Content uploaded by Angela Curl
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Angela Curl on Aug 12, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Measuring what Matters: Comparing the Lived Experience to Objective Measures of Accessibility
Abstract
Accessibility is an enduring concept in Transport Planning, historically relating to the performance of the transport system and more recently to the understanding of social aspects of transport planning and practice. Accessibility Planning, set in the context of addressing social exclusion, is one example of an applied approach to accessibility which seeks to reflect user perspectives. However, translating the concept into practice is problematic. Measurement is dominated by time and distance and separation of people from destinations, rather than reflecting individuals’ perceptions. The core aims of this thesis are to critically appraise dominant approaches to Accessibility Planning and to understand how objective measures relate to perceptions of accessibility. The thesis is structured into two main empirical stages. Firstly a review of current approaches is undertaken through engagement with accessibility practitioners in England and a comparative analysis of accessibility measures in the English Core Accessibility Indicators and National Travel Survey. Secondly a mixed methods case study, utilising household survey and mental mapping interviews in Greater Nottingham, is presented. Statistical analyses are used to compare objective and self-reported measures of accessibility and to explore factors contributing to perceptions of accessibility. Perceived accessibility is more strongly related to selfreported measures than to objective measures. Demographic characteristics and attitudes are also important in explaining variation in perceptions. For example, while an elderly person may perceive accessibility to be worse because of physical mobility issues, car users may perceive inaccessibility due to lack of awareness of alternatives, leading to different policy approaches. A grounded theory analysis of interview data highlights that affective and symbolic factors are useful in understanding perceptions of accessibility, in addition to the instrumental factors more usually studied. Recommendations include a need to incorporate subjective measurement alongside more traditional accessibility measures, in line with wider policy discourses such as the recent development of subjective wellbeing measures by the Office for National Statistics.
... In response to recent calls for more research in this area (including Lättman, 2018;Curl, 2013;van Wee, 2016), the overarching objective of this paper is to understand the influence of attitudes and objective walking accessibility on perceived walking accessibility and the consequences for realised walking behaviour. In order to achieve the overall objective, we address the following research questions: ...
... For example, people with a car affinity perceive the accessibility of a certain destination differently than people who have more positive attitudes towards public transport or cycling due to their different sets of perceived mode options (Curl, 2013). Thus, the question arises as to what extent different travel attitudes affect the perception of general accessibility and whether that influences travel behaviour. ...
... p = .837). This supports other research that has found a mismatch between objectively measured accessibility and perceptions of accessibility (Curl, 2013;Ball et al., 2008;Tuckel and Milczarski, 2015;van der Vlugt et al., 2019), but may also be due to the investigation area, which is located in an urban area with very high walkscore values, meaning that there is limited variation in objective accessibility in our study area. Secondly, the model shows that a positive attitude towards public transport increases perceived walking accessibility (β = 0.44, p < .01). ...
People are driven by their perceptions. Perceptions of the environment shape mobility decisions and represent the “lived reality” of accessibility but are mostly disregarded in common accessibility analysis. This paper explores the role of perceived accessibility. By using a structural equation modelling (SEM) approach, we investigate multiple relations between travel attitudes, socio-demographic factors, objective walking accessibility, perceived walking accessibility and realised walking behaviour in three steps. Firstly, we analyse the influence of objective walking accessibility and travel attitudes on perceived walking accessibility. Secondly, we look at perceived walking accessibility as a mediator variable and, finally, we investigate the association between perceived walking accessibility and walking behaviour. Key results imply that travel attitudes are important in understanding variations in perceptions, in terms of direct effects and as mediator variables. Perceived walking accessibility directly affects the probability of walking and plays, therefore, an important role in understanding travel behaviour. The implications of our results are discussed with regard to future research gaps and policy
... However, despite being such a vastly researched area, the majority of our empirical understanding of accessibility today has been built upon objective assessments and evaluations of the concept that miss out on individual perceptions. To clarify, the terms objective and subjective are commonly used in social psychology research, where subjective refers to individual experiences and evaluations of the own "perceived reality", whereas objective refers to a more positivistic view of an existing "official reality" (Curl, 2013). As these approaches capture different aspects of reality, empirical research relying on objective approaches and ignoring individual perspectives and differences ultimately leaves our knowledge and understanding of accessibility incomplete. ...
