Access and Accessibility - Literature review Example

? Access and accessibility Access and accessibility Introduction a. Access and accessibility – what is it?  b. How it is analysed?What are the factors involved in it?        c. Guidelines in relation to access ?  d. What is the relationship between access and green space?  e. what is the benefits from access to green space?  f. use GIS to evaluate the green space?  g. what is the measuring accessibility to green space?  h. what is a spatial analysis of green space access?  The aspect of accessibility is quite crucial with regard to green space. This is because accessibility is a direct proportion of the expression of ability of to reach green spaces within their areas, (Schaeffer and Sclar 1998, p. 65). Fully-developed and efficient green spaces are those that provide great degrees of accessibility when we exclude the effects of traffic and other mitigating factors such as economic barriers. It, therefore, goes without saying that less-developed green spaces offer relatively low levels of accessibility. The obvious aspect, therefore, is that accessibility is linked with numerous socio-economic opportunities and hindrances. Accessibility refers to the measure of the ability of a location to be reached by different people around it, or to reach different locations. It is, thus apparent that the scope and arrangement of all transport infrastructures are essential in determining accessibility to green spaces in urban areas (Comber et al 2011, p. 30). Access, on the other hand, refers to the capacity to go into or leave a green space. Access is, hence an absolute determinant of whether a location can be entered or exited. This paper appreciates both the concepts of access and accessibility and looks into the intricacies of both geographical elements with regard to green spaces in urban areas (Van 2007, p. 18). This is bound to provide an in-depth understanding of the green spaces in towns and cities, offering leeway for determining accessibility and access of green spaces in major towns (Van Herzele 2003, p. 120) As noted, access and accessibility are quite distinct. While accessibility varies according to one’s position, access is a relative concept, which is equal for all persons in an area. For instance, an areas of green space can be accessible by any person, be it by persons of high socio-economic status, low status, persons with disabilities, or fully-able bodied persons. Access to urban green space is, therefore, uniform wherever one is situated in the vicinity of the green space, provided that there is a capacity to enter or exit the green space (Heywood, Carver and Cornelius 2006, p. 96). When assessing the viability of the green spaces in urban areas, two important concepts must be considered. These are distance and time. These two factors typically affect accessibility in different capacities. Firstly, distance between the green space and a person’s location is bound to affect one’s ability to reach the green space and the time it takes to arrive at the green space (Handy and Niemeier 1997, p. 1183). In addition, time is relative in terms of the duration it takes for a green space to develop fully after its establishment. Time is relative because different locations within an urban area have distinct speed limits, which affect the time taken to travel through these locations. Distance does not change, but is it a contributor to the overall speed used to reach a specific green space. Because not all locations within an urban area are equally accessible, this implies inequality. The concept of accessibility, therefore, relies on two paramount factors that is the location and distance. Analyzing distance and location of the green space is a key aspect of GIS analysis (Kong, Yin, and Nakagoshi 2007 , p. 249). Firstly, location measures accessibility with regard to other green spaces in the areas and around the urban area. Infrastructure supports movement to and from green spaces. This implies that accessibility of green spaces is relatively proportional to a person’s accessibility to infrastructure that assists him or her to reach the green space (Dwyer, JF, 2004, p. 158). In addition, the implication of location bears in mind one’s accessibility to green spaces through walking. This involves pathways used to reach green spaces either by walking or cycling (Koenig 1998, p. 163). The second concept used in analyzing accessibility is distance. This is typically the connectivity between two distinct locations that is a green space and a person’s place or residence or work. Connectivity can, therefore, only exist if or when it is feasible to link persons to green spaces through transportation, such as road and rail transport. The aspect of connectivity expresses the friction between location and distance, relative to the population being served by the green space is probably the most accessible (Kessel 2009, p. 36). In a GIS analysis, when considering spatial applicability to accessibility, we have to look at a number of accessibility issues. Firstly, topological accessibility, which is a system of analyzing accessibility in terms of system nodes and paths, within the urban area (Wu and Miller 2002, p. 7). Here, accessibility is measured in terms of significant elements within the urban area such as transportation systems. In urban areas, transportation infrastructure to green spaces improves topological accessibility (Handy and Niemeier 1997, 1198). Most green spaces in urban areas are accessible through various means of transportations such as roads, paths and nodes. Green spaces are vital in offering the residence of urban areas with fresh air and recreational activities that offer release from the stresses of everyday life (Comber, et al, 2009, p. 63). Secondly, contagious accessibility reflects spatial accessibility to green spaces. Contagious accessibility is measured in terms of accessibility over a surface. Therefore, accessibility is considered a measurable feature of every location covered by a green space, because space is examined in a measurable manner. Accessibility is a crucial indicator of fundamental spatial structure of an urban area since it makes an allowance for the location, as well as the friction brought about by distance to other green space locations (Antony 2005, p. 282). A GIS network analyst grants network-based spatial analysis like travel directions, location-allocation matrices, routing and closest facilities within an urban area with regard to green spaces. Therefore, one can develop