Advertisement

Micro-Level Analysis of Road Connectivity and Its Spatial Variation in the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC) Area

  • Sk. Mafizul HaqueEmail author
  • Md. Juber AlamEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Contemporary South Asian Studies book series (CSAS)

Abstract

Road network systems provide the means of movement of people and goods and, therefore, constitute one of the most important infrastructures in any geographical setting. In a leading metropolis such as Kolkata, such networks can be considered as the pivot of developmental sustainability since old networks must be improved and expanded and new ones must be built, accelerating development and ensuring long-term economic growth. The chapter examines the pattern of existing road network systems in ward areas in Kolkata with the help of a structural analysis and graph theory. It was assumed that every ward has a planar graph of the road networks. The study of any network includes an analysis of its intersections (nodes), connected links and road density at ward level; all this is used to understand its spatial variation of the road network using the Geographic Information System (GIS) techniques. The study shows that a few wards have acquiescent levels of connectivity and that most of the connectivity indices have negative relationships with population densities.

Keywords

Road networks Connectivity index Graph theory Planar graph Kolkata 

References

  1. Baradaran S, Ramjerdi F (2001) Performance of accessibility measures in Europe. J Transp Stat 4(2/3):31–48Google Scholar
  2. Bell MGH, Lida Y (1997) Transportation network analysis. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brandnock RW (1976) Measurement of accessibility and their relationship to development in Tamil Nadu. The Indian Geographical Society, Golden Jubilee Volume, Department of Geography, MadrasGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen A, Yang H, Lo HK, Tang W (1999) A capacity related reliability for transportation networks. J Adv Transp 33(2):183–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Davidson PMB, Davidson KB (1998) Development of assessment techniques and tools for rural accessibility. Final report and paper presented at the transport 98: 19th ARRB transport research conference, Sydney, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  6. Fazal S (2006) Addressing congestion and transport related air pollution in Saharanpur, India. Environ Urbanization 18(1):141–154 (SAGE)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Figalli A, Maggi F, Pratelli A (2010) A mass transportation approach to quantitative isoperimetric inequalities. Invent Math 182(1):167–211.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00222010-0261-z
  8. Gebel K, King L, Bauman A, Vita P, Gill T, Rigby A, Capon A (2005) Creating healthy environments—a review on the links between the physical environment, physical activity and health. NSW Health Department and NSW Centre for overweight and Obesity, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  9. Geurs KT, van Wee B (2004) Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: review and research directions. J Transp Geogr 12(2):127–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Grishchenko MA (2011) Multi-scale assessment of intermodal freight networks in Europe: a geo-spatial approach. University of Twenty, Faculty of Geo-Information and Earth Observation ITC, EnschedaGoogle Scholar
  11. Gutierrez J, Monzon A, Pinero JM (1998) Accessibility, network efficiency and transport infrastructure planning. Environ Planning—A 30(8):1337–1350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gwilliam K (2002) Cities on the move: a World Bank urban transport strategy review. The World Bank, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  13. Haque SM, Bandyopadhyay S (2012) Identification of metropolitan core using geo-spatial data for Kolkata, India. Sci Ann Alexandru Ioan Cuza Univ 58, s II-c, Geography Series:185–206Google Scholar
  14. Kansky KJ (1963) Structure of transportation networks: relation between network geometry and regional characteristics. University of Chicago, Department of Geography, Research Papers No. 84Google Scholar
  15. Keshkamat SS, Looijen J, Zuidgeest MHP (2009) The formulation and evaluation of transport route planning alternatives: A spatial decision support system for the Via Baltic project, Poland. J Transp Geogr 17(1):54–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Knoflacher H (2006) A new way to organize parking: the key to a successful sustainable transport system for the future. Environ Urbanization 18(2):387–400 (Sage)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kwan MP, Weber J (2003) Individual accessibility revisited: implications for geographical analysis in the twenty-first century. Geogr Anal 35(4):341–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Levinson D, Huang A (2011) A positive theory of network connectivity. Environ Planning, Part B 39(2):308–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liu S, Zhu X (2004) An integrated GIS tool for accessibility analysis in urban transportation planning. Accessibility Anal 31(1):105–124Google Scholar
  20. Murray W (2004) The driver training debate, roadwise. J Australas Coll Road Saf 14(4):3–5Google Scholar
  21. Murray W and Dubens E (2001) Driver assessment including the use of interactive. Paper presented at the 9th world conference on transportation research, Seoul, 24–27 JulyGoogle Scholar
  22. Ndiwari EL (2014) Urban road network analysis for Yenagoa, local government area, Bayelsa stateGoogle Scholar
  23. Noraini A, Zakaria A (2010) The effectiveness of a road transportation network system in a Port City: towards green logistics in Malaysia. In: Proceeding Malaysian Universities Transportation Research Forum and Conference MUTRFC 2010. University Tenaga National, MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
  24. Pikora TJ, Giles-Corti B, Knuiman MW, Bull FC, Jamrozik K, Donovan RJ (2006) Neighborhood environmental factors correlated with walking near home: using spaces. Med Sci Sports Exerc 38:708–714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ree RVD (2009) The ecology of roads in urban and urbanising landscape. In: McDonnell M et al. (ed) Ecology of cities and towns: a comparative approach. Cambridge University Press, pp 185–196Google Scholar
  26. Rodrigue JP, Comtois C, Slack B (2006) The geography of transport systems. Routledge, N.Y.Google Scholar
  27. Sohail M, Maunder DAC, Cavill S (2006) Effective regulation for sustainable public transport in developing countries. Transp Policy 13(3):177–190.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2005.11.004 (Elsevier)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Taaffe EJ, Gautheir HL (1973) Geography of transportation. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  29. Taaffe EJ, Gauthier HL, O’Kelly ME (1996) Geography of transportation, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, pp 288–317Google Scholar
  30. Vasconcellos EA (2001) Urban transport, environment and equity: the case for developing countries. Earth-scan Pub, LondonGoogle Scholar
  31. Waddell P (2011)—Integrated land use and transportation planning and modelling: addressing challenges in research and practice. Transp Rev 31(2):209–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Xie F, Levinson D (2007) Measuring the structure of road networks. Geogr Anal 39(3):336–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of GeographyUniversity of CalcuttaKolkataIndia
  2. 2.Department of GeographyAliah UniversityKolkataIndia

Personalised recommendations