... Nevertheless, this dimension is often implicitly presumed when presenting and interpreting the results, resulting in assessments and subsequently also theories on accessibility that consequently ignore individual experiences and desires without explicitly regarding this as a limitation or "missing perspective". Several researchers have recently pointed out the need for incorporating the individual perspective of accessibility (Curl, 2013;Weber & Kwan, 2003) in order to reach an understanding of accessibility that take into consideration the needs and expectations of the individual, rather than focusing on selected, objective attributes in the essence of "one size fits all". Despite this, assessments and evaluations of accessibility still generally rely on methodologies and approaches that are unrelated to individual experiences of accessibility (Curl et al., 2015). ...
... Alas, instead of assuming homogeneity in large segments of the population, a distinction between objective accessibility and perceived accessibility is highly relevant. A subjective approach to accessibility is also expected to have benefits in several areas related to social consequences, such as preventing social inclusion and increasing well-being (Currie & Stanley, 2008;Curl, 2013;Hui & Habib, 2014). ...
This thesis fills a gap in contemporary transport research and planning as it introduces perceived accessibility as a theoretical and methodological concept for incorporating the individual dimension of accessibility in current practice. Perceived accessibility is defined as “how easy it is to live a satisfactory life with the help of the transport system”, and is proposed as a complement to objective measures and understandings of accessibility.
The thesis includes three studies. Study I developed a measure for capturing perceived accessibility with a specific transport mode, based on theories and conceptualizations of accessibility. Study II looked at determinants of perceived accessibility, and Study III further developed the measure of perceived accessibility to include actual travel (combinations of transport modes), and explored the relation between perceived accessibility and objectively measured accessibility for the same area of study in Sweden. In all, the thesis provides background ideas and theory on perceived accessibility, and a validated quantitative approach to capturing perceived accessibility in day-to-day travel. Empirical findings further support the complementary nature of the approach and results show that assessments of perceived accessibility can help in determining where to direct interventions aiming at improving accessibility by evaluating different segments of individuals, or different transport modes. The method developed for capturing perceived accessibility shows merit in contributing to further theory development on accessibility by its ability to identify determinants of perceived accessibility and identifying segments of the population that experience significantly lower accessibility than other groups, and are at risk of experiencing social exclusion or suffer from transport disadvantage.
... Previous empirical findings also support the suggestion that subjective experiences and perceptions may be as important as conventional objective indicators when designing and evaluating a socially inclusive transport system. For instance, feelings of safety (Lättman et al., 2016a), attitudes, and affective and symbolic factors (Curl, 2013) have assessable effects on perceived accessibility. ...
... There are several approaches for measuring objective accessibility, ranging from the simpler conventional methods that capture distances and travel times from A to B, up to more complex measures that capture and compare aspects of several different accessibility-dimensions, such as the SNATMUS-tool developed by Curtis and Scheurer (2016). The overviews by Scheurer and Curtis (2007), Curl (2013), and Ryan, Lin, Xia, and Robinson (2016) provide thorough descriptions and evaluations of different accessibility measures commonly used in research, divided into six methodological categories; Spatial separation measures, Contour measures, Gravity measures, Competition measures, Time-space measures, Utility measures, and Network measures. Although these measures each have merit, they have been criticized for putting too much focus on (reducing) travel times and the importance of travel times to the users (Curl, 2013), and by relying on levels of accessibility to a specific set of destinations, when other destinations may be equally or more important for overall accessibility. ...