a pragmatic network condition by making use of an ArcGIS Network Analyst (Ross 2000, p. 16). The ArcGIS Network Analyst allows for accurate calculations of shortest to and from a green space, locating the closest facilities that allow access to green spaces such as roads, paths and nodes. In addition, the ArcGIS Network Analyst allows for the generation of matrices of overall travel costs within an urban area from all points of entry to all exit points (Heywood, Carver and Cornelius 2006, p. 56). The network also provides an avenue for the formulation of a system that uses available GIS information obtained in other studies. The information in an ArcGIS Network Analyst assists in the production of efficient routes that allow access to green spaces to serve as many persons as possible by defining crucial points in terms of time and distance covered to reach different points (Chang 2008, p 132). The Department of Planning uses knowledge of ArcGIS Network Analyst to establish accessibility plans for all regions of the nation. It is vital to note that government intervention has a distinct impact on accessibility as the government, through local authorities establish local transport plans and set accessibility targets for different urban areas (Forman and Godron 2006, p. 75). Enhancing accessibility and reducing the cost of accessibility is of paramount importance to both the government and residents served by a green space (Neimeier 1997, p. 379). Because accessibility is the primary objective of urban green spaces, transport planning becomes of immeasurable importance (Litman 2007, p. 13). Considering transportation planning in terms of accessibility, involves appreciating aspects such as people’s transport capabilities and needs, the affordability and quality of transportation and the degree to which transportation modes link people to green spaces (Horner 2008, p. 271). In addition, urban planning for accessibility involves to green spaces takes into consideration the quality of the green space with regard to the green space’s ability to meet the needs of the area residence. Providing significant improvements to accessibility evaluation is vital in reconciling conflicts, which are inherent in the planning process in terms of city planning of the urban green spaces. For instance, a substantial number of accessibility issues can be resolved enhancing the comfort and convenience of urban spaces, improving information released to the residents regarding urban spaces, improving connectivity between residential and working quarters with urban spaces and increasing land use set aside for green spaces in urban areas (Miller and Shaw 2001, p. 73). Conclusion The aspects of access and accessibility, though quite distinct, provide a substantial basis for the evaluation of access feasibility in terms of urban green spaces. Accessibility is of paramount importance in ensuring that a well-planned green space is accessible to all interested persons in an urban area (Vermeulen, et al 2004, p. 98). This paper has provided a description of access and accessibility, as well as a compilation of different factors that affect access and accessibility. In addition, the paper has uncovered ways of analyzing and assessing accessibility of the green spaces in urban areas. By looking at these issues, we have come to the realization that accessibility-based planning is paramount in the city’s planning of its urban green spaces. Policy makers and implementers should utilize the ArcGIS Network Analyst to establish highly accessible green spaces by considering the spatial distribution in the urban area. References Chang, K T, 2008, Introduction to Geographical Information Systems. McGraw Hill, New York. Comber et al, 2011, “A spatial analysis of variations in health access: linking geography, socio- Economic status & access perceptions”. Landscape and Urban Planning, 46 (2), pp.13-34.  Comber, et al, 2009, “Using a GIS-based network analysis and optimisation routines to evaluate service provision: a case study of the UK post office”, Applied Spatial Analysis and policy, 2(1), pp.47-64.  Dwyer, JF, 2004, “Movement of people across a landscape: A blurring distinction between areas, Interests, and issues affecting natural resource management”. Landscape and Urban Planning: 153-164. Heywood, I, Carver, S and Cornelius, S, 2006,  An Introduction to Geographical Information Systems (3rd ed.), Prentice Hall., England. Forman RTT and Godron M, 2006, Landscape Ecology, John Wiley& Sons, New York. Forman RTT, 2005, Ecology of Landscapes and Regions : Land Mosaics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Horner, MW, 2008, "Exploring metropolitan accessibility and urban structure," Urban Geography, 25: 264-284. Kessel, A, 2009, “Multidisciplinary research in public health: A case study of research on access to green space”. Public Health: 15, 32-38. Kong, FH, Yin, HW and Nakagoshi, N, 2007, "Using GIS and landscape metrics in the hedonic Price modelling of the amenity value of urban green space," Landscape and Urban Planning, vol. 79(1): 240-252. Handy, SL and Niemeier, DA, 1997, “Measuring accessibility: An exploration of issues and alternatives”, Environment and Planning A, 29(7): 1175-1194. Heywood, I, Carver, S and Cornelius, S, 2006,  An Introduction to Geographical Information Systems (3rd ed.), Prentice Hall., England. Horner, MW, 2008, "Exploring metropolitan accessibility and urban structure," Urban Geography, 25: 264-284. Koenig, JG, 1998, “Indicators of urban accessibility: Theory and application”. Transportation, 9:145-172.   Litman, T, 2007, Evaluating Accessibility for Transport Planning, VTPI Retrieved from www.vtpi.org and  www.vtpi.org/access.pdf. Miller, H and Shaw, S, 2001, Geographic information systems for transportation: Principles and applications, Oxford University Press, New York. Neimeier, D,1997, “Accessibility: An Evaluation Using Consumer Welfare,” Transportation, 24(4): 377-396. Ross, R, 2000, “Mobility and Accessibility: The Yin and Yang of Planning,” World Transport Policy & Practice, 6(2):13-19. Schaeffer, KH and Sclar, E, 1998, Access for All, Columbia University Press, New York. Van Herzele, A, 2003, “A monitoring tool for the provision of accessible and attractive urban green spaces”. Landscape and Urban planning: 19, 109-126. Van, HA, 2007, "Relating spatial pattern of forest cover to accessibility," Landscape and Urban Planning, 80(2): 14-22. Vermeulen, et al, 2004, The Price of Transport: Overview of the Social Costs of Transport, McGraw, New York.   Read More