This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Transportation planning has long prioritized the efficiency of movement. However, the concept of accessibility represents a more comprehensive evolution, shifting focus from movement (i.e., trips) to the potential to spatially interact with desired destinations. Despite growing recognition of accessibility-based planning approaches, the concept remains fragmented, with inconsistent definitions and unclear interpretations. To this end, this paper makes a methodological contribution by specifying a family of accessibility measures that are grounded in the shared 'gravity-based' theoretical roots of spatial interaction models, particularly their balancing factors. From this foundation, we outline four members of the family: the 'unconstrained' measure (i.e., Hansen-type accessibility), the 'total-constrained' measure (i.e., a constrained version of the Hansen-type accessibility), the 'singly-constrained' measure (i.e., related to the popular two-step floating catchment approach - 2SFCA), and the 'doubly-constrained' measure representing realized access (i.e., equal to the doubly-constrained spatial interaction model). These measures can be interpreted as either the number of accessible opportunities or accessible population (i.e., market potential). A toy example illustrates how they produce interpretable unit-based values, offering a clearer and more coherent basis for accessibility analysis.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Soukhov et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: