Next Article in Journal
Duckweed (Lemna minor L.) Successfully Accumulates Selenium from Selenium-Impacted Water
Next Article in Special Issue
Car-Free Day on a University Campus: Determinants of Participation and Potential Impacts on Sustainable Travel Behavior
Previous Article in Journal
Public Acceptability of Policy Interventions to Reduce Sugary Drink Consumption in Urban Vietnam
Previous Article in Special Issue
Levels and Characteristics of Utilitarian Walking in the Central Areas of the Cities of Bologna and Porto
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Which Residential Clusters of Walkability Affect Future Population from the Perspective of Real Estate Prices in the Osaka Metropolitan Area?

Department of Housing and Environmental Design, Graduate School of Human Life Science, Osaka City University, Osaka 5588585, Japan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2021, 13(23), 13413; https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313413
Submission received: 4 October 2021 / Revised: 28 November 2021 / Accepted: 1 December 2021 / Published: 3 December 2021

Abstract

:
In Japan, where the population is declining and aging significantly, walkability has attracted attention as a way to improve residents’ lifestyles. Therefore, it is essential to identify the residential clusters where walkability improvement would contribute to the maintenance of the population in order to select urban areas for the implementation of walkable designs. This study aimed to identify the residential clusters in which walkability affects the future population from the perspective of real estate prices. The reason for focusing on real estate prices is that they are expected to be a confounding factor connecting walkability and the future population. The method we used was to analyze the structural equation modeling of the impact of walkability index, real estate prices, and future population change ratio. This analysis was based on the neighborhood association scale. This study clarified that effective residential clusters are the business center cluster and the sprawl cluster. In the business center cluster and the sprawl cluster, the price of apartments for sale is the real estate value, through which the walkability index positively impacts the future population change ratio. This means that it is expected to contribute to the maintenance of the future population through a combination of walkable designs and housing policies that encourage people to change their residence types to apartments for sale when rebuilding old building stock using the location optimization plan policy.

1. Introduction

1.1. Background

In Japan, the mission for urban planning is to support the country’s declining population. A characteristic of Japan’s declining population is the aging of the population [1]. Therefore, it is necessary for urban planning to enable older adults to continue to live healthily while the population declines. In this context, walkability has attracted attention in terms of sustaining the lifestyle of citizens, including older adults. Walkability is defined as a property of a residential environment that promotes walking or cycling with safety, comfort, and easy access to the attractions of daily life [2]. Improving walkability is expected to contribute to the health of residents [3,4] and their ecological footprint [5]. This means that designing walkable neighborhoods might help prevent rapid population decline. In Japan, the Location Optimization Plan has developed urban planning in preparation for a declining population since 2015 [6]. Since 2019, walkability has begun to attract attention because urban policies related to walkability are being developed. Kato [7] and Kato et al. [8,9] clarified that the COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease 2019) pandemic accelerated the need for walkable neighborhoods in the Osaka metropolitan area. Therefore, it is essential to understand the impact of walkability on future populations, as this will enable us to take a practical approach to future urban planning.
However, improving walkability will not be effective in all residential clusters. That is because the type of residential cluster influences the process of population decline. For example, Kato [10] clarified that the location of medical and welfare facilities influences the population level in the sprawl cluster, whereas the location of station buildings influences the population in the old New-Town cluster (old NT cluster). The old NT cluster was defined to be planned and large-scale suburban residential areas featuring detached houses for high-income workers, where located in hillside areas [10]. Therefore, it is essential to identify the residential clusters where walkability improvement would contribute to the maintenance of population in order to select urban areas for the implementation of walkable designs. In addition, if we can identify residential clusters where increased walkability does not contribute to maintaining the population, we can consider methods other than walkable designs. Therefore, this research hypothesis is that the relationship between walkability and future population could be clarified by analyzing real estate prices as a factor connecting.

1.2. Purpose

This study aimed to clarify the residential clusters in which walkability affects the future population from the perspective of real estate prices in the Osaka metropolitan area. The results would be worth it for urban planners to develop policies to prevent a rapid population decline. The reason for focusing on real estate prices is that they are expected to be a confounding factor connecting walkability and future population levels. Specifically, the precise impact of walkability on the future population has not been found. However, some research papers have reported on the relationship between walkability and real estate prices and the relationship between real estate prices and population. Therefore, this study attempts to analyze the impact of walkability, real estate prices, and future population through structural equation modeling (SEM). The SEM allows us to clarify the impact of walkability on the future population. By analyzing the SEM for each residential cluster, effective residential clusters can be clarified.
In this study, we analyzed the Osaka metropolitan area. We used this area because the population of the Osaka metropolitan area has been declining on a metropolitan scale [11]. The analysis scale was the neighborhood association (NA) scale. In Japan, NA is almost the same as the zip code. The NA scale is the smallest scale of community governance identified by the Local Autonomy Act in Japan [12]. Therefore, NA has played an essential role in reaching a consensus on community welfare. Thus, we decided that the NA scale fits the purpose of this analysis.

