##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Submitted
Nov 16, 2024
Published
Dec 28, 2024
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 31 Download : 34

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study assesses the walkability of 16 pedestrian routes con-necting public transport stations to the University of Algiers, fo-cusing on safety, comfort, accessibility, connectivity, and pedestri-an traffic flow. The selected routes represent key pathways fre-quently used by students commuting between public transport hubs and the university, chosen due to their high foot traffic and significance for daily student mobility. A mixed-methods approach was employed, combining field observations, interviews with 120 students, and mapping using Google Earth to provide a compre-hensive spatial analysis. To evaluate walkability, a model was de-veloped that includes a scoring system based on five criteria, with each route assessed and categorized as Highly Walkable, Moder-ately Walkable, Slightly Walkable, or Not Walkable. This model en-abled a structured assessment, using tables to quantify aspects like safety (lighting, crossings), comfort (sidewalk quality, shade), and accessibility. Results indicate that while connectivity between transport hubs and the university is consistently high, there are significant disparities in safety, comfort, and accessibility. Route 03 scored well in terms of overall walkability, whereas others like Route 05 and Route 06 were categorized as Not Walkable due to major deficiencies in safety and infrastructure. High congestion during peak hours also emerged as a challenge for many routes. Recommendations for improvement include enhancing safety fea-tures, upgrading comfort amenities, increasing accessibility for individuals with disabilities, and managing pedestrian congestion. These findings aim to inform urban planning efforts to create safer, more comfortable pedestrian infrastructure for university stu-dents in Algiers.

Article Details

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
ACHOURA, S., HARAOUBIA, I., MOHINO SANZ, M. I., & BAOUNI, T. (2024). Assessing Pedestrian Walkability: Improving University Access Via Public Transport in Algiers. Indonesian Journal of Social Science Research, 5(2), 761-783. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijssr.05.02.35

References

1. Loo, B. P. Y., & Tsoi, K. H. (2018). The sus-tainable transport pathway: A holistic strategy of five transformations. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 11(1), 961-980. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2018.1354
2. Shao, J., Yang, M., Liu, G., Li, Y., Luo, D., Tan, Y., Zhang, Y., & Song, Q. (2021). Ur-ban sub-center design framework based on the walkability evaluation method: Taking Coomera Town sub-center as an example. Sustainability, 13(6259). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116259
3. Shach-Pinsly, D., & Ganor, T. (2021). A new approach for assessing secure and vulnerable areas in central urban neigh-borhoods based on social-groups’ analy-sis. Sustainability, 13(1174). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031174
4. Burckhart, K., & Blair, C. (2009). Urban intermodality: Potentials for connecting the cities’ public transport. WIT Transac-tions on The Built Environment, 107. https://doi.org/10.2495/UT090071
5. Sanaa Benhamouche, Malika Lebdiri, Inès Sanchez De Madariaga & Mustapha Ben-hamouche (11 Apr 2024): Public space for women: a cross-cultural study assessing spatial conviviality in Blida, Algeria and Madrid, Spain, Journal of Urbanism: In-ternational Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, DOI: 10.1080/17549175.2024.2337872
6. Gehl, J. (2010). Cities for People. Washing-ton, DC: Island Press.
7. Yang, X., Zheng, X., Cao, Y., Chen, H., Tang, L., & Yang, H. (2023). Connectivity analy-sis in pedestrian networks: A case study in Wuhan, China. Applied geography, 151, 102843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2022.102843
8. Prykhodko, V., & Vikovych, I. (2021). Analysis of calculating level of service for pedestrians. Transport Technologies, 1 (2), 2021, (1), 50-59. https://doi.org/ 10.23939/tt2021.01.050
9. Martínez-Martínez, O. A., & Ramírez-Lopez, A. (2017). Walkability and the built environment: Validation of the Neighbor-hood Environment Walkability Scale (NEWS) for urban areas in Mexico. Pub-lished by Springer Science+Business Me-dia Dordrecht . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0483-x
10. Forsyth, A. (2015). What is a walkable place? The walkability debate in urban design. Urban Design International, Mac-millan Publishers Ltd . https://doi.org/10.1057/udi.2015.22
11. Gedrose, J. (2016). Retrofitting Suburban Plains: Creating a Walkable Mixed-use Neighborhood for South Fargo. PhD the-sis. North Dakota State University, De-partment of Architecture and Landscape Architecture .
12. Ujang, N., & Muslim, Z. (2015). Walkability and Attachment to Tourism Places in the City of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Athens Journal of Tourism, Volume 2 Issue 1 .
13. Reyer, M., Fina, S., Siedentop, S., & Schlicht, W. (2014). Walkability is Only Part of the Story: Walking for Transporta-tion in Stuttgart, Germany. Springer Inter-national Publishing . https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110605849
14. Nyagah P (2015) A Multi-Procedural Ap-proach to Evaluating Walkability and Pe-destrian Safety. PhD thesis. University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Civil and Environmen-tal Engineering Department
15. Rogers, S. H., Halstead, J. M., Gardner, K. H., & Carlson, C. H. (2011). Examining walkability and social capital as indicators of quality of life at the municipal and neighborhood scales. Applied research in quality of life, 6, 201-213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-010-9132-4
16. Shumi, S., Zuidgeest, M. H. P., Martinez, J. A., Efroymson, D., & van Maarseveen, M. F. A. M. (2014). Understanding the Rela-tionship Between Walkability and Quality-of-Life of Women Garment Workers in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Applied research in quality of life, 10, 263-287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-014-9312-8
17. Clifton MB (2013) Placemaking and Walkability in Austin’s Capitol Complex. Master’s thesis. University of Texas at Austin, Graduate School of Public Affairs and Community and Regional Planning.
18. Blečić, I., Cecchini, A., Congiu, T., Fancello, G., & Trunfio, G. A. (2014). Walkability ex-plorer: An evaluation and design support tool for walkability. In Computational Sci-ence and Its Applications–ICCSA 2014: 14th International Conference, Guimarães, Portugal, June 30–July 3, 2014, Proceedings, Part IV 14 (pp. 511-521). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09147-1_37
19. Bağcı S (2019) Assessing the Walkability Principles: The Case Study of Mehmetçik Boulevard. Master’s thesis. İzmir Institute of Technology, Graduate School of Engi-neering and Sciences, Urban Design Pro-gram, İzmir, Turkey.
20. Garau, C., Annunziata, A., & Yamu, C. (2024). A walkability assessment tool coupling multi-criteria analysis and space syntax: the case study of Iglesias, Ita-ly. European Planning Studies, 32(2), 211-233. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2020.1761947
21. Shamsuddin, S., Hassan, N. R. A., & Bil-yamin, S. F. I. (2012). Walkable environ-ment in increasing the liveability of a city. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sci-ences, 50, 167-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.08.025
22. Park, S., Choi, K., & Lee, J. S. (2017). Oper-ationalization of path walkability for sus-tainable transportation. International journal of sustainable transporta-tion, 11(7), 471-485. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2016.1226996
23. Ceylan, R. (2018). A GIS-Based Walkable Service Area Analysis from Smart Growth Perspective in the city of Edirne. Journal of Multidisciplinary Research in Sustaina-bility, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.30562/jmrs.v1i1.17503