SpringerLink
Log in

Pedestrian Perception of Safety in Areas with Newly Provided Pedestrian Facility: The Case of Bangalore’s Tender SURE (Specifications for Urban Utilities and Road Execution Project)

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Recent Advances in Traffic Engineering (RATE 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering ((LNCE,volume 377))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

According to India's Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MORTH), every sixth person killed in a road accident is a pedestrian, making pedestrians vulnerable road users. The general approach to mitigating such an epidemic is to implement corrective infrastructure measures. However, pedestrian perceptions of such changes are often neglected. Although a few studies in the Indian context on pedestrian perceptions of safety have been conducted, the majority of them have been done with the goal of advocating for improvements to existing old infrastructure. This becomes a reactive approach, while the current study aims to examine the safety perceptions of pedestrians in newly pedestrianized zones as a proactive approach by determining the factors that influence pedestrians’ perception of safety. The study area under consideration in this study is part of the newly constructed pedestrian zones as a part of the project Tender S.U.R.E. Bangalore. In the present study, principal component analysis (PCA) with a discrete choice model (ordinal logistic regression) was applied to determine the factors affecting the safety perception of pedestrians. Based on the results obtained it was found that pedestrian perceptions of safety were significantly affected by their income level, their frequency of walking, and the three factors derived from principal component analysis. The findings of this study also revealed that pedestrians were most concerned about the approaching speed of vehicles. Referring to the results obtained from the present study, government agencies can plan future interventions pertaining to infrastructural changes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now
Chapter
EUR 29.95
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
EUR 213.99
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
EUR 267.49
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Saxena A, Choudhury B (2022) Internalizing the externalities of urban private transport—a case of Gurugram, national capital region, India. Case Stud Transp Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2022.08.002

  2. Mphela T, Mokoka T, Dithole K (2021) Pedestrian motor vehicle accidents and fatalities in Botswana—an epidemiological study. Front Sustain Cities. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2021.666111

  3. The World Bank (2017) The High Toll of Traffic Injuries: Unacceptable and Preventable. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/29129/HighTollofTrafficInjuries.pdf?sequence=5andisAllowed=y

  4. Zegeer CV, Carter DL, Hunter WW, Richard Stewart J, Huang H, Do A, Sandt L (1982) Index for assessing pedestrian safety at intersections. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 1982(1):76–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198106198200110

  5. Saxena A (2022) Is street design and infrastructure perceived differently by persons of different ages, genders , and hierarchy of street ? Innov Infrastruct Solut. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-022-00880-2

  6. Dash DK (2019) 62 pedestrians die daily in India, up 84% in 4 years. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/62-pedestrians-die-daily-in-india-up-84-in-4-years/articleshow/72101003.cms

  7. Transport Research Wing (2019) Road accidents in India—2019. Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, MORTH

    Google Scholar 

  8. MOHUA (2020) Pedestrianisation in market places: MoHUA recommends holistic planning for pedestrian friendly market spaces in consultation with stake holders. https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1630613

  9. Registrar General & Census Commissioner., India (2011) 2011 Census data. https://censusindia.gov.in/2011-common/censusdata2011.html

  10. Police (2021) Bengaluru traffic. Accident Statistics. http://www.bangaloretrafficpolice.gov.in/Accidentstats.aspx

  11. Indian Urban space foundation (2012) Government of Karnataka project tender S.U.R.E. Report. Indian Urban space foundation

    Google Scholar 

  12. Pietrantonio H, Bornsztein LL (2015) Evaluating road safety audit procedures: some questions and a new method of study. Transp Plan Technol 38(8):909–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/03081060.2015.1079390

  13. Qi Y, Zhao Q (2017) Safety impacts of signalized lane merge control at highway work zones. Transp Plan Technol 40(5):577–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/03081060.2017.1314499

  14. Kim NS, Yoon SS, Yook D (2017) Performance comparison between pedestrian push-button and pre-timed pedestrian crossings at midblock: a Korean case study. Transp Plan Technol 40(6):706–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/03081060.2017.1325146

  15. Raad N, Burke MI (2018) What are the most important factors for pedestrian level-of-service estimation? A systematic review of the literature. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 2652(35). https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198118790623

  16. Rodriguez-Valencia A, Barrero GA, Ortiz-Ramirez HA (2020) Power of user perception on pedestrian quality of service. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 2674(5). https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198120914611