1.3. Literature Review

The novelty of this study is its analysis of the impact of walkability on the future population in relation to the type of residential cluster involved. The relationship between walkability and real estate prices has been studied previously. Renne et al. [13] determined that areas with a high walkability have higher real estate prices in 4399 locations in the United States. Similarly, Xia et al. [14] also clarified that housing price and walkability are statistically significantly positively correlated in Nanjing by developing a walkability measure model. However, Zhang et al. [15] found that walkability and real estate price are negatively correlated in the Futian District in the central area of Shenzhen. These results suggest that the statistical relationship between walkability and real estate price changes according to the type of residential cluster involved.
Furthermore, this relationship is influenced not only by the residential cluster but also by the real estate type. Regarding detached houses such as single-family homes, Boyle et al. [16] found that the impact of walkability on housing prices was not statistically significant in Miami. However, Li et al. [17] determined that walkability was positively correlated with housing prices in areas with high walkability in Austin. On the other hand, it was also found that walkability and housing price are not correlated in areas where people tend to use automobiles. These results verify that the residential cluster involved influences the statistical relationship. Regarding apartments, Kim [18] found that walkability and house price were positively correlated in areas with low housing prices in Seoul. In contrast, it was also found that there was no statistical relationship in areas with high housing prices. Based on this research, the novelty of this study is its attempt to clarify the statistical relationship according to the type of residence cluster and property type involved.
The relationship between real estate prices and population has been studied in prior research. Saita et al. [19] clarified that real estate prices are positively correlated with the total level of population in Japan and the United States. It was also found that real estate prices are negatively correlated with the old age dependency ratio. Moreover, in German metropolitan areas, Maennig et al. [20] determined that growth in terms of the population had no significant effect on the price of detached houses, whereas declining population significantly lowered prices. This result suggests that declining real estate prices might become a serious problem in Japan with its aging and shrinking cities. On the other hand, the population decline caused by rising real estate prices has also become a social problem known as gentrification [21]. For example, in Kyoto, an excessive increase in the number of simple accommodations has caused residents and stores to be displaced due to the rising land prices in a process of tourism gentrification [22]. Based on this research, the novelty of this study is to clarify the statistical relationship between walkability, real estate price, and the future population according to the type of residence cluster involved.

1.4. Article Structure

This manuscript consists of five chapters based on an IMRAD format: materials and methods in Section 2; results in Section 3; discussion in Section 4; and conclusions in Section 5.

2. Materials and Methods

The analytical flow is summarized in Figure 1. The analysis method used was SEM based on the NA scale. The walkability index was used to calculate how pedestrian-friendly the urban environment is. Real estate prices were calculated using the At Home dataset. The future population change ratio was calculated using the cohort component method. Urban ecology analysis was used to classify residential clusters. Using the walkability index, real estate price, and future population change ratio, according to the residential cluster involved, an SEM in which walkability affects the real estate price and the real estate price affects the future population was analyzed.

2.1. Urban Ecological Analysis

Using urban ecological analysis, this study clarified the types of residential clusters present in the Osaka metropolitan area. This analysis was based on the NA scale. Urban ecological analysis analyzes geospatial patterns using an inductive method that makes use of statistical data [23]. Kato et al. [2] evaluated the effectiveness of urban ecological analysis in the Osaka metropolitan area. Moreover, Kato [5] analyzed the types of clusters present using urban ecological analysis in the Osaka metropolitan area, which is the same region and data as that studied in this paper. The validity of the analysis was also assessed [8,10]. The analysis consisted of five steps as detailed in Appendix A. The locations of those residential clusters are classified into three categories. The central areas are the inner city and business center clusters. Suburban areas include dense, public housing, non-residential, sprawl, high-rise residential, old NT, and suburban agriculture clusters. Rural areas include mining industry, agriculture, mountain, and rural clusters. For each of the clusters, this study analyzed the SEM.

2.2. Walkability Index

Using the walkability index, each NA was evaluated. Brownson et al. [24] classified three types of walkability indicators that use GIS-based measures, perceived environment measures, and observational measures. Walkability indicators that use GIS-based measures include the Walkability 3Ds [25], the Walk Score® [26], and the walkability index [27,28]. The Walk Score® was developed as an indicator for evaluating the walkability of neighborhood environments [22]. Koohsari et al. [29] validified the effectiveness of Walk Score® in Japan.
The walkability index is an evaluation index that was developed by Frank et al. [27,28] as an index for evaluating the neighborhood environment in the United States. Many studies have verified the effectiveness of the walkability index using the number of pedestrians [30]. The walkability index includes three components. These are the net residential density (ND) in Equation (1), the density of street connectivity (SC) in Equation (2), and the land use mix (LUM) in Equation (3). WI, which is the score of the walkability index: the sum of the standardized values of ND, SC, and LUM in Equation (4). We followed the method of Kato [10], which analyzed the Osaka metropolitan area using the same data.
ND k = H k A k ,
SC k = I k L k ,
LUM k = i = 1 3 p k , i × ln p k , i ln n ,
W I k = z _ ND k + z _ SC k + z _ LUM k ,
where H k is the total number of net residents in the NAk according to Japanese census data from 2015 [31]; A k is the total housing area in the NAk according to Japanese census data from 2015 [31]; I k is the amount of street connectivity in the NAk according to road centerline data [32]; L k is the total length of the street in the NAk according to road centerline data [32] (m); p k , i is the area ratio of land use i in the NAk according to the data of the numerical map 5000 in Japan [33]; i is the classification of land use i (residential land, commercial land, public facility land); and z_ is the standardized value.

2.3. Real Estate Big Data

The housing prices of each NA were evaluated using the At Home dataset as real estate big data [34]. In particular, real estate and housing information were registered to the At Home Real Estate Information Network operated by At Home Co., Ltd., for five years from 2015 to 2019. The At Home Co., Ltd., is a company that provides real estate information services for real estate companies and consumers. More than 50,000 real estate companies use the dataset service throughout Japan, which is the largest number in Japan. At Home is a service that connects buyers and sellers of real estate in Japan. At Home Dataset is data on the prices offered by sellers. Based on the prices offered by sellers in this dataset, actual trades are conducted between individuals. There is little public disclosure of actual transaction prices between individuals in Japan. Therefore, the price of this dataset is an important indicator to estimate the transaction price.
This study categorized the real estate dataset into six types: apartments for sale, apartments for rent, detached houses for sale, detached houses for rent, shops for rent, and vacant lots for sale. These six types were selected as the main types of real estate traded in Japan. Shops are traded in the same way as houses and apartments. The dataset contained information on real estate price (rental fee/price), area, floor plan, structure, year of construction, location (zip code (postal code)), latitude/longitude), facilities, etc. Among these, detached houses do not include latitude/longitude data for reasons of personal privacy. Therefore, this study used the data of real estate price (rental fee/price), area, and zip code. Regarding the real estate price, rental fees were analyzed for apartments for rent, detached houses for rent, and stores for rent, and prices were analyzed for apartments for sale and detached houses for sale. This study did not include standard service fees in the real estate price (rental fee/price) because the fee varies depending on the lifestyle of each resident and owner. This study then calculated the real estate price per unit area (Yen/m2) for each zip code in the six categories of real estate. This study analyzed the data from the Osaka, Kyoto, and Hyogo prefectures.

