Keywords
Abstract
Transportation networks play a vital role in determining spatial accessibility and regional equity, particularly in semi-urban regions where infrastructure distribution is often uneven. This study examines the impact of transportation networks on social accessibility in Dharmapuri Taluk, Tamil Nadu, using a GIS-based network analysis framework. Both primary and secondary data were integrated to develop a spatial database, and analytical techniques such as shortest path analysis, service area mapping, Isotim travel cost analysis, and Shimbel index-based accessibility assessment were employed. The results reveal significant spatial disparities in accessibility across the study area. Central locations, including Dharmapuri town, Annasagaram, Adiyamankottai, and Lakkiampatti, exhibit higher accessibility due to better connectivity, denser road networks, and proximity to essential services. In contrast, peripheral villages such as Akkamanahalli, Andihalli, Kadagathur, Kammampatti, Konangihalli, and Errabaiyanahalli experience lower accessibility, characterized by longer travel distances, higher travel costs, and limited route options. The findings indicate a clear core–periphery pattern, where infrastructure concentration in central areas leads to unequal access to services in outer regions. The study further demonstrates that although the transportation network ensures basic connectivity, it lacks sufficient redundancy and alternative route options in several parts of the taluk, particularly in villages such as Noolahalli, Kondampatti, and Konanginayakkanahalli, which remain dependent on limited road linkages. This reduces network efficiency and increases vulnerability to disruptions. The accessibility patterns also highlight that improved connectivity is closely associated with better access to education, healthcare, and other essential services, while poorly connected villages such as Budanahalli, Dhalavaihalli, and Dokkubodanahalli continue to face accessibility constraints. The findings provide valuable insights for policymakers and planners to design targeted interventions aimed at improving connectivity in underserved villages and promoting balanced regional development.
References
1. Banister, D. (2011). The trilogy of distance, speed and time. Journal of Transport Geography, 19(4), 950–959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2010.12.004
2. Bhat, C., Handy, S., Kockelman, K., Mahmassani, H., Chen, Q., & Weston, L. (2000). Urban accessibility index. Transportation Research Record, 1780, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3141/1780-01
3. Church, A., Frost, M., & Sullivan, K. (2000). Transport and social exclusion. Transport Policy, 7(3), 195–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0967-070X(00)00013-9
4. Currie, G. (2010). Quantifying spatial gaps in public transport supply. Transport Policy, 17(1), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2009.09.002
5. Delmelle, E. C., & Casas, I. (2012). Evaluating spatial equity of bus rapid transit. Applied Geography, 35(1–2), 343–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2012.06.001
6. El-Geneidy, A., Levinson, D., Diab, E., Boisjoly, G., & Verbich, D. (2016). Accessibility metrics review. Transport Reviews, 36(1), 15–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2015.1077288
7. Geurs, K. T., & van Wee, B. (2004). Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: Review and research directions. Journal of Transport Geography, 12(2), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2003.10.002
8. Handy, S. (2002). Accessibility versus mobility: Exploring the distinctions. Environment and Planning A, 34(6), 899–915. https://doi.org/10.1068/a3467
9. Handy, S. L., & Niemeier, D. A. (1997). Measuring accessibility: An exploration of issues and alternatives. Environment and Planning A, 29(7), 1175–1194. https://doi.org/10.1068/a291175
10. Hansen, W. G. (1959). How accessibility shapes land use. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 25(2), 73–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944365908978307
11. Levinson, D., & Xie, F. (2011). Evolving transportation networks. Journal of Transport Geography, 19(6), 1149–1157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2010.10.002
12. Litman, T. (2020). Evaluating transportation equity. Victoria Transport Policy Institute.
13. Lucas, K. (2012). Transport and social exclusion: Where are we now? Transport Policy, 20, 105–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2012.01.013
14. Neutens, T. (2015). Accessibility, equity and health. Journal of Transport Geography, 43, 14–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.02.006
15. Páez, A., Scott, D. M., & Morency, C. (2012). Measuring accessibility: Positive and normative implementations of various accessibility indicators. Journal of Transport Geography, 25, 141–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2012.03.002
16. Rodrigue, J.-P., Comtois, C., & Slack, B. (2017). The geography of transport systems. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315618159
17. Sreelekha, M. G., et al. (2016). Road network connectivity using GIS. Procedia Technology, 24, 130–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protcy.2016.05.018
18. van Wee, B. (2016). Accessibility and equity. Journal of Transport Geography, 51, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.12.006
19. Weber, J., & Kwan, M. P. (2003). Evaluating accessibility using GIS. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 30(6), 865–884. https://doi.org/10.1068/b29120
20. Xie, F., & Levinson, D. (2011). Evolving transportation networks. Journal of Transport Geography, 19(6), 1149–1157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2010.10.002
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2026 Muniraj M, Dr. Rubalingeshwari N, Damodharan G (Author)