A global assessment of street-network sprawl


Autoři: Christopher Barrington-Leigh aff001;  Adam Millard-Ball aff002
Působiště autorů: Institute for Health and Social Policy and McGill School of Environment, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada aff001;  Environmental Studies Department, University of California, Santa Cruz, California, United States of America aff002
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(11)
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223078

Souhrn

Disconnected urban street networks, which we call “street-network sprawl,” are strongly associated with increased vehicle travel, energy use and CO2 emissions, as shown by previous research in Europe and North America. In this paper, we provide the first systematic and globally commensurable measures of street-network sprawl based on graph-theoretic and geographic concepts. Using data on all 46 million km of mapped streets worldwide, we compute these measures for the entire Earth at the highest possible resolution. We generate a summary scalar measure for street-network sprawl, the Street-Network Disconnectedness index (SNDi), as well as a data-driven multidimensional classification that identifies eight empirical street-network types that span the spectrum of connectivity, from gridiron to dendritic (tree-like) and circuitous networks. Our qualitative validation shows that both the scalar and multidimensional measures are meaningfully comparable within and across countries, and successfully capture varied dimensions of walkability and urban development. We further show that in select high-income countries, our measures explain cross-sectional variation in household transportation decisions, and a one standard-deviation increase in SNDi is associated with an extra 0.25 standard deviations in cars owned per household. We aggregate our measures to the scale of countries, cities, and smaller geographies and describe patterns in street-network sprawl around the world. Latin America, Japan, South Korea, much of Europe, and North Africa stand out for their low levels of street-network sprawl, while the highest levels are found in south-east Asia, the United States, and the British Isles. Our calculations provide the foundation for future work to understand urban processes, predict future pathways of transportation energy consumption and emissions, and identify effective policy responses.

Klíčová slova:

Human mobility – Roads – Transportation – United States – Urban areas – Urban ecology – Urban environments – Walking


Zdroje

1. Seto KC, Guneralp B, Hutyra LR. Global forecasts of urban expansion to 2030 and direct impacts on biodiversity and carbon pools. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2012;109(40):16083–16088. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1211658109

2. Seto KC, Dhakal S, Bigio A, Blanco H, Delgado GC, Dewar D, et al. Human Settlements, Infrastructure and Spatial Planning. In: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2014. Available from: http://mitigation2014.org/report/publication/.

3. Galster G, Hanson R, Ratcliffe MR, Wolman H, Coleman S, Freihage J. Wrestling Sprawl to the Ground: Defining and measuring an elusive concept. Housing Policy Debate. 2001;12(4):681–717. doi: 10.1080/10511482.2001.9521426

4. Marshall WE, Piatkowski DP, Garrick NW. Community design, street networks, and public health. Journal of Transport & Health. 2014;1(4):326–340. doi: 10.1016/j.jth.2014.06.002

5. Barrington-Leigh C, Millard-Ball A. More connected urban roads reduce US GHG emissions. Environmental Research Letters. 2017;12(4):044008. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/aa59ba

6. Creutzig F, Baiocchi G, Bierkandt R, Pichler PP, Seto KC. Global typology of urban energy use and potentials for an urbanization mitigation wedge. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2015;112(20):201315545. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1315545112

7. Güneralp B, Zhou Y, Ürge-Vorsatz D, Gupta M, Yu S, Patel PL, et al. Global scenarios of urban density and its impacts on building energy use through 2050. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2017;114(34):8945–8950. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1606035114

8. Ewing R, Cervero R. Travel and the Built Environment. Journal of the American Planning Association. 2010;76(3):265–294. doi: 10.1080/01944361003766766

9. Fradkin PL. The Great Earthquake and Firestorms of 1906. How San Francisco Nearly Destroyed Itself. Berkeley: University of California Press; 2005.

10. Angel S, Blei AM, Civco DL, Parent J. Atlas of urban expansion. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy; 2012. Available from: http://atlasofurbanexpansion.org.

11. Pesaresi M, Huadong G, Blaes X, Ehrlich D, Ferri S, Gueguen L, et al. A global human settlement layer from optical HR/VHR RS data: concept and first results. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing. 2013;6(5):2102–2131. doi: 10.1109/JSTARS.2013.2271445

12. Schneider A, Woodcock CE. Compact, Dispersed, Fragmented, Extensive? A Comparison of Urban Growth in Twenty-five Global Cities using Remotely Sensed Data, Pattern Metrics and Census Information. Urban Studies. 2008;45(3):659–692. doi: 10.1177/0042098007087340

13. Barrington-Leigh C, Millard-Ball A. A century of sprawl in the United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2015;112(27):8244–8249. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1504033112

14. Wheeler SM. Built Landscapes of Metropolitan Regions: An International Typology. Journal of the American Planning Association. 2015;81(3):167–190. doi: 10.1080/01944363.2015.1081567

15. Angel S, Blei AM, Parent J, Lamson-Hall P, Sánchez NG, with Daniel L Civco, et al. Atlas of Urban Expansion—2016 Edition: Volume 1: Areas and Densities. NYU Urban Expansion Program at New York University, UN-Habitat, and the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy; 2016. Available from: http://www.lincolninst.edu/publications/other/atlas-urban-expansion-2016-edition.

16. Wilson B, Chakraborty A. The environmental impacts of sprawl: Emergent themes from the past decade of planning research. Sustainability. 2013;5(8):wvsa. doi: 10.3390/su5083302

17. Kantor P, Savitch HV. How to Study Comparative Urban Development Politics: A Research Note. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 2005;29(1):135–151. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2427.2005.00575.x

18. Seto KC, Golden JS, Alberti M, Turner BL. Sustainability in an urbanizing planet. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2017;114(34):8935–8938. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1606037114

19. Barrington-Leigh C, Millard-Ball A. The world’s user-generated road map is more than 80% complete. PLOS ONE. 2017;12(8):1–20. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0180698

20. Ewing R, Pendall R, Chen D. Measuring Sprawl and its Transportation Impacts. Transportation Research Record. 2003;(1831):175–183. doi: 10.3141/1831-20

21. Knaap GJ, Song Y, Nedovic-Budic Z. Measuring Patterns of Urban Development: New Intelligence for the War on Sprawl. Local Environment. 2007;12(3):239–257. doi: 10.1080/13549830601183412

22. Cervero R, Sarmiento OL, Jacoby E, Gomez LF, Neiman A. Influences of Built Environments on Walking and Cycling: Lessons from Bogotá. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation. 2009;3(4). doi: 10.1080/15568310802178314

23. Marshall W, Garrick N. Effect of Street Network Design on Walking and Biking. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board. 2010;2198:103–115. doi: 10.3141/2198-12

24. Salon D, Boarnet MG, Handy S, Spears S, Tal G. How do local actions affect VMT? A critical review of the empirical evidence. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment. 2012;17(7):495–508. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2012.05.006

25. Marshall W, Garrick N, Marshall S. Street Networks. In: Hickman R, Givoni M, Bonilla D, Banister D, editors. Handbook on Transport and Development. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar; 2015. p. 208–226.

26. Dong H. Were Home Prices in New Urbanist Neighborhoods More Resilient in the Recent Housing Downturn? Journal of Planning Education and Research. 2015;35(1):5–18. doi: 10.1177/0739456X14560769

27. Wang J. Resilience of Self-Organised and Top-Down Planned Cities—A Case Study on London and Beijing Street Networks. PLOS ONE. 2015;10(12):1–20.

28. Handy S, Paterson RG, Butler K. Planning For Street Connectivity: Getting from Here to There. Chicago: APA Planning Advisory Service; 2003.

29. Marshall S. Streets and Patterns. Abingdon: Spon Press; 2005.

30. Knight PL, Marshall WE. The metrics of street network connectivity: their inconsistencies. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability. 2015;8(3):241–259.

31. Xie F, Levinson D. Measuring the Structure of Road Networks. Geographical Analysis. 2007;39(3):336–356. doi: 10.1111/j.1538-4632.2007.00707.x

32. Ballou RH, Rahardja H, Sakai N. Selected country circuity factors for road travel distance estimation. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 2002;36(9):843–848. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0965-8564(01)00044-1.

33. Parthasarathi P, Hochmair H, Levinson D. Street network structure and household activity spaces. Urban Studies. 2015;52(6):1090–1112. doi: 10.1177/0042098014537956

34. Giacomin DJ, Levinson DM. Road network circuity in metropolitan areas. Environment & Planning B: Planning & Design. 2015;42:1040–1053. doi: 10.1068/b130131p

35. Boeing G. A multi-scale analysis of 27,000 urban street networks: Every US city, town, urbanized area, and Zillow neighborhood. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science. 2018;Online First.

36. Laboratory ORN. Landscan 2012; 2013. Available from: http://web.ornl.gov/sci/landscan/.

37. Jacobs AB. Great streets. New ed ed. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press; 1995.

38. Southworth M, Ben-Joseph E. Streets and the Shaping of Towns and Cities. 2nd ed. Washington, D.C.: Island Press; 2003.

39. Forsyth A, Krizek KJ. Promoting walking and bicycling: Assessing the evidence to assist planners. Built Environment. 2010;36(4):429–446. doi: 10.2148/benv.36.4.429

40. Guerra E. The Built Environment and Car Use in Mexico City: Is the Relationship Changing over Time? Journal of Planning Education and Research. 2014;34(4):394–408. doi: 10.1177/0739456X14545170

41. Zegras PC, Hannan VA. Dynamics of Automobile Ownership under Rapid Growth. Case Study of Santiago, Chile. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board. 2012;2323:80–89. doi: 10.3141/2323-10

42. Smith RC. Colonial Towns of Spanish and Portuguese America. Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians. 1955;14(4):3–12. doi: 10.2307/987727

43. Duany A, Plater-Zyberk E, Speck J. Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream. New York: North Point Press; 2001.

44. Connell J. Beyond Manila: Walls, Malls, and Private Spaces. Environment and Planning A. 1999;31(3):417–439. doi: 10.1068/a310417

45. Leisch H. Gated communities in Indonesia. Cities. 2002;19(5):341–350. doi: 10.1016/S0264-2751(02)00042-2

46. Barter P. Transport, urban structure and ‘lock-in’ in the Kuala Lumpur Metropolitan Area. International Development Planning Review. 2004;26(1):1–24. doi: 10.3828/idpr.26.1.1


Článek vyšel v časopise

PLOS One


2019 Číslo 11