRAPHY
Volume 74, Issue -, Pages 134-144

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2018.11.012

Keywords

Residential dissonance; Walking for transport; Residential environment; Walkability; Activity space

Funding

  1. PLAN-Health (PLAN-H) project through the Academy of Finland [13297753]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The concept of residential dissonance contextualizes the combined impact of built environment and individual travel and land-use preferences on travel behavior. A limited number of studies have explored the effect of residential dissonance specifically on walking. However, evidence from the active travel literature suggests that the environmental characteristics associated with diverse active travel modes differ to some extent. This study addresses residential dissonance in a framework specific for walking outcomes, as the applied neighborhood boundaries, residential preferences and the observed built environment were operationalized with measures related to walking for transport. SoftGIS, a public participatory GIS method allowing the mapping of frequently visited destinations was used to survey the daily walking behavior of 772 respondents aged 25-40 years living in the Helsinki metropolitan area, Finland. Ordinal logistic regression analyses were used to assess the adjusted odds of walking a high share of estimated monthly trips and travel distance. The identified residential dissonance groups were found to have significant associations with the walking outcomes. Associations between the observed neighborhood walkability and the walking outcomes varied by trip purpose, being more consistent with walking to utilitarian than to recreational destinations. Overall, the results support views on the inter-connectedness of individual attitudes and the built environment in facilitating walking for transport.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available