Measurement and spatial difference analysis on the accessibility of road networks in major cities of China

19Citations
Citations of this article
31Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Given the current lack of accessibility research on road networks in 36 major cities in China, the accessibility and its spatial difference were measured by using space syntax and Moran index. The purpose is to provide an important decision-making basis for the Chinese government to grasp the accessibility level of China's urban roads in general and formulate urban traffic development policies. The results show that the mean value of the global integration average is only 1.0009, indicating that the accessibility level is not optimistic in general. The accessibility of 36 major cities was divided into four levels: very low, low, high, and very high. Only four cities, namely Beijing, Shijiazhuang, Xi'an, and Zhengzhou, were at a very high level. The spatial differences of accessibility presented a spatial pattern of "middle-high, east-middle, and west-low". The global integration average, intelligibility, and synergy had significant global spatial autocorrelation, while the local spatial agglomeration distributions of these three indexes were dominated by high-high types. The five cities of Beijing, Shijiazhuang, Hohhot, Taiyuan, and Zhengzhou constituted the core area of high-value clustering of local spatial autocorrelation and presented a spatial form of inverted "T" shape. The research still has some limitations. The reasons for the low accessibility of developed cities, such as Guangzhou and Nanjing, are worth further analysis. Besides, the main possible influencing factors affecting accessibility, such as urban road density and spatial form, are also worthy of further analysis.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zhang, X., Ren, A., Chen, L., & Zheng, X. (2019). Measurement and spatial difference analysis on the accessibility of road networks in major cities of China. Sustainability (Switzerland), 11(15). https://doi.org/10.3390/su11154209

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free