2.4. Future Population Change Ratio

The future population change ratio between 2020 and 2040 (FPCR2040) for each NA was calculated using the cohort component method with Japanese census data from 2015 [31]. We followed the method of Kato [10], which analyzed the Osaka metropolitan area using the same data. For the analysis of the cohort component method, this study used the “Future Population/Household Forecasting Program” (version 1.3) [35]. The program was developed by the National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management in Japan. The cohort component method estimates the future population of each cohort by assuming the future values for two population change factors; these factors are the “ratio of women and children” and the “net movement ratio”. This section analyzes the cohort component method. It is preferable to use the cohort component method in NA in areas where the past population experienced remarkable changes or where the past population change rate is unsuitable for estimating the future population.
Using the cohort component method, the FPCR2040 of each NA was calculated with Equation (5). Then, a boxplot diagram of the FPCR2040 of each residential cluster was analyzed. Using this boxplot diagram, the residential clusters with rapidly declining populations were clarified:
FPCR 2040 = P 2040 P 2020 P 2020 ,
where P2040 is the population of 2040 based on the data of “Future Population/Household Forecasting Program [35]” and P2020 is the population of 2020 based on the data of “Future Population/Household Forecasting Program [35]”.

2.5. Structural Equation Modeling

In this study, we analyzed the SEM, for each residential cluster, of the impact of walkability on real estate price and the impact of real estate price on FPCR2040. Specifically, for each zip code, we conducted a path analysis of the WI calculated in Section 2.2, the real estate price per unit area (Yen/m2) of real estate types calculated in Section 2.3, and the FPCR2040 calculated in Section 2.4. The real estate types are apartments for sale, apartments for rent, detached houses for sale, detached houses for rent, shops for rent, and vacant lots for sale. The SEM is shown in Figure 2. Based on the results of GFI (Goodness of Fit Index), AGFI (Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index), and RMSTA (Root-Mean-Square Error of Approximation), effective models of residential clusters were clarified.

3. Results

3.1. Map of Each Score

Section 3.1 examines the distribution on the map. First, the results of the urban ecological analysis are shown in Figure 3. As a result, Figure 3 shows thirteen types of residential clusters. The thirteen clusters were named based on the type of residential area. The clusters were assessed by Kato [5,10]. The locations of these residential clusters are classified into three categories by the criteria of the urbanized area ratio (%) and the average distance from the center (km). Central areas include the inner city (84.5%, 19.3 km) and business center (86.2%, 34.5 km) clusters. Suburban areas include the dense (77.1%, 31.2 km), public housing (72.4%, 26.7 km), non-residential (55.2%, 43.9 km), sprawl (66.2%, 38.2 km), high-rise residential (61.8%, 25.9 km), old NT (59.1%, 26.7 km), and suburban agriculture (21.3%, 63.1 km) clusters. Rural areas include the mining industry (45.1%, 59.9 km), agriculture (23.6%, 71.6 km), mountain (40.7%, 56.1 km), and rural (24.9%, 52.1 km) clusters. The infrastructure typology of each residential cluster was also analyzed based on the average land use area (m2). Rice field and farmland areas are large in the mining industry (18,644 m2), agriculture (423,887 m2), mountain (24,012 m2), suburban agriculture (180,632 m2), and rural (81,475 m2) clusters. The housing areas are large in the inner city (47,374 m2), dense (46,892 m2), public housing (61,492 m2), sprawl (34,236 m2), high-rise residential (72,499 m2), and old NT (48,441 m2) clusters.
Based on Appendix A, a population who works in agriculture and forestry is high in agriculture (0.13%), suburban agriculture (0.03%), and rural cluster (0.03%). Besides, the population who work in the mining industry is high in the mining industry cluster (0.09%). There are almost no residents in the non-residential cluster. The other clusters are populated by white-collar workers, such as those who work in the service industry and in education.
Next, the results for the walkability index of each NA are plotted in Figure 4. Figure 4 categorizes the data with seven levels of WI at 0.15 intervals. As a result, it was found that the WI is higher in urban areas. Moreover, in urban areas, it was also found that the WI was high along the train network. That is because urban areas have high walkability due to the concentration of urban facilities and population and to the presence of diverse land uses. That means that urban areas are easy to live within walking distance. Many people tend to walk and use public transportation. On the other hand, it was found that the WI was lower in bay areas and in mountainous areas. That is because bay areas and mountainous areas have low walkability due to the diffuse location of urban facilities and small population. That means that bay areas and mountainous areas are difficult to live in within walking distance. Many people tend to drive their cars. This result suggests that the location of the residential clusters might influence the WI score.
The real estate data are plotted in Figure 5. First, the locations of various real estate types are shown in Figure 4. These types are apartments for sale, apartments for rent, detached houses for sale, detached houses for rent, shops for rent, and vacant lots for sale. As a result, Figure 4 shows that there are more apartments than detached houses and stores in this area. Among these types of real estate, Figure 4 also shows that apartments for rent are located widely across the Osaka metropolitan area. On the other hand, apartments for sale are mainly located in urban areas and areas with convenient transportation along railroad lines.
Next, Figure 6 shows the average price of an apartment according to the rent for each NA. The reason for analyzing apartments for rent was that they made up the majority of the six types of real estate. As a result, Figure 6 shows that apartments for rent were generally not located in mountainous areas. Moreover, it was found that the prices were higher in the central area of Osaka, Kyoto, and Kobe city. In addition, it was found that prices were higher in areas close to train railways. This result also suggests a relationship between real estate price and the location of residential clusters, such as WI in Figure 4.
Finally, the FPCR2040 of each NA is plotted in Figure 7. Figure 7 categorizes the data using the Jenks natural breaks classification. Figure 7 shows that the population decreases in many areas. However, it was found that the population will increase in dispersed areas. The dispersed location bears no relation to the central area.

