Critical Liveability Indicators in Urban Transport Infrastructure Planning

1. An integrative literature review of critical liveability indicators in urban transport infrastructure planning ChiomaOkoro Innocent Musonda Justus Agumba Joint CIBW099 & TG59 Conference Cape Town, South Africa 11 – 13 June, 2017

2. Contents Introduction Objective Methods Summary of findings Discussion & Conclusion

3. Introduction • Although urban transport developments have positive impacts, negative effects on the environment and the citizens have been reported. • Such developments should satisfy residents by meeting their economic, social, and cultural needs, while promoting their wellbeing, and overall quality of life, and thus ensuring liveability.

4. Introduction (2) Extant literature focused on: liveability and sustainability as a whole (Faiz et al. 2012; National League of Cities 2013; Gough 2015); sustainability principles with scant attention to liveability aspects (Boarnet 2008); liveability and road development in rural areas (Faiz et al., 2012);

5. Introduction (3) liveability and sustainability principles during management and operations (Grant et al., 2012). The current study focuses on liveability considerations for urban transport planning and identifies the level of attention given to them in literature

6. Figure 1: Liveable transport network (Source: US Department of Transportation)

7. Objective To identify urban liveability indicators focused on in previous studies, and the level of attention given to them over a specified period of time.

8. Methods (1) Detailed and integrative literature review Keywords - liveability, sustainability, transport infrastructure, wellbeing, used in combination with considerations, criteria, indicators Databases – Taylor & Francis, ASCE, Google Scholar, Google, Scopus, Science Direct and Academic Search Complete.

9. Methods (2) Materials - journal articles, conference papers, newspaper articles, book chapters, organisations’ web articles, and theses Period covered - a 15-year period, from 2002 to 2017 Criteria - possession of any of the keywords and related areas Analysis - Thematic analysis and ranking (level of attention)

10. Summary of findings (1) Table 1: Identified liveability indicators (from 24 articles)

11. Summary of findings (2)Table 2: Identified liveability indicators (from 24 articles)

12. Summary of findings (3) Table 3: Identified liveability indicators (from 24 articles)

13. Figure 2: Percentage frequency of identified liveability criteria % frequency

14. Discussion and Conclusion (1) • Pollution and mobility/ accessibility/ connectivity/ walkability ranked first and second, respectively, suggesting that health is given a great deal of attention, in addition to the primary movement function of transport infrastructure.

15. Discussion and Conclusion (2) • Residents’ satisfaction ranked the least, suggesting that they were not given more attention in literature and especially in older literature; thus showing the trend/direction of research concerns in recent times (2011 & 2016).

16. Thank you! Thank you