The impact of orbital motorways on intra-metropolitan accessibility: the case of Madrid's M-40

Gutiérrez, Javier; Gómez, Gabriel

doi:10.1016/s0966-6923(98)00029-5

Cited by 55 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This approach has been extensively used to appraise transport infrastructure, such as evaluating the impacts of new transport infrastructure. In Spain, several studies use this approach to analyse road network improvements, generally concluding that road investments bring positive benefits to accessibility changes ( [12][13][14][15]). Similarly, in Finland, improvements in road and rail networks between 1970 and 2007 were associated with positive accessibility changes and population growth [16].…”

Section: Accessibility Dimensions and Their Decompositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drivers of changes in Spanish accessibility for the 1960–2010 period

Condeço-Melhorado

Zofío

Christidis

2017

Eur. Transp. Res. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The accessibility of a certain place can evolve either as the direct result of transport changes or as a consequence of the spatial redistribution of economic activities. These two factors are often indistinguishable-especially at regional level-since improved infrastructure stimulates relocation of activities. Moreover, infrastructure investment choices tend to follow population and economic activity patterns, distorting the cause and effect relationship between infrastructure and accessibility even further. The methodology and results presented here decompose the impact of both factors in terms of accessibility using Spanish data between 1960 and 2010. During this period, Spain experienced profound changes in transport infrastructure and economic activity. Methods We use the potential accessibility indicator and resort to index number theory to disentangle the contribution of transport infrastructure from that of land-use changes. Detailed historical data on road infrastructure and population is used to represent the transport and land-use components of accessibility.Results Our results show that changes in transport infrastructure had a relevant impact on accessibility, as expected, but changes in the spatial distribution of population had an even greater effect. This outcome may be used as an argument for sustainable accessibility, a concept that advocates integration of transport and land use planning.

show abstract

Section: Accessibility Dimensions and Their Decompositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drivers of changes in Spanish accessibility for the 1960–2010 period

Condeço-Melhorado

Zofío

Christidis

2017

Eur. Transp. Res. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Location-based accessibility measures can be further divided into five types of measures (Geurs and Ritsema van Eck 2001;Tillema et al 2003;Geurs and van Wee 2004): (1) distance approaches based on direct distance measurement (e.g., Bertolini et al 2005;Curtis and Scheurer 2010;Ingram 1971); (2) contour measures (Breheny 1978) based on opportunities that can be accessed within a certain travel time, distance or cost (e.g., O'Sullivan et al 2000); (3) potential accessibility measures (Koenig 1980), scaled by a deterrence function (Hansen 1959) e.g., Gutierrez and Gomez 1999;Kawabata and Shen 2006); (4) measures based on balancing factors of spatial interaction models (Wilson 1967(Wilson , 1971Williams and Fotheringham 1984;Fotheringham and O'Kelly 1989;and (5) measures derived from time-space geography based on Hägerstrand's (1970) time-space prisms (classified as person-based measure in Geurs and van Wee 2004) (e.g.,;Miller 1991;Lovett et al 2002).…”

Section: Reviewing Accessibility Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring the Accessibility of Public Transport: A Critical Comparison Between Methods in Helsinki

Albacete

Olaru

Carril

et al. 2015

Appl. Spatial Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research compares two location-based methods of evaluating public transport accessibility and applies them in Helsinki. After discussing a series of methodological aspects, the authors calculate the Structural Accessibility Layer (SAL) public transport indicator and the Public Transport and Walking Accessibility Index (PTWAI) for a grid with 8,325 zones, comparable in size to the smallest census unit. Both methods are operational for urban planners and policy makers interested in a relatively straightforward way of quantifying the accessibility of sustainable transport modes such as public transport. The results display similar accessibility patterns when moving from larger to smaller isochrones (60 to 38 min). However, the findings are inconclusive between SAL and PTWAI: SAL (38 min) displays good accessibility by public transport (more than 94 % of the population living within two-thirds of the metropolitan area has very high and high access to public transport), but PTWAI indicates that 35 % of the population, primarily households with children (43 %), experience low and very low access. The contrasting results are mainly due to the derivation of the two indicators and have considerable implications for policy making. The findings of this research imply that PTWAI is preferable to planning assessments regarding public transport, given its relatively richer content. However, for multi-mode-based accessibility categorization, SAL appears more appropriate. It is the analyst's role to understand the objective and contents of each index and choose the tool fit for their purpose. Then, a judgement should be made on the trade-off between the Appl. Spatial Analysis (2017)

show abstract

“…7 As in other major metropolitan areas in the developed world (Hohenberg, 2004;Cavailhès et al, 2004;Goffette-Nagot, 2000;White, 1999;Wu, 1997, 1998), the process of suburbanisation has been driven by several forces like, for instance, the greater availability of land in the ring belt than in the core, the deconcentration of economic activity, the cheaper housing in the periphery and the development of a modern network of infrastructure that facilitates commuting by public and private transport (OECD, 2007;Gutiérrez and García-Palomares, 2005;Gutiérrez and Gómez, 1999;Llano, 2006;Cuadrado, Roura and Sierra, 2000;Rubalcaba, 1998;Suarez-Villa and Rama, 1996).…”

Section: Spatial Structure Of the Madrid Regionmentioning

confidence: 99%