Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Observational video analysis reveals recurring combinations of informal street activities drive traffic congestion in motorcycle-dominated cities, highlighting the need for dynamic curb management.
Urban traffic congestion in motorcycle-dependent cities such as Ho Chi Minh City (HCMC) is often examined through infrastructure capacity, traffic volume, or intersection performance. However, these approaches can overlook the behavioral and spatial dynamics embedded in everyday use of street space. This study adopts a micro-behavioral lens to examine how informal socio-economic activities and concurrent human vehicle interactions contribute to recurring congestion. Drawing on field observations and structured video analysis across representative road segments in HCMC, the research develops a behavior-coding scheme and identifies five behavioral groups (A–E). Spatial temporal intensity mapping and co-occurrence analysis show that congestion rarely stems from a single behavior; rather, it emerges from recurring combinations, particularly those involving traffic participation (A), street vending (B), logistics activity (C), and school or workplace-related activity (D). Based on these patterns, the study identifies four dominant congestion mechanisms: spatial encroachment, flow interruption, traffic weaving and conflict, and temporal density surges. These mechanisms reflect context-specific interactions shaped by street width, land use, and daily urban rhythms. The findings underscore the need to move beyond infrastructure-centered traffic management toward integrated behavioral and spatial approaches. Policy implications include context-sensitive curb-space management, time-based regulation of street activities, and closer coordination between transport planning and land use policy. Although grounded in HCMC, the proposed framework offers transferable insights for traffic governance in other motorcycle-reliant cities across the Global South.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thoi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: