Modelling the Suitability of Urban Networks for Pedestrians: An Affordance-Based Framework

  • David JonietzEmail author
  • Wolfgang Schuster
  • Sabine Timpf
Part of the Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography book series (LNGC)


In this chapter, a framework for modelling the suitability of urban networks for pedestrians is presented. Based on the psychological theory of affordances, a model of spatial suitability is developed that acknowledges the fact that suitability must always be analysed relative to the agent, the task and the environment. We extend existing affordance concepts by moving beyond simple true/false statements to express that there are various degrees to which an action can be afforded by an environmental object. In our model, environmental dispositions and agent capabilities are repeatedly selected, calculated and specified until atomic property pairs are identified. These can be combined to compute suitability values. We test and implement the model on a routing scenario for mobility-impaired persons. The results show that the framework produces suitable paths for different agents and thus shows promise for future work.


Geographic Information System Fitness Level Environmental Object Path Segment Urban Network 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Alfonso MA (2005) To walk or not to walk? The hierarchy of walking needs. Environ Behav 37(6):808–836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chemero A (2003) An outline of a theory of affordances. Ecol Psychol 15(2):181–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clark S, Davies A (2009) Identifying and prioritising walking investment through the PERS audit tool. In: Walk21 Proceedings, 10th international conference for walking. New York, USA, 7–9 Oct 2009Google Scholar
  4. Czogalla O (2011) Parameters determining route choice in pedestrian networks. In: TRB 90th annual meeting compendium of papers DVD. Washington, D.C., 23–27 Jan 2011Google Scholar
  5. Gibson JJ (1977) The theory of affordances. In: Shaw R, Bransford J (eds) Perceiving, acting, and knowing: toward an ecological psychology. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 67–82Google Scholar
  6. Gibson JJ (1979) The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin Company, BostonGoogle Scholar
  7. Heft H (2001) Ecological psychology in context: James Gibson, Roger Barker, and the legacy of William James’s radical empiricism. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, MahwahGoogle Scholar
  8. Janowicz K, Raubal M (2007) A affordance-based similarity measurement for entity types. In: Winter S, Duckham M, Kulik L, Kuipers B (eds) COSIT’07 proceedings of the 8th international conference on Spatial information theory, 19–23 Sept 2007Google Scholar
  9. Jones KS (2003) What is an affordance? Ecol Psychol 15(2):107–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jonietz D, Timpf S (2012) Towards an affordance-based model of walkability. In: Timpf S (ed) Proceedings of the short papers of the SDH2012. Bonn, Germany, 21–24 Aug 2012Google Scholar
  11. Jordan T, Raubal M, Gartrell B, Egenhofer M (1998) An affordance-based model of place in GIS. In: eighth international symposium on spatial data handling, 11–15 July 1998Google Scholar
  12. Koffka K (1935) Principles of Gestalt psychology. Harcourt Brace, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Michaels CF (2000) Information, perception, and action: what should ecological psychologists learn from Milner and Goodale (1995)? Ecol Psychol 12(3):241–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ortmann J, De Felice G, Wang D, Daniel D (2012) An egocentric reference system for affordances. Available via semantic web journal. Accessed 10 Nov 2012
  15. Raubal M (2001) Ontology and epistemology for agent based wayfinding simulation. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 15(7):653–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Raubal M, Moratz R (2006) A functional model for affordance-based agents. In: Dagstuhl seminar towards affordance-based robot control. Dagstuhl Castle, Germany, 5–9 June 2006Google Scholar
  17. Reed ES (1996) Encountering the world. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Scheider S, Janowicz K, Kuhn W (2009) Grounding geographic categories in the meaningful environment. In: Hornsby S, Claramunt C, Denis M, Ligozat G (eds) Spatial information theory, 9th international conference, COSIT 2009, 21–25 Sept 2009Google Scholar
  19. Stoffregen TA (2000) Affordances and events. Ecol Psychol 12(1):1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Stoffregen TA (2003) Affordances as properties of the animal environment system. Ecol Psychol 15(2):115–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Turvey MT (1992) Affordances and prospective control: An outline of the ontology. Ecol Psychol 4(3):173–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Varela FJ, Thompson E (1991) The embodied mind. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  23. Warren WH (1984) Perceiving affordances: visual guidance of stair climbing. J Exp Psychol 105(5):683–703Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Jonietz
    • 1
    Email author
  • Wolfgang Schuster
    • 1
  • Sabine Timpf
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for GeographyUniversity of AugsburgAugsburgGermany

Personalised recommendations