Factors related to the use of pedestrian bridges in university students of Honduras

Considering that deaths and injuries due to run overs near pedestrian bridges (PB) are preventable events, this research aims to analyze the factors related to the use of pedestrian bridges in students of a public university of Honduras. This was made through a quantitative methodology; 330 questionnaires were applied to a sample of university students. Results suggest that 17.27% of the respondents don’t use the bridge. Most respondents (62.42%) believe it’s faster to cross the street and that using the bridge is tiresome (79.90%). Pedestrian bridges are also considered to be unsafe places, prone to robberies. Pearson’s r coefficient determined that this belief is significantly associated with the perception of cleanliness, quality of the infrastructure and illumination. There is a correlation between stress and considering the use of the bridge as a tiresome activity. A logistic regression model determined that significant variables explained the use of the PB included: being in a hurry, believing it’s faster to cross the street, thinking that PBs have a bad infrastructure, laziness and thinking that using the PB is tiresome, all of them reducing the chance that someone will use the bridge. On the other hand, non-significant variables in the model included: age, considering that using the PB is stressful, thinking that crossing the street is stressful, thinking PBs have good illumination. Safety related variables were not able to discriminate between users and non-users. These results are discussed in the light of previous research and their implication for public policy and future research.     

Estimating preferences for different types of pedestrian crossing facilities

This paper reports the results of a study to understand the preferences of pedestrians towards using different types of road crossing facilities. A preliminary qualitative study found that people’s perceptions about crossing facilities are shaped by aspects such as safety, convenience, crossing time, accessibility, and personal security. The main quantitative study consisted of a stated preference survey implemented in three neighbourhoods in English cities near busy roads. Participants were first asked to indicate how comfortable they felt using different types of crossing facilities. Footbridges and underpasses were systematically rated below signalised crossings. Participants were then asked to choose between walking different additional times to use certain types of crossing facility or avoid crossing the road altogether. The analysis of the choices using a mixed logit model found that on average participants are willing to walk an additional 2.4 and 5.3 min to use a straight signalised crossing and avoid using footbridges and underpasses, respectively. Women and older participants were willing to walk longer additional times to avoid those facilities. Participants only avoid crossing the road if the additional time to use straight signalised crossings is at least 20.9 min. The estimated values for the willingness to walk were slightly smaller when using a conditional logit model. The study provides information that is useful for policy decisions about the frequency and the type of pedestrian facilities provided to cross busy roads.