This study explores the challenges faced by captive pedestrians—individuals who rely on walking as their only affordable travel option—in navigating urban streets. Using route data from pedestrians in New Delhi, India, we classified respondents into captive or choice pedestrians based on public transport affordability, household vehicle ownership, and accessibility. Captive pedestrians comprised 68% of the sample. We analyzed both reported walking routes and corresponding alternative routes to identify patterns in route selection and travel distances. This study confirmed that distance is the most important variable that affects the route choice of captive pedestrians. Our findings revealed that even though captive pedestrians predominantly opted for the shortest routes, they still tended to travel longer distances compared with their choice counterparts, with female captives walking farther than males. This study highlights the importance of ensuring safe, risk-free walking environments that better accommodate the transport needs of this pedestrian group.
BorstH. C.de VriesS. I.GrahamJ. M. A.van DongenJ. E. F.BakkerI.MiedemaH. M. E.Influence of Environmental Street Characteristics on Walking Route Choice of Elderly People. Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 29, No. 4, 2009, pp. 477–484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.08.002.
2.
CarruthersR.DickM.SaurkarA.Affordability of Public Transport in Developing Countries. (No. TP-3). World Bank Group, Washington, D.C., 2005.
3.
HidayatiI.YamuC.TanW.Realised Pedestrian Accessibility of an Informal Settlement in Jakarta, Indonesia. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, Vol. 14, No. 4, 2021, pp. 434–456. https://doi.org/10.1080/17549175.2020.1814391.
4.
JacquesC.ManaughK.El-GeneidyA.Rescuing the Captive [Mode] User: An Alternative Approach to Transport Market Segmentation. Transportation, Vol. 40, No. 3, 2013, pp. 625–645. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-012-9437-2.
5.
BraunR. R.RoddinM. F.Quantifying the Benefits of Separating Pedestrians and Vehicles. NCHRP Report No. 189. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1978.
6.
SarkarS.Determination of Service Levels for Pedestrians, with European Examples. Transportation Research Record, Vol. 1405, 1993, p. 35.
7.
StrakaA. V.Suburban Elderly Transportation: Case Study of Richmond, B.C. Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia, 1989.
8.
BrownA. E.Car-Less or Car-Free? Socioeconomic and Mobility Differences among Zero-Car Households. Transport Policy, Vol. 60, 2017, pp. 152–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRANPOL.2017.09.016.
9.
BardakaE.JinX.McDonaldN.SteinerR.LaMondiaJ.North Carolina State University, Florida International University, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Auburn University, and College of Design, Construction & Planning University of Florida. Emerging Mobility Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged. Report No. Project C3. 2022.
10.
StarkeyP.HineJ.Poverty and Sustainable Transport: How Transport Affects Poor People with Policy Implications for Poverty Reduction: A Literature Review. UN Habitat; Partnership on Sustainable, Low Carbon Transport (SLoCaT); Overseas Development Institute (ODI), 2014.
11.
GoelR.MohanD.Investigating the Association between Population Density and Travel Patterns in Indian Cities—An Analysis of 2011 Census Data. Cities (London, England), Vol. 100, 2020, p. 102656. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CITIES.2020.102656.
12.
BentonJ. S.JenningsG.WalkerJ.EvansJ.“Walking Is Our Asset”: How to Retain Walking as a Valued Mode of Transport in African Cities. Cities, Vol. 137, 2023, P. 104297. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CITIES.2023.104297.
13.
Adriazola-SteilC.OhlundH.El-SamraS.TargaF.ZayasG.Investing for Momentum in Active Mobility. World Resources Institute and World Bank Group, Washington, D.C., 2021.
14.
KlugmanJ.A Sourcebook for Poverty Reduction Strategies: Core Techniques and Cross-Cutting Issues. World Bank Group, Washington, D.C., 2002.
15.
ShumiS.ZuidgeestM. H. P.MartinezJ. A.EfroymsonD.Van MaarseveenM. F. A. M.Understanding the Relationship Between Walkability and Quality-of-Life of Women Garment Workers in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Applied research in quality of life, Vol. 10, 2014, pp. 263–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-014-9312-8.