... The overviews by Scheurer and Curtis (2007), Curl (2013), and Ryan, Lin, Xia, and Robinson (2016) provide thorough descriptions and evaluations of different accessibility measures commonly used in research, divided into six methodological categories; Spatial separation measures, Contour measures, Gravity measures, Competition measures, Time-space measures, Utility measures, and Network measures. Although these measures each have merit, they have been criticized for putting too much focus on (reducing) travel times and the importance of travel times to the users (Curl, 2013), and by relying on levels of accessibility to a specific set of destinations, when other destinations may be equally or more important for overall accessibility. Moreover, Curl (2013) points out that the current (objective) measures may not even meet their intended outcomes, such as helping in providing accessibility to those most in need (e.g. ...
Accessibility has conventionally been measured and evaluated ignoring user perceptions in favor of focusing on travel time and distance to a number of pre-determined destinations. Acknowledging this gap, we recently developed a scale for perceived accessibility PAC (Lättman, Friman, & Olsson 2016b) aimed at capturing the individual perspective of accessibility with a certain travel mode. In this paper, we 1) further develop the PAC measure of perceived accessibility in order to capture how easy it is to live a satisfactory life with the help of the transport system, 2) compare levels of perceived accessibility between residential areas and main travel modes, and 3) compare residents’ perceived accessibility to the objective accessibility level for the same residential area. Data from 2711 residents of Malmö, Sweden show that perceived accessibility is consistently different from objective accessibility across 13 residential areas, with minor differences in levels of perceived accessibility between areas. Surprisingly, bicycle users rate their accessibility significantly higher than those who mainly use the car or public transport for daily travel, contrary to objective accessibility assumptions. These differences point at the importance of including perceived accessibility as a complementary tool when planning for and evaluating transport systems.
... This can be a limitation, as it may result in flawed interpretations where the needs, experiences, and desires of individuals tend to be overlooked. This has led to the development of an approach for assessing and understanding perceived accessibility (Curl, 2013;Curl et al., 2015;Lättman et al., 2018;Pot et al., 2021). Perceived accessibility is defined as 'the possibility to live the life one wants with the help of the transport system' (Lättman, Olsson, & Friman, 2016, p.16). ...
... These dimensions are typically based on spatial indicators (also known as calculated or objective accessibility indicators). Recent research has revealed discrepancies between calculated measures of accessibility and how individuals perceive their own accessibility (Curl, 2013;Curl et al., 2015;Lättman et al., 2018;Pot et al., 2021). Hence, a narrow focus on calculated indicators can lead to an incomplete picture; consequently, our knowledge of how different policies and transport investments for increased inclusion affect individual accessibility may be flawed. ...
... Objective measures concern the objective options for travel, such as the built environment, attributes of transport modes, travel times, travel costs, and travel distance, while subjective measures concern individual travel experiences (Curl et al., 2011). In practice, most research and practice on transport accessibility mainly depends on objective measures despite criticism for their focus on (reducing) travel cost and being insensitive to different individuals' needs (Curl, 2013;Pot et al., 2021). Lättman et al. (2018) emphasized that in order to achieve access-for-all, there should be complementary measures which identify individuals' experiences that are shaped by own preferences, abilities, and attitudes. ...
... It complements the objective approach by including the view of the individuals without strictly specifying what is to be included in the individual assessment of accessibility (Lättman et al., 2016). The subjective accessibility concerns attribute that are important to the individual such as feeling of safety and security, as well as, perceptions on time and distances to destinations (Curl, 2013;Pot et al., 2021). Depending on contexts and preferences, individuals may perceive accessibility differently, thus different satisfactions on their trips. ...
... Perceptions of confirmed accessibility influence travel decisions. According to Curl (2013), perceived accessibility is more related to travel decision-making than an objective approach. Cascetta et al. (2013) and Lä ttman et al. (2018) explain that individual characteristics are determining factors in travel decisions. ...
Purpose
Accessibility is critical in tourism planning for protected islands, especially when balancing tourism and conservation interests. This study aims to explore the dimensions of accessibility that impact tourists’ decisions to visit protected islands and encourage tourism. The accessibility dimension is essential in designing sustainable tourism management of protected islands.
Design/methodology/approach
This study was conceptualized by integrating the concept of accessibility in the context of transport accessibility, accessible tourism, protected areas and protected islands. In a sample of 487 surveys, factor analysis and structural equation model-partial least squares were used to examine the physical and nonphysical accessibility dimensions.
Findings
The primary objective of this study is to build a conceptual framework for the tourism accessibility of protected islands. This study confirms that accessibility is perceived in three dimensions: destination accessibility, individual accessibility and protected island accessibility. It is also found that all three accessibility dimensions have a significant influence on the decision to visit, with protected island accessibility as the lowering factor. This study demonstrates that, theoretically, tourism accessibility in protected islands should be treated as a convenience and restriction to balance the function of protected areas and tourism.
Research limitations/implications
The findings of this study can be generalized because the notion of accessibility dimensions is derived from a theoretical investigation of several contexts (transport accessibility, accessible tourism, protected areas and island characteristics) to identify more particular aspects. In addition, the results of the theoretical investigation were tested using quantitative methods with high statistical power (80%). However, saturation has not been reached, because thorough research on tourism accessibility on this protected island is still scarce. Within the same framework, application and duplicate research are required to increase the generalizability of the proposed concept. Therefore, the authors recommend further studies to validate the protected islands’ accessibility concept in a broader context by replicating the study in a more diversified timeline, sample and destination setting.
Practical implications
This study concludes that all dimensions of accessibility in protected islands must be considered from two perspectives: convenience and constraints. Conveniences can be constructed through tourists’ perceptions of accessibility. Destination accessibility should be designed with a “back to nature” mindset, excluding hedonistic elements. Individual accessibility is achieved by applying high safety, hygiene and health standards as well as environmental ethics standards that are consistent with the natural characteristics of the environment. This balance between constraint and convenience demonstrates that, while tourism accessibility must be made as comfortable as possible for all individuals, there are particular areas whose accessibility must be controlled to preserve them. The convenience of accessibility for universal access should not be allowed to lead to mass tourism that affects the ecosystem in protected areas.
Originality/value
The novelty of this study lies in the finding that the tourism accessibility of protected islands can be divided into three types: destination accessibility, individual accessibility and protected island accessibility. This study also demonstrates the significant influence of accessibility on tourists’ decisions to visit. Accordingly, the protected island accessibility dimension can create a perception of difficult accessibility and lower tourists’ decisions to visit. This study concludes that all elements influencing the perception of tourism accessibility on a protected island must be considered to sustainably manage convenience and restrictions to avoid mass tourism. Therefore, it is recommended that these three dimensions be considered in visitor management programs.
... We are aware that this assumption is not always true in reality. Anyhow, the presented type of accessibility analysis is considered an objective, location-based approach [17,25] and specific spatial insight is possible due to the strongly disaggregated population data. Of course, the approach includes errors due to the spatial and thematic highly resolved population disaggregation. ...
Purpose
Rapid accessibility of (intensive) medical care can make the difference between life and death. Initial care in case of strokes is highly dependent on the location of the patient and the traffic situation for supply vehicles. In this methodologically oriented paper we want to determine the inequivalence of the risks in this respect.
Methods
Using GIS we calculate the driving time between Stroke Units in the district of Münster, Germany for the population distribution at day- & nighttime. Eight different speed scenarios are considered. In order to gain the highest possible spatial resolution, we disaggregate reported population counts from administrative units with respect to a variety of factors onto building level.
Results
The overall accessibility of urban areas is better than in less urban districts using the base scenario. In that scenario 6.5% of the population at daytime and 6.8% at nighttime cannot be reached within a 30-min limit for the first care. Assuming a worse traffic situation, which is realistic at daytime, 18.1% of the population fail the proposed limit.
Conclusions
In general, we reveal inequivalence of the risks in case of a stroke depending on locations and times of the day. The ability to drive at high average speeds is a crucial factor in emergency care. Further important factors are the different population distribution at day and night and the locations of health care facilities. With the increasing centralization of hospital locations, rural residents in particular will face a worse accessibility situation.
... While objective measures reflect important information of accessibility in various geographical areas, they are not able to consider other contextual determinants like culture, society, individual preferences, or destination attraction factors (such as: economy and demographics) [30]. Neither they are able to differentiate variations of individuals or groups in accessibility, the awareness of individuals for certain opportunities or accessibility options, and they are not enough to differentiate between satisfaction levels of individuals' accessibility and their perceptions [26,[31][32][33][34]. Therefore, incorporating subjective indicators represented by travel behavior and individuals' perception [30] in evaluating the impact of waterfront accessibility is important and sorely needed. ...
Waterfront accessibility is one of the major planning aspects of cities. However, tackling this issue from the Human Well-Being (HWB) perspective is relatively new. Alexandria is one of the leading Mediterranean cities that was planned, shaped, and configured as based on its direct linkage to the waterfront. Nowadays, city extensions make many of its newly developed zones detached from the waterfront. This paper investigates the correlations between waterfront accessibility and HWB in Alexandria. It uses an analytical approach-based on statistical investigations-to compare HWB in two zones based on their proximity to the waterfront. The results show that detailed configuration of street pattern and travel duration are the most influencing attributes on waterfront accessibility. Consequently, these attributes have a higher impact on residents' satisfaction or negative affect, and therefore their HWB than other attributes. The paper concludes with guidelines to policymakers, urban planners, and researchers' contributions to waterfront accessibility. Ó 2020 THE AUTHORS. Published by Elsevier BV on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Ain Shams University. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by-nc-nd/4.0/).
... This is by necessity simplistic as there is collinearity between access to different destinations and it becomes complicated to include all destinations separately. Although separate analyses by destination and by mode have previously been reported (Curl 2013) the purpose here is to focus on overall accessibility that is not specific to particular modes or destinations and this requires some simplification of predictor variables. Additionally, we include socio-demographic variables of age, gender and access to a car. ...
As a primary objective in transport planning urban neighbourhood accessibility plays an essential role in the sustainable transformation of cities and their infrastructure. In most studies, accessibility is objectively measured using aggregate travel time or generalised costs as an indicator of the separation of people from places. However, this approach does not reflect perceptions of residents, which ultimately shape mobility decisions and represent the “lived reality” of accessibility. This paper addresses this research gap, adding to a growing evidence base on understanding the relationship between perceived and objective measures of accessibility, and discusses opportunities for incorporating perceptions into measures of accessibility. We offer suggestions for how and why individual perceptions of accessibility differ from objective measures using data from Germany and the UK.
... Perceptions of one's local neighbourhood have been shown to be as important as its objective characteristics in influencing accessibility (Curl, 2013) and mobility choices (Schwanen and Mokhtarian, 2005) so it is important to understand how changes in the built environment influence perceptions of the neighbourhood, something we have not been able to do here. For example, Curl et al. (2015) found that while reported levels of walking did not change following "home zone" interventions, perceptions of the walkability of the local area improved, which may be a precondition for behaviour change. ...
This paper examines changes to the walkability of the built environment and associated changes in walking behaviour following area regeneration or relocation in Glasgow, UK. The aim is to contribute to longitudinal evidence of links between the built environment and walking behaviour. Most studies to date have been cross-sectional and the evidence they provide that changing the built environment will lead to changes in walking behaviour is weak. Our study examines how changes in neighbourhood walkability influence levels of walking in the local area. We use household survey data from deprived neighbourhoods in Glasgow undergoing housing-led and area regeneration at two time points, 2011 and 2015. Measures of walkability were calculated for each year as a product of intersection density (connectivity) and dwelling density and attached to survey data. Relationships between changes in walkability and repeated measures of walking frequency are examined. We compare changes in walking between those who move house compared with those who experience changes to the built environment in their existing home location. Those who relocate (‘movers’) are more likely to increase their frequency of walking in the neighbourhood, but this is not necessarily as a result of changes in the built environment as measured using walkability metrics. Prior walking habits are a strong influence, with those who walk at baseline being more likely to increase their walking later. Environmental improvements through renewal programmes are often of insufficient quality or extent to stimulate increased walking. It is likely that area regeneration needs to be combined with people-based and social interventions to produce ‘behavioural spillovers’ that encourage walking habits.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.