3.2. Score of Residential Clusters

Section 3.1 examines the scores for each residential cluster. The scores are WI, real estate price, and FPCR2040 and are analyzed in Section 3.1. First, the WI of each residential cluster was analyzed using a boxplot diagram in Figure 8. Figure 8 does not include plot outliers in the boxplot. Focusing on the median value, Figure 8 shows that that WI was higher in the inner city cluster (WI = 0.60), the dense cluster (WI = 0.61), the public housing cluster (WI = 0.54), the sprawl cluster (WI = 0.49), and the high-rise residential cluster (WI = 0.46).
Next, the amount of real estate available for each residential cluster is analyzed in Figure 9. Figure 9 shows that the inner city cluster has the highest amount of real estate available (N = 2,221,702). The second-largest amount is the business center cluster (N = 1,368,720). These clusters are both located in the city center. The following most significant clusters are residential clusters located in metropolitan suburban areas, such as sprawl clusters (N = 1,008,296), dense urban clusters (N = 661,647), old NT clusters (N = 546,417), and public housing clusters (N = 371,159).
Each type of real estate is analyzed in Figure 9. Figure 9 shows that the most common type was apartments for rent (N = 6,083,241). The cluster with the largest number of these was the inner city cluster (N = 1,859,217). The next largest type was shops for rent (N = 628,086). The cluster with the largest number of these was the business center cluster (N = 195,922).
Next, the real estate prices are plotted for each residential cluster using a boxplot diagram in Figure 10. Figure 10 does not include plot outliers in the boxplot. The real estate includes apartments for sale, apartments for rent, detached houses for sale, detached houses for rent, shops for rent, and vacant lots for sale. The results were analyzed focusing on the median value. Figure 10 shows that the median value did not vary greatly, ranging from 1500 Yen/m2 to 2000 Yen/m2. However, it was found that the real estate prices were higher in the inner city cluster (price = 2022 Yen/m2),business center cluster (price = 2124 Yen/m2), dense cluster (price = 1923 Yen/m2) and high-rise cluster (price = 1771 Yen/m2). On the other hand, it was found that the real estate prices were higher in the public housing cluster (price = 1368 Yen/m2), agriculture cluster (price = 1438 Yen/m2), suburban agriculture cluster (price = 1479 Yen/m2), and rural cluster (price = 1323 Yen/m2).
Finally, the FPCR2040 for each residential cluster was analyzed in the boxplot diagram in Figure 11. Figure 11 does not include plot outliers. Focusing on the median value, Figure 11 shows that the future population was expected to decline in all residential clusters. Among the residential clusters, the future population was expected to decline rapidly in the public housing cluster (FPCR2040 = −45.9) and the mountain cluster (FPCR2040 = −44.7). However, it was found that the population would decrease by approximately 30% in the business center cluster (FPCR2040 = −29.7) and the sprawl cluster (FPCR2040 = −33.2).

3.3. Structural Equation Modeling of Residential Clusters

In this section, we analyze the SEM in which walkability affects real estate prices and real estate prices affect FPCR2040 according to the residential cluster involved. Effective models of residential clusters are clarified in Table 1 based on GFI, AGFI, and RMSEA. Table 1 shows that the effective residential clusters are the business center cluster and the sprawl cluster. The result suggests that, in the business center cluster and the sprawl cluster, walkability affects real estate prices and those real estate prices affect the FPCR2040.
In the business center cluster, Figure 12 shows that WI has a positive impact on the price of apartments for sale (Path coefficient: P.C. = 1.88) and the price of stores for rent (P.C. = 0.44). On the other hand, WI has negative impacts on the price of vacant lots for sale (P.C. = −1.30) and the price of detached houses for sale (P.C. = −0.33). Moreover, it was found that the price of real estate had positive impacts on the price of apartments for rent (P.C. = 48.39) and the price of detached houses for rent (P.C. = 10.92). This result suggests that the price of apartments for sale is a real estate factor in which WI positively impacts FPCR2040. In the business center cluster, this means that, by increasing WI, the price of apartments for sale is expected to increase and the FPCR2040 is also expected to increase.
In the sprawl cluster, Figure 13 shows that WI has positive impacts on the price of apartments for sale (P.C. = 4.01) and the price of detached houses for sale (P.C. = 1.25). On the other hand, there is no real estate that has negative impacts on the real estate price. Moreover, many types of real estate prices have a negative impact on the FPCR2040. These types are the price of apartments for rent (P.C. = −14.10) and the price of detached houses for rent (P.C. = −23.78). However, only the price of apartments for sale had a positive impact on FPCR2040. This result suggests that the price of apartments for sale is a real estate factor in which WI has a positive impact on FPCR2040. In the sprawl cluster, this suggestion means that the price of apartments for sale and FPCR2040 are expected to increase by increasing the WI.