16.
WHO. Global Status Report on Road Safety 2023. World Health Organization, Geneva, 2023.
17.
BoothD.HanmerL.LovellE.Poverty and Transport: A Report Prepared for the World Bank in Collaboration with DFID. Overseas Development Institute (ODI), London, 2000.
18.
BereitschaftB.Do Socially Vulnerable Urban Populations Have Access to Walkable, Transit-Accessible Neighborhoods? A Nationwide Analysis of Large U.S. Metropolitan Areas. Urban Science, Vol. 7, No. 1, 2023, p. 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/URBANSCI7010006.
19.
HananelR.BerechmanJ.Justice and Transportation Decision-Making: The Capabilities Approach. Transport Policy, Vol. 49, 2016, pp. 78–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.04.005.
20.
RahulT. M.VermaA.A Study of Acceptable Trip Distances Using Walking and Cycling in Bangalore. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 38, 2014, pp. 106–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JTRANGEO.2014.05.011.
21.
MorrisE. A.BlumenbergE.GuerraE.Does Lacking a Car Put the Brakes on Activity Participation? Private Vehicle Access and Access to Opportunities among Low-Income Adults. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 136, 2020, pp. 375–397. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2020.03.021.
22.
BostockL.Pathways of Disadvantage? Walking as a Mode of Transport among Low-Income Mothers. Health & social care in the community, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2001, pp. 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1046/J.1365-2524.2001.00275.X.
23.
CSE. The Cost of Urban Commute: Balancing Affordability and Sustainability of Public Transport. Centre for Science and Environment, New Delhi, 2019.
24.
TitheridgeH.MackettR.ChristieN.Oviedo HernándezD.YeR.Transport and Poverty: A Review of the Evidence (UCLTI Publications ). UCL Transport Institute, University College London, London, 2014.
25.
JocoyC. L.Del CasinoV. J.Homelessness, Travel Behavior, and the Politics of Transportation Mobilities in Long Beach, California. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 42, No. 8, 2010, pp. 1943–1963. https://doi.org/10.1068/A42341.
26.
AroraA.TiwariG.A Handbook for Socio-Economic Impact Assessment (SEIA) of Future Urban Transport (FUT) Projects. TRIPP, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, 2007.
27.
ITF. Income Inequality, Social Inclusion and Mobility. International Transport Forum Roundtable Reports No. 164. OECD Publishing, Paris, 2017. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1787/g2g7ae77-en.
28.
TuchoG. T.A Review on the Socio-Economic Impacts of Informal Transportation and Its Complementarity to Address Equity and Achieve Sustainable Development Goals. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science, Vol. 69, No. 1, 2022, pp. 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/S44147-022-00074-8.
29.
OlveraL. D.PlatD.PochetP.Changes in Daily Mobility Patterns in Dakar (Senegal). 14thWorld Conference on Transport Research, WCTRS-Tongji Iniversity, Shanghaï, China, 2016, p. 14.
30.
RivasM. E.SerebriskyT.Suárez-AlemánA.How Affordable Is Transportation in Latin America and the Caribbean? No. TRBAM-21-01978, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2021.
31.
SeneviratneP. N.MorrallJ. F.Analysis of Factors Affecting the Choice of Route of Pedestrians. Transportation Planning and Technology, Vol. 10, No. 2, 1985, pp. 147–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/03081068508717309.
32.
GuoZ.LooB. P. Y.Pedestrian Environment and Route Choice: Evidence from New York City and Hong Kong. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 28, 2013, pp. 124–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2012.11.013.
33.
GimT. H. T.KoJ.Maximum Likelihood and Firth Logistic Regression of the Pedestrian Route Choice. International Regional Science Review, Vol. 40, No. 6, 2017, pp. 616–637. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160017615626214.
34.
DessingD.de VriesS. I.HegemanG.VerhagenE.van MechelenW.PierikF. H.Children’s Route Choice during Active Transportation to School: Difference between Shortest and Actual Route. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, Vol. 13, No. 1, 2016, pp. 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/S12966-016-0373-Y.
35.
YamamotoT.TakamuraS.MorikawaT.Structured Random Walk Parameter for Heterogeneity in Trip Distance on Modeling Pedestrian Route Choice Behavior at Downtown Area. Travel Behaviour and Society, Vol. 11, 2018, pp. 93–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TBS.2018.02.006.
36.
IaconoM.KrizekK.El-GeneidyA. M.Access to Destinations: How Close Is Close Enough? Estimating Accurate Distance Decay Functions for Multiple Modes and Different Purposes. Minnesota Department of Transportation, 2008.
37.
YangW.ZhenX.GaoW.OuyangS.An Examination of the Impact of Neighbourhood Walking Environments on the Likelihood of Residents of Dense Urban Areas Becoming Overweight or Obese. The Canadian Geographer / Le Géographe canadien, Vol. 64, No. 4, 2020, pp. 619–633. https://doi.org/10.1111/CAG.12614.
38.
TsunodaK.SomaY.KitanoN.JindoT.FujiiK.OkuraT.Acceptable Walking and Cycling Distances and Their Correlates among Older Japanese Adults. Journal of Population Ageing, Vol. 14, No. 2, 2021, pp. 183–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12062-020-09272-9.
39.
Silva-UrraJ. A.UrizarC.Basualto-AlarcónC.TorrellaJ. R.PagésT.BehnC.ViscorG.Effects of Oxygen Supplementation on Acute Mountain Sickness Symptoms and Functional Capacity During a 2-Kilometer Walk Test on Chajnantor Plateau (5050 Meters, Northern Chile). Wilderness & Environmental Medicine, Vol. 22, No. 3, 2011, pp. 250–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wem.2011.05.004.
40.
Marín-JiménezN.Sánchez-ParenteS.Expósito-CarrilloP.Jiménez-IglesiasJ.Álvarez-GallardoI. C.Cuenca-GarcíaM.Castro-PiñeroJ.Criterion-Related Validity and Reliability of the 2-Km Walk Test and the 20-m Shuttle Run Test in Adults: The Role of Sex, Age and Physical Activity Level. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, Vol. 26, No. 4, 2023, pp. 267–276. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2023.03.005.
41.
PavlovićR.Evaluation of Fitness Index and Maximal Oxygen Consumption of Students Using the UKK 2 Km Walk Test. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, Vol. 16, No. 1, 2016, pp. 269–274. https://doi.org/10.7752/jpes.2016.01043.
42.
MendiateC. J.NkurunzizaA.MachanguanaC. A.BernardoR.Pedestrian Travel Behaviour and Urban Form: Comparing Two Small Mozambican Cities. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 98, 2022, p. 103245. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2021.103245.
43.
LallS. V.HendersonJ. V.VenablesA. J.Africa’s Cities: Opening Doors to the World. World Bank Group, Washington, DC., 2017.
44.
Mashhadi MoghadamS. N.RafieianM.What Did Urban Studies Do for Women? A Systematic Review of 40 Years of Research. Habitat International, Vol. 92, 2019, p. 102047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2019.102047.
45.
VasudevanV.Mobility of Urban Working Women in India: Study of Jalandhar in North India. Territoire en mouvement Revue de géographie et aménagement [Territory in movement Journal of geography and planning], No. 47, 2020, pp. 11–25.
46.
RGI. Population Projections for India and States: 2011–2036. Registrar General of India, National Commission on Population, New Delhi, 2020.
47.
UNDESA. World Population Prospects 2024. Department of Economic and Social Affairs Population Division, United Nations, New York, 2024.
48.
Planning Department. Economic Survey of Delhi 2022–23. Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi, New Delhi, 2023.
49.
TiwariG.Pedestrian Infrastructure in the City Transport System: A Case Study of Delhi. World transport policy and practice, Vol. 7, No. 4, 2001, pp. 13–18.
AayogN.National Multidimensional Poverty Index: A Progress Review 2023. Government of India, New Delhi, 2023.
52.
SharmaA.TiwariG.RaoK. R.Identifying Mixed Use Indicators for Including Informal Settlements as a Distinct Land Use: Case Study of Delhi. Transportation Research Procedia, Vol. 48, No. 2019, 2020, pp. 1918–1930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2020.08.224.
R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.r-project.org/. Accessed July 22, 2024.
56.
StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 17. StataCorp LLC, TX. https://www.stata.com/. Accessed July 22, 2024.
57.
ShapiroS. S.WilkA. M. B.An Analysis of Variance Test for Normality (Complete Samples). Biometrika, Vol. 52, No. 3–4, 1965, pp. 591–611. https://doi.org/10.1093/BIOMET/52.3-4.591.
58.
MishraP.PandeyC. M.SinghU.GuptaA.SahuC.KeshriA.Descriptive Statistics and Normality Tests for Statistical Data. Annals of Cardiac Anaesthesia, Vol. 22, No. 1, 2019, p. 67. https://doi.org/10.4103/ACA.ACA_157_18.
59.
MannH. B.WhitneyD. R.On a Test of Whether One of Two Random Variables Is Stochastically Larger than the Other. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, Vol. 18, No. 1, 1947, pp. 50–60. https://doi.org/10.1214/AOMS/1177730491.
WilcoxonF.Individual Comparisons by Ranking Methods. In Breakthroughs in statistics: Methodology and distribution (KotzS.JohnsonN. L., eds.) Springer, New York, 1992, pp. 196–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4380-9_16.
62.
AlshalalfahB. W.ShalabyA. S.Case Study: Relationship of Walk Access Distance to Transit with Service, Travel, and Personal Characteristics. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, Vol. 133, No. 2, 2007, pp. 114–118. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9488(2007)133:2(114).
63.
JeekelH.Inclusive Transport: Fighting Involuntary Transport Disadvantages. Elsevier, 2018.
64.
El-GeneidyA.LevinsonD.DiabE.BoisjolyG.VerbichD.LoongC.The Cost of Equity: Assessing Transit Accessibility and Social Disparity Using Total Travel Cost. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 91, 2016, pp. 302–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRA.2016.07.003.
65.
BasuN.HaqueM. M.KingM.KamruzzamanM.Oviedo-TrespalaciosO.A Systematic Review of the Factors Associated with Pedestrian Route Choice. Transport Reviews, Vol. 42, No. 5, 2022, pp. 672–694. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2021.2000064.
66.
DaltonA. M.JonesA. P.PanterJ.OgilvieD.Are GIS-Modelled Routes a Useful Proxy for the Actual Routes Followed by Commuters?Journal of Transport & Health, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2015, pp. 219–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JTH.2014.10.001.
67.
ZhangH.ZhangY.Pedestrian Network Analysis Using a Network Consisting of Formal Pedestrian Facilities: Sidewalks and Crosswalks. Transportation Research Record, Vol. 2673, No. 7, 2019, pp. 294–307. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198119846095.
68.
MarkM.UlrichW.Measuring Neighborhood Walkability Using Detour Factor Distributions. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, Vol. 144, No. 2, 2018, p. 04018017. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000453.
69.
LeatherJ.FabianH.GotaS.MejiaA.Walkability and Pedestrian Facilities in Asian Cities: State and Issues. Asian Development Bank, Manila, Philippines, 2011.
70.
PorterG.Reflections on a Century of Road Transport Developments in West Africa and Their (Gendered) Impacts on the Rural Poor. EchoGeo, No. 20, 2012, pp. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.4000/ECHOGEO.13116.
71.
Loukaitou-SiderisA.Is It Safe to Walk?1 Neighborhood Safety and Security Considerations and Their Effects on Walking. Journal of Planning Literature, Vol. 20, No. 3, 2016, pp. 219–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412205282770.