  17. Mikušová M, Hrkút P (2014) Public perception of selected road safety problems. Proc Soc Behav Sci 330–339

    Google Scholar 

  18. Dinh D, Vũ NH, McIlroy RC (2020) Effect of attitudes towards traffic safety and risk perceptions on pedestrian behaviours in Vietnam. IATSS Res 238–247

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ram T, Chand K (2016) Effect of drivers’ risk perception and perception of driving tasks on road safety attitude. Transp Res Part F Traf Psychol Behav

    Google Scholar 

  20. Espinoza F, del Valle Arenas Ramirez B, Izquierdo FA (2021) Road safety perception questionnaire (RSPQ) in Latin America: a development and validation study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

    Google Scholar 

  21. Anapakula KB, Eranki GA (2021) Develo** an index to evaluate the quality of pedestrian environment: case study application in an Indian metro. Transp Res Interdisc Perspect

    Google Scholar 

  22. Balasubramanian V, Bhardwaj R (2018) Pedestrians’ perception and response towards vehicles during road-crossing at nighttime. Accident Anal Prevent 128–135

    Google Scholar 

  23. Vijayawargiya V, Rokade S (2017) Identification of factors affecting pedestrian level of service of crosswalks at roundabouts. Int Res J Eng Technol (IRJET) 342–346

    Google Scholar 

  24. Bendak S, Alnaqb AM (2021) Factors affecting pedestrian behaviors at signalized crosswalks: an empirical study. J Saf Res 269–275

    Google Scholar 

  25. Bartolomeos K, Crof P (2013) Pedestrian safety—a road safety manual for decision makers and practitioners. The World Health Organization (WHO)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Barón L, da Costa JO, Soares F (2021) Effect of built environment factors on pedestrian safety in Portuguese urban areas. Applied System Innovation (Applied System Innovation)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Rankavata S, Tiwari G (2016) Pedestrians risk perception of traffic crash and built environment features—Delhi, India. Saf Sci 1–7

    Google Scholar 

  28. Bhaduri E, Manoj BS, Sen J (2019) Measuring user satisfaction of pedestrian facilities and its heterogeneity in urban India—a tale of three cities. J East Asia Soc Transp Stud

    Google Scholar 

  29. Kumar P (2007) The value of design : a study of pedestrian perception in New Delhi, India. Environment and Planning D-society & Space D

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kumar A, Ghosh I (2020) Analysis of spontaneous order of pedestrian–vehicle conflicts at signalized intersections. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board

    Google Scholar 

  31. Kathuria A, Vedagiri P (2020) Evaluating pedestrian vehicle interaction dynamics at un-signalized intersections: a proactive approach for safety analysis. Accident Anal Prevent

    Google Scholar 

  32. Chatterjee S, Mitra S (2019) Safety assessment of two-lane highway using a combined proactive and reactive approach: case study from Indian national highways. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board

    Google Scholar 

  33. Mukherjee D, Mitra S (2020) Pedestrian safety analysis of urban intersections in Kolkata, India using a combined proactive and reactive approach. J Transp Saf Secur

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kadali RB, Nivedan R, Perumal V (2015) Evaluation of pedestrian mid-block road crossing behavior using an artificial neural network (ANN). J Traf Transp Eng

    Google Scholar 

  35. Banerjee A, Maurya AK (2019) A comparative study of pedestrian movement behavior over foot over bridges under similar land-use type. Transp Res Proc. Elsevier

    Google Scholar 

  36. Rahula TM, Manoj M (2020) Categorization of pedestrian level of service perceptions and accounting its response heterogeneity and latent correlation on travel decisions. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 40–55

    Google Scholar 

  37. Neumann DL, Chan RCK, Boyle GJ (2015) Measures of personality and social psychological constructs. In: Saklofske DH, Gregory GM, Boyle J (eds) Measures of empathy: self-report, behavioral, and neuroscientific approaches. Elsevier, pp 257–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-386915-9.00010-3

  38. Korkmaz IH, Özceylan A, Özceylan E (2019) Investigating the academic success of industrial engineering students in terms of various variables. Proc Comput Sci 158:9–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.09.022

  39. Karamizadeh S, Abdullah SM, Manaf AA (2013) An overview of principal component analysis. J Signal Inf Process 173–175. https://doi.org/10.4236/jsip.2013.43B031

  40. Jolliffe IT, Cadima J (2016) Principal component analysis: a review and recent developments. Philos Trans R Soc A

    Google Scholar 

  41. Maskey R, Fei J (2018) Use of exploratory factor analysis in maritime research. Use of exploratory factor analysis in maritime research, pp 91–111