4. Discussion

We conclude that, in the business center cluster and the sprawl cluster, the price of apartments for sale is a real estate factor in which WI positively impacts FPCR2040. There are previous studies on walkability and real estate prices and on real estate prices and future population [13,14,15]. However, there were many theories about the positive and negative influences, and the findings were not always consistent [16,17,18]. Compared to previous studies, this study clarified the relationship between walkability, real estate prices, and future population according to residential clusters. The method we used was the SEM, for each residential cluster of an NA, of the impact of walkability on the real estate price and the impact of real estate price on FPCR2040, using the walkability index, real estate price, and future population change ratio. This study provided reliable results based on the GFI, AGFI, and RMSEA scores by the SEM. This study was analyzed in the Osaka metropolitan area based on the NA scale.
The results are summarized in Table 2. The SEM was not found to be a valid model for the eleven clusters apart from the business center cluster and the sprawl cluster. The result clarified the effectiveness of the studies of Boyle et al. [16] and Maennig et al. [20] in the eleven clusters. The result suggests that factors other than improving walkability might affect the future population in the eleven clusters. This suggestion meets the need for approaches other than improving walkability in the eleven clusters.
On the other hand, in the business center and sprawl clusters, the results suggest that improving walkability might contribute to sustaining the future population. For improving walkability in the clusters, it was found that apartments for sale are essential. Specifically, WI positively impacts the real estate price of apartments for sale in the business center cluster (P.C. = 1.88) and the sprawl cluster (P.C. = 4.01). This result validates the studies of Kim [18] and Pivo et al. [36]. The results are consistent with a previous study of Brazilian cities in the global south [37]. The reason might be that apartments for sale are sometimes developed together with shops and hospitals, which increases the scores of a walkability index (Equation (4)) in ND (Equation (1)) and LUM (Equation (3)). Moreover, the real estate price of apartments for sale has positive impacts on FPCR2040 in the business center cluster (P.C. = 0.25) and the sprawl cluster (P.C. = 0.08). This result validates the study of Saita et al. [19]. The reason might be that residents of apartments for sale tend to live there for a long time. This result suggests that, in the business center clusters and the sprawl clusters, the effective use of apartments for sale can contribute to the maintenance of the future population in approaches aiming to improve walkability.

5. Conclusions

In the future, walkable neighborhoods need to be designed according to the characteristics of each residential cluster. The result of this study is worth it for urban planners to suggest that a combination of effective housing policies and the design of walkable neighborhoods is expected to achieve promising results. Japanese housing policy is positioned in the dualist rental model suggested by Kemeny [38]. Therefore, the houses are mainly traded on the private market. That means that this research result would be highly effective in Japan. With its aging society, Japan also needs to redesign walkable neighborhoods strategically in order to prevent rapid population decline. In addition, while the concept of a 15-min city has been discussed [39], this study is valuable for raising new possibilities for urban projects related to walkable design.
In the business center cluster in the Osaka metropolitan area, Midosuji Street in central Osaka has been designed as a walkable street [40]. The city center of Kyoto has also been designated a walkable area as an urban strategy [41]. In addition to these walkable designs, it is expected that the future population will be sustained by strategically locating apartments for sale in the business center cluster. This means that there is a need for a housing policy for apartments for sale in the business center cluster. If real estate types other than apartments for sale are located there, there will be a risk of gentrification, which will cause population decline, as in the central area of Kyoto City [22]. Therefore, policies to guide urban development, including apartments for sale, would be effective in the business center cluster.
For the sprawl cluster in the Osaka metropolitan area, no successful designs to improve walkability have been reported yet. However, diversifying land use could be effective. Kato [10] reported that the creation of medical facilities and welfare facilities could help maintain the future population in the sprawl cluster. By strategically locating such facilities on land made vacant by population decline, it may be possible to maintain the population. In the sprawl cluster, housing stock has been rebuilt because many areas were developed after the 1960s. Therefore, in addition to land use diversification, when rebuilding old building stock using the location optimization plan policy, it would be effective to maintain the future population by developing a housing policy that proactively locates apartments for sale in residential-inducing areas in the sprawl cluster.
A future task of this research group is to develop policies to realize the proposed method in the business center cluster and sprawl cluster. Methods that succeed in Japan, where population decline is projected, are expected to become a model for urban policies in shrinking cities worldwide.
There are two main limitations of this study. The first limitation is that we could not clarify factors other than walkability in eleven clusters apart from the business center cluster and the sprawl cluster. This factor needs to be investigated further in the future. The second limitation is the analysis of the NA scale. For example, we cannot identify changes in individual real estate prices by increasing walkability. In order to clarify the changes in particular real estate prices, it is necessary to evaluate walkability at the street or building scale. This analysis needs to be investigated further in the future.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, H.K.; methodology, H.K.; software, H.K.; validation, H.K. and A.T.; formal analysis, H.K.; investigation, H.K.; resources, H.K.; data curation, H.K.; writing—original draft preparation, H.K.; writing—review and editing, H.K. and A.T.; visualization, H.K.; supervision, H.K.; project administration, H.K.; funding acquisition, H.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the JSPS KAKENHI (21K14318) and the Association of Real Estate Agents of Japan.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author, H.K.

Acknowledgments

In this paper, we used the “At Home Dataset” provided by At Home Co., Ltd., via IDR Dataset Service of National Institute of Informatics. This study was undertaken using data provided by the Conservation GIS Consortium Japan.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

