PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 6, 2026IET Intelligent Transport SystemsOpen Access

Revisiting Accessibility to Amenities: Equity Implications From Comparing Cumulative Opportunity Measure and Two‐Step Floating Catchment Area Method

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Authors

YCYue ChenWJWei JiangSOSteve O'Hern

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

This evaluation compares accessibility measures in urban planning, focusing on equity across different transportation modes.

Key Points

  • This research aims to compare the cumulative opportunity measure and the two-step floating catchment area method in terms of accessibility and equity.
  • Compared accessibility in 12 different scenarios using cumulative opportunity measure and 2SFCA.
  • Assessed two transportation modes: public transport and private car.
  • Evaluated six urban services: company, education, healthcare, shopping, restaurant, and scenery.
  • Analyzed equity using Gini coefficient and Palma ratio.
  • Cumulative opportunity measure results were more reflective of overall city structure.
  • Two-step floating catchment area method better indicated local characteristics and spatial heterogeneity.
  • Public transport accessibility is less equitable than private car under CO, but more equitable under 2SFCA.
  • Accessibility and equity of public transport are more influenced by the chosen method than private car.

Cite This Study

Chen et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/698585aa8f7c464f23009382https://doi.org/10.1049/itr2.70165
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share