    Google Scholar 

  42. Dubey A (2018) The mathematics behind principal component analysis. https://towardsdatascience.com/the-mathematics-behind-principal-component-analysis-fff2d7f4b643

  43. Mishra S, Sarkar U (2017) Principal component analysis. Int J Livestock Res

    Google Scholar 

  44. Rossoni L, Engelbert R, Bellegard NL (2016) Normal science and its tools: reviewing the effects of factor analysis in management. Revista de Administração 51(2):198–211. https://doi.org/10.5700/rausp1234

  45. Han W, Zhao J (2020) Driver behaviour and traffic accident involvement among professional urban bus drivers in China. Transp Res Part F Traf Psychol Behav 74:184–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2020.08.007

  46. Birren JE (2007) Encyclopedia of gerontology. Elsevier

    Google Scholar 

  47. Fumagalli LAW, Rezende DA, Guimarães TA (2021) Challenges for public transportation: consequences and possible alternatives for the covid-19 pandemic through strategic digital city application. J Urban Manage 10(2):97–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jum.2021.04.002

  48. Coppola P, Silvestri F (2020) Assessing travelers’ safety and security perception in railway stations. Case Stud Transp Policy 8(4):1127–1136

    Google Scholar 

  49. Baldwin C, Stafford L (2019) The role of social infrastructure in achieving inclusive liveable communities: voices from regional Australia. Plan Pract Res 34(1):18–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2018.1548217

  50. Behrens R (2005) Accommodating walking as a travel mode in south African cities: towards improved neighbourhood movement network design practices. Plan Pract Res 20(2):163–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697450500414686

  51. Talen E (2002) Pedestrian access as a measure of urban quality. Plan Pract Res 17(3):257–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/026974502200005634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Guo Y, Yang L, Huang W (2020) Traffic safety perception, attitude, and feeder mode choice of metro commute: evidence from Shenzhen. Int J Environ Res Publ Health 17(24)

    Google Scholar 

  53. Nordfjærn T, Şimşekoğlu Ö, BrendeLind H (2014) Transport priorities, risk perception and worry associated with mode use and preferences among Norwegian commuters. Accident Anal Prevent 72:391–400

    Google Scholar 

  54. Nevelsteen K, Steenberghen T, Van Rompaey A (2012) Controlling factors of the parental safety perception on children's travel mode choice. Accident Anal Prevent 45:39–49

    Google Scholar 

  55. Papić Z, Jović A, Simeunović M, Saulić N (2020) Underestimation tendencies of vehicle speed by pedestrians when crossing unmarked roadway. Accident Anal Prevent 143:105586

    Google Scholar 

  56. Shi J, Wu C, Qian X (2020) The effects of multiple factors on elderly pedestrians’ speed perception and stop** distance estimation of approaching vehicles. Sustainability 12(13):5308

    Google Scholar 

  57. Butler AA, Lord SR, Fitzpatrick RC (2016) Perceptions of speed and risk: experimental studies of road crossing by older people. PLoS One 11(4)

    Google Scholar 

  58. Lyu Y, Forsyth A (2021) Attitudes, perceptions, and walking behavior in a Chinese city. J Transp Health 21:101047

    Google Scholar 

  59. Yoh K, Khaimook S, Doi K, Yamamoto T (2021) Study on influence of walking experience on traffic safety attitudes and values among foreign residents in Japan. IATSS Res

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Not available.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Indian Institute of Technology, Mumbai, India

    Aditya Saxena

  2. Global Academy of Technology, Bengaluru, India

    P. S. Reashma

  3. Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), Bengaluru, India

    Basavaraj Kabade

Authors
  1. Aditya Saxena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P. S. Reashma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Basavaraj Kabade
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. S. Reashma .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology, SVNIT, Surat, India

    Ashish Dhamaniya

  2. Transportation Research and Injury Prevention Centre (TRIPC), Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, India

    Sai Chand

  3. Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee, India

    Indrajit Ghosh

Ethics declarations

The authors report there are no competing interests to declare.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Saxena, A., Reashma, P.S., Kabade, B. (2024). Pedestrian Perception of Safety in Areas with Newly Provided Pedestrian Facility: The Case of Bangalore’s Tender SURE (Specifications for Urban Utilities and Road Execution Project). In: Dhamaniya, A., Chand, S., Ghosh, I. (eds) Recent Advances in Traffic Engineering. RATE 2022. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, vol 377. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4464-4_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4464-4_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-99-4463-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-99-4464-4

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation