Getting serious about the walking experience to maximize public transport investments
Looking more closely at the fundamental qualities of pedestrian access to public transport, recent research has clarified some of the more subjective factors of walkability that comprise the walking experience. It has been shown that the walking experience significantly impacts riders’ overall public transport experience and influences their decision to use public transport or not.
People are willing to walk almost twice to public transport as far in pedestrian-oriented environments – substantially increasing potential public transport ridership[i].
Connecting the walking experience with walking behavior
While perceptions and sensory experiences are subjective, there are helpful frameworks from which to base evaluations. Ewing and Handy provide a framework that illustrates how the physical environment and human perception influence walkability and our walking behaviors[ii].
Perceptions of time while walking
Our perception of time influences our decision to use public transport or not – if we think it will take too long to walk to public transport, we may opt for another mode of transport altogether. Influenced by the physical environment and individual sense of safety and comfort, perceived walking times can be difficult to measure. But a couple of key things we do know are:
- People are just not very good at estimating the distance or time to walk somewhere, and we have the tendency to overestimate[iii].
- Short stimulating activities are shown to leave us with bigger memory impressions than long and boring activities[iv].
Hillnhütter found that the perceived time spent walking through a pedestrian-oriented area with shops and buildings with interesting facades result in 26% longer accepted walking distances than along a boring street lined with large scale buildings with closed façades and few pedestrians[v].
To make such findings actionable in public transport planning, our UPPER colleague, UITP and Walk21 highlight a few strategies in their recent policy brief to reduce perceived walking times:
- Prioritize people walking in street design
- Review crossings to limit the barrier effect of car traffic
- Increase possibilities to access shops and services
- Identify preferable walking routes and effective footpath networks that are direct and convenient[vi]
How do you identify and promote preferable walking routes? There are several traditional and digital strategies, namely:
- Wayfinding – Serving as point-of-decision cues, wayfinding signs can change walking behaviors by:
- Providing directions to a destination
- Clarifying how long it takes to walk there[vii]
- Mobility as a Service (MaaS) platforms – MaaS platforms, like Google Maps or those developed by public transport authorities, can be used for individuals travel planning purposes or by a public transport authority. To promote pedestrian access, MaaS platforms should:
- Put walking at the top of the hierarchy and exploit nudging messaging[viii]
- Include individualized user profiles to gather user data and, in turn, tailor messaging[ix]
Human emotions while walking
To develop definitions to measure the physical environment and to test for significant associations with walking behaviors, Ewing and Handy found that physical characteristics of the street environment impact people’s perception of walking. For example:
- Noise negatively impacts perceptions of walking
- Windows on first floor façades positively impacts perceptions of walking[x]
By investigating head movements to show stimuli in different physical environments, Hillnhütter found that socially active pedestrian areas with shop windows can raise stimulation levels by about 70 – 90%, compared to surrounds with large-scale buildings, monotonous façades, and wide streets[xi]. By plotting such findings onto a circumplex model (below), he offers a clear illustration of the way in which physical environments influence the emotions of people walking, as well as the experience they have walking[xii].
While our reactions and experiences while walking are not uniform, this model is telling. Findings from other studies, like Golan et al., which explore women’s subjective pedestrian experiences, are not dissimilar either. Golan et al. conclude:
- Fear of crime was the top consideration for women when deciding to walk
- Street and sidewalk cleanliness and traffic volumes were the most influential factors after perceived security
- Streets and building designs should encourage “eyes on the street” and minimize the number of deserted spaces
- Traffic calming, including a better separation between cyclists and pedestrians; removing large off-street parking lots; and adding greenery and shrubbery to urban streets and sidewalks could enhance walkability for women[xiii]
While we highlighted more subjective—but also strong emotional—factors that affect people’s perceptions of walking to and from public transport, infrastructure also plays an important role. Are you surprised by what you see in in Hillnhütter’s model or by the factors that impact women’s walkability? We aren’t.
The evidence is clear: To maximize our investments in public transport, we must also focus on walkability – we must design streets that make people feel safe, secure, and comfortable walking. Only after we get serious about the walking experience, and our policies and investment decisions reflect that, will we realize the potential of public transport.
[i] Hillnhütter, “Pedestrian access to public transport,” 38 – 39. [ii] Ewing and Handy, “Measuring the unmeasurable: Urban design qualities related to walkability,” 67. [iii] Ralph et al., “Is it really too far to walk? Overestimating walk time and distance reduces walking,” 533. [iv] Hillnhütter, “Pedestrian access to public transport,” 65. [v] Hillnhütter, “Pedestrian access to public transport,” 171. [vi] Walk21. “Integrating Walking + Public Transport,” 7. [vii] Ralph et al., “Is it really too far to walk? Overestimating walk time and distance reduces walking,” 533. [viii] Madigral et al., “Pedestrian mobility in Mobility as a Service (MaaS): sustainable value potential and policy implications in the Paris region case,” 11. [ix] Pangbourne et al., “Persuasion profiles to promote pedestrianism: Effective targeting of active travel messages,” 311. [x] Ewing and Handy, “Measuring the unmeasurable: Urban design qualities related to walkability,” 67. [xi] Hillnhütter, “Pedestrian access to public transport,” 182. [xii] Hillnhütter, “Pedestrian access to public transport,” 175. [xiii] Golan et al., “Gendered walkability: Building a daytime walkability index for women,” 523.