This section draws upon the author’s previous study [5,8,10]. The types of clusters present using urban ecological analysis were analyzed in the Osaka metropolitan area, the same region and data as that studied in this paper [5,8,10]. Urban ecological analysis aims to identify geospatial patterns through an inductive method using a wide range of statistical data on the NA scale. This analysis consisted of five steps. First, the 2015 Japanese census was analyzed using the standardization of the 53 identified indicators. The 53 indicators were census data such as “population under 15 years old”, “households who live in detached houses”, and “population who work in their own city”. Next, the standardized composition ratio R x k was calculated by standardizing each indicator’s data using Equation (A1):
R x k = X x i k X x m i n X x m a x X x m i n ,
where X x i k is the number of NAi for indicator x in the NAk, Xxmin is the minimum value of NAi for indicator x, and Xxmax is the maximum value of NAi for indicator x.
Third, using R x k , the principal component was analyzed. The social survey data were deemed reliable because the Cronbach’s α coefficient of the principal component analysis was 0.985. Fourth, using the Kaiser criterion, seven principal components were extracted. The obtained data were reliable because the total variable amount of these seven principal components was 78.8%. Finally, using their seven principal component scores, residential clusters were categorized using hierarchical cluster analysis.
In addition to the urban ecological analysis, this study analyzed the urbanized area ratio and the average distance from the center. The urbanized area ratio was analyzed using the National Land Information Download Service provided by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport, and Tourism of Japan [42]. The urbanized area ratio was the ratio of the NA that were designated as urbanized areas by their local governments. The average distance from the center of the metropolitan area—Umeda in Osaka city, Karasuma in Kyoto city, and Sannomiya Station in Kobe City—was then calculated. Then, by analyzing the Rki, urbanized area ratio, and average distance from the center of each indicator for each residential cluster, each cluster’s name was determined, as shown in Table A1. Finally, the cluster classification was verified by analyzing the average land use area (m2) using the data of the Numerical Map 5000 for Japan [33] in Table A1.
Table A1. The Rki of each indicator for each residential cluster (Table A1 features the same data as Table A.1 and Table A.2 from Kato [8]).
Table A1. The Rki of each indicator for each residential cluster (Table A1 features the same data as Table A.1 and Table A.2 from Kato [8]).
HeadingInner City ClusterBusiness Center ClusterMining Industry ClusterDense ClusterPublic Housing ClusterNon-Residential ClusterAgriculture ClusterSprawl ClusterHigh-Rise Residential ClusterMountain ClusterOld NT ClusterSuburban Agriculture ClusterRural Cluster
Number of NA in the cluster (N)19375472728672889740329749986287251254629141033
Location data by GIS analysisUrbanized area ratio (%)84.5 86.2 45.1 77.1 72.4 55.2 23.6 66.2 61.8 40.7 59.1 21.3 24.9
Average distance from the center (km)19.334.559.931.226.743.971.638.225.956.126.763.152.1
Census data of 2015 Japanese censusPopulation under 15 years old (%)0.06 0.01 0.03 0.06 0.05 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.09 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.10
Population between 16 and 64 years old (%)0.09 0.02 0.04 0.09 0.08 0.00 0.06 0.03 0.12 0.01 0.05 0.02 0.14
Population over 65 years old (%)0.10 0.02 0.04 0.07 0.12 0.00 0.09 0.04 0.11 0.01 0.05 0.03 0.15
Population of foreigners (%)0.09 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.07 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.05
Population who live in their own houses (%)0.09 0.02 0.04 0.07 0.05 0.00 0.07 0.03 0.13 0.01 0.05 0.02 0.15
Population who live in public housing (%)0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.12 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01
Population who live in private rented houses (%)0.10 0.02 0.02 0.10 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.07
Population who live in houses for employees (%)0.02 0.00 0.01 0.08 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02
Population who live in shared houses (%)0.08 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.04 0.03 0.06 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.09
Households who live outside of houses (%)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01
Households who live in detached houses (%)0.07 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.10 0.04 0.09 0.02 0.06 0.03 0.19
Households who live in traditional nagaya houses (%)0.08 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.07
Households who live in apartments (%)0.08 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.10 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.04
Households who live in 1- or 2-story buildings (%)0.05 0.02 0.04 0.07 0.02 0.00 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.16
Households who live in 3- to 5-story buildings (%)0.05 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.11 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.03
Households who live in 6- to 10-story buildings (%)0.06 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02
Households who live in 11 (or more)-story buildings (%)0.03 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00
Population who work in agriculture and forestry (%)0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.03
Population who work in a fishery (%)0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Population who work in the mining industry (%)0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01
Population who work in the construction industry (%)0.08 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.04 0.09 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.15
Population who work in the manufacturing industry (%)0.05 0.01 0.03 0.07 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.08 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.12
Population who work in the electricity, gas, and water supply industries (%)0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.03
Population who work in the information industry (%)0.08 0.01 0.02 0.08 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.12 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.06
Population who work in the transport industry (%)0.08 0.02 0.03 0.07 0.10 0.00 0.05 0.04 0.09 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.14
Population who work in the retail industry (%)0.09 0.02 0.03 0.08 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.03 0.12 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.13
Population who work in the financial industry (%)0.06 0.01 0.02 0.08 0.04 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.12 0.00 0.04 0.01 0.08
Population who work in the real estate business (%)0.09 0.02 0.03 0.08 0.06 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.12 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.08
Population who work as researchers or professionals (%)0.06 0.01 0.02 0.07 0.04 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.11 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.07
Population who work in the service industry (%)0.09 0.02 0.03 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.03 0.09 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.12
Population who work in the entertainment industry (%)0.06 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.09
Population who work in education (%)0.06 0.02 0.03 0.08 0.04 0.00 0.05 0.02 0.13 0.01 0.05 0.02 0.10
Population who work in the medical/welfare industry (%)0.07 0.02 0.03 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.03 0.11 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.13
Population who work in a joint service industry (%)0.05 0.01 0.05 0.06 0.05 0.00 0.18 0.03 0.09 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.18
Population who work in another service industry (%)0.09 0.02 0.04 0.08 0.10 0.00 0.06 0.04 0.11 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.14
Population who work as civil servants (%)0.02 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.04
Population who work at home (%)0.08 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.00 0.18 0.03 0.07 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.13
Population who work in their own city (%)0.06 0.01 0.04 0.07 0.06 0.00 0.07 0.03 0.07 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.14
Population who work in other cities (%)0.07 0.01 0.03 0.07 0.06 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.11 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.10
Population who work in other wards of their own cities (%)0.07 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Population who work in other cities of their own prefectures (%)0.03 0.00 0.02 0.07 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.09 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.12
Population who work in other prefectures (%)0.03 0.01 0.02 0.07 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.15 0.00 0.05 0.01 0.05
Population who go to school in their own city (%)0.04 0.01 0.02 0.06 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.09
Population who go to school in other cities (%)0.07 0.01 0.03 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.04 0.03 0.14 0.01 0.05 0.01 0.11
Population who go to school in other wards of their own cities (%)0.07 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Population who go to school in other cities of their own prefectures (%)0.04 0.01 0.03 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.06 0.03 0.13 0.01 0.05 0.02 0.13
Population who go to school in other prefectures (%)0.04 0.01 0.02 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.16 0.01 0.05 0.01 0.08
Population who have lived in the area since birth (%)0.07 0.02 0.05 0.06 0.05 0.00 0.13 0.04 0.10 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.17
Population who have lived in the area for 1 year (%)0.06 0.02 0.02 0.10 0.05 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.07 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.08
Population who have lived in the area for the past 5 years (%)0.06 0.01 0.02 0.08 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.08 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.09
Population who have lived in the area for the past 10 years (%)0.07 0.01 0.03 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.04 0.03 0.12 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.11
Population who have lived in the area for the past 20 years (%)0.08 0.02 0.03 0.07 0.08 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.15 0.01 0.05 0.01 0.13
Population who have lived in the area for over 20 years (%)0.07 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.03 0.09 0.01 0.05 0.02 0.15
Land use data of Numerical Map 5000 in JapanPublic facilities land (m2)39,63718,93624,39365,20532,63940,83032,14333,20841,08017,95123,89719,78434,391
Low-rise residential land (m2)32,78913,48535,36328,84819,3013504111,00126,41948,55317,37339,97341,49272,239
High-rise residential land (m2)90531632438014,97139,734583525365421,31380749287016887
Park green land (m2)11,6495947942610,63114,58013,58041,421742114,5137716740515,44717,434
Commercial facilities land (m2)17,635781010,73620,40510,95011,91431,93811,28213,0676388743614,57124,132
Dense residential land (m2)553116195025307324582654379416326331325354093311,780
Mountain forest land (m2)109,634205,136419,545196,34156,359652,8362,742,09966,609216,845676,535272,4602,120,660628,045
Industrial land (m2)6192330374308553524518,72934,147784650475513332712,18915,315
Rice field (m2)4655310211,0915342363110,420248,0385034357314,9773650107,50646,223
Farm land (m2)354116197553268834903963175,850402030769034292973,12635,252
Vacant land (m2)74933565914511,3197761741360,975693212,6346345905923,75723,063
developing land (m2)2757453244283645920320318903551699202853182704

References

  1. Japan National Institute of Population and Social Security Research. Population and Social Security in Japan 2019. In IPSS Research Report; Japan National Institute of Population and Social Security Research: Tokyo, Japan, 2019; p. 85. [Google Scholar]
  2. Kato, H.; Kanki, K. Development of walkability indicator for visualising smart shrinking—A case study of sprawl areas in North Osaka Metropolitan Region. Int. Rev. Spat. Plan. Sustain. Dev. 2020, 8, 39–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Cerin, E.; Saelens, B.E.; Sallis, J.F.; Frank, L.D. Neighborhood environment walkability scale: Validity and development of a short form. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2006, 38, 1682–1691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Inoue, S.; Murase, N.; Shimomitsu, T.; Ohya, Y.; Odagiri, Y.; Takamiya, T.; Ishii, K.; Katsumura, T.; Sallis, J.F. Association of physical activity and neighborhood environment among Japanese adults. Prev. Med. 2009, 48, 321–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Kato, H. Effect of Walkability on Urban Sustainability in the Osaka Metropolitan Fringe Area. Sustainability 2020, 12, 9248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Japanese MILT (Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism). Basic Plan on Transport Policy. Available online: https://www.mlit.go.jp/common/001096409.pdf (accessed on 15 September 2020).
  7. Kato, H. Development of a Spatio-temporal Analysis Method to Support the Prevention of COVID-19 Infection: Space-Time Kernel Density Estimation Using GPS Location History Data. In Urban Informatics for Future Cities; Geertman, S., Pettit, C., Goodspeed, R., Staffans, A., Eds.; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 51–67. ISBN 978-3-030-76058-8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Kato, H.; Matsushita, D. Changes in Walkable Streets during the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Suburban City in the Osaka Metropolitan Area. Sustainability 2021, 13, 7442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kato, H.; Takizawa, A.; Matsushita, D. Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Home Range in a Suburban City in the Osaka Metropolitan Area. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Kato, H. How Does the Location of Urban Facilities Affect the Forecasted Population Change in the Osaka Metropolitan Fringe Area? Sustainability 2021, 13, 110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. OECD Stat. Metropolitan Areas (Database). Available online: https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=CITIES (accessed on 16 September 2021).
  12. Japanese Law Translation. Local Autonomy Act. Available online: http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/law/detail/?id=281&vm=&re=01 (accessed on 26 July 2021).
  13. Renne, J.L.; Tolford, T.; Hamidi, S.; Ewing, R. The Cost and Affordability Paradox of Transit-Oriented Development: A Comparison of Housing and Transportation Costs across Transit-Oriented Development, Hybrid and Transit-Adjacent Development Station Typologies. Hous. Policy Debate 2016, 26, 819–834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Xia, Z.L.; Li, H.; Chen, Y.H. Assessing Neighborhood Walkability Based on Usage Characteristics of Amenities under Chinese Metropolises Context. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Zhang, J.; Tan, P.Y.; Zeng, H.; Zhang, Y. Walkability Assessment in a Rapidly Urbanizing City and Its Relationship with Residential Estate Value. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Boyle, A.; Barrilleaux, C.; Scheller, D. Does Walkability Influence Housing Prices? Soc. Sci. Q. 2014, 95, 852–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Li, W.; Joh, K.; Lee, C.; Kim, J.H.; Park, H.; Woo, A. Assessing Benefits of Neighborhood Walkability to Single-Family Property Values: A Spatial Hedonic Study in Austin, Texas. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 2015, 35, 471–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Kim, E.J.; Kim, H. Neighborhood Walkability and Housing Prices: A Correlation Study. Sustainability 2020, 12, 593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Saita, Y.; Shimizu, C.; Watanabe, T. Aging and real estate prices: Evidence from Japanese and US regional data. Int. J. Hous. Mark. Anal. 2016, 9, 66–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Maennig, W.; Dust, L. Shrinking and growing metropolitan areas asymmetric real estate price reactions? The case of German single-family houses. Reg. Sci. Urban Econ. 2008, 38, 63–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Smith, N.; LeFaivre, M. A class analysis of gentrification. In Gentrification, Displacement, and Neighborhood Revitalization; Palen, J., London, B., Eds.; State University of New York Press: Albany, NY, USA, 1984; pp. 43–63. [Google Scholar]
  22. Kato, H. Residents’ evaluations of the tourism gentrification caused by guesthouses in the central area of Kyoto City: A case study of Shutoku District in Kyoto City. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2020, 960, 032063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Paul, K.; Steven, P. Difference and inequality: Socioeconomic and sociocultural patterns. In Urban Social Geography—An Introduction, 6th ed.; Prentice Hall: Harlow, UK, 2010; pp. 67–83. [Google Scholar]
  24. Brownson, R.C.; Hoehner, C.M.; Day, K.; Forsyth, A.; Sallis, J.F. Measuring the built environment for physical activity, state of the science. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2009, 36, 99–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Cervero, R.; Kockelman, K. Travel demand and the 3Ds: Density, diversity, and design. Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 1997, 2, 199–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Duncan, D.T.; Aldstadt, J.; Whalen, J.; Melly, S.J.; Gortmaker, S.L. Validation of Walk Score® for estimating neighborhood walkability: An analysis of four US metropolitan areas. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2011, 8, 4160–4179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Frank, L.D.; Schmid, T.L.; Sallis, J.F.; Chapman, J.; Saelens, B.E. Linking objectively measured physical activity with objectively measured urban form. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2005, 28, 117–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Frank, L.D.; Sallis, J.F.; Saelens, B.E.; Leary, L.; Cain, K.; Conway, T.L.; Hess, P.M. The development of a walkability index: Application to the neighborhood quality of life study. Br. J. Sports Med. 2009, 44, 924–933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Owen, N.; Cerin, E.; Leslie, E.; duToit, L.; Coffee, N.; Frank, L.D.; Bauman, A.E.; Hugo, G.; Sealens, B.E.; Sallis, J.F. Neighborhood walkability and the walking behavior of Australian adults. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2007, 33, 387–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Koohsari, M.J.; Sugiyama, T.; Hanibuchi, T.; Shibata, A.; Ishii, K.; Liao, Y.; Oka, K. Validity of Walk Score® as a measure of neighborhood walkability in Japan. Prev. Med. Rep. 2018, 9, 114–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. E-Stat. Japanese Census Data in 2015. Available online: https://www.e-stat.go.jp/ (accessed on 14 June 2020). (In Japanese)
  32. Conservation GIS-Consortium Japan. GIS Data. Available online: http://cgisj.jp/download_type_list.php (accessed on 14 April 2020). (In Japanese).
  33. Geospatial Information Authority of Japan. The Numerical Map 5000 in Japan. Available online: https://www.gsi.go.jp/kankyochiri/lum-5k.html (accessed on 1 April 2020). (In Japanese)
  34. At Home Co., Ltd. At Home Dataset. Informatics Research Data Repository, National Institute of Informatics (Dataset). 2020. Available online: https://dsc.repo.nii.ac.jp/?action=pages_view_main&active_action=repository_view_main_item_detail&item_id=4333&item_no=1&page_id=13&block_id=21 (accessed on 3 October 2021). [CrossRef]
  35. G-Spatial Information Center, Japanese MILT (Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism). Future Population and Household Forecast Tool V. 2 (2015 National Census Edition Download Webpage). Available online: https://www.geospatial.jp/ckan/dataset/cohort-v2 (accessed on 14 March 2020).
  36. Pivo, G.; Fisher, J.D. The Walkability Premium in Commercial Real Estate Investments. Real Estate Econ. 2011, 39, 185–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Lucchesi, S.T.; Larranaga, A.M.; Cybis, H.B.B.; Silva, J.; Arellana, J.A. Are people willing to pay more to live in a walking environment? A multigroup analysis of the impact of walkability on real estate values and their moderation effects in two Global South cities. Res. Transp. Econ. 2021, 86, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Kemeny, J. From Public Housing to the Social Market. In Rental Policy Strategies in Comparative Perspective; Routledge: London, UK, 1995; ISBN 0-415-08365-6. [Google Scholar]
  39. Balletto, G.; Ladu, M.; Milesi, A.; Borruso, G. A Methodological Approach on Disused Public Properties in the 15-Minute City Perspective. Sustainability 2021, 13, 593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Osaka City. Midosuji Future Vision (Summary Version). Available online: https://www.city.osaka.lg.jp/kensetsu/cmsfiles/contents/0000464/464479/gaiyou.pdf (accessed on 31 July 2021). (In Japanese).
  41. Kyoto City. Kyoto City Urban Planning Master Plan (Draft). Available online: https://www.city.kyoto.lg.jp/templates/pubcomment/cmsfiles/contents/0000285/285150/toshimasu_soan.pdf (accessed on 31 July 2021). (In Japanese).
  42. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism of Japan. National Land Information Download Service. Available online: http://nlftp.mlit.go.jp/ksj/index.html (accessed on 14 March 2020).
Figure 1. Analysis process used for each section.
Figure 1. Analysis process used for each section.
Sustainability 13 13413 g001
Figure 2. SEM of this study.
Figure 2. SEM of this study.
Sustainability 13 13413 g002
Figure 3. Map of residential clusters from the urban ecological analysis (Data Source: Kato [5,8,10]).
Figure 3. Map of residential clusters from the urban ecological analysis (Data Source: Kato [5,8,10]).
Sustainability 13 13413 g003
Figure 4. Map of WI (Data Source: Kato [5]).
Figure 4. Map of WI (Data Source: Kato [5]).
Sustainability 13 13413 g004
Figure 5. Map of the location of real estate (Data Source: Self-elaboration by the authors, 2021).
Figure 5. Map of the location of real estate (Data Source: Self-elaboration by the authors, 2021).
Sustainability 13 13413 g005
Figure 6. Map of housing prices (apartments for rent) (Data Source: Self-elaboration by the authors, 2021).
Figure 6. Map of housing prices (apartments for rent) (Data Source: Self-elaboration by the authors, 2021).
Sustainability 13 13413 g006
Figure 7. Map of future population change ratio FPCR2040 (Data Source: Kato [10]).
Figure 7. Map of future population change ratio FPCR2040 (Data Source: Kato [10]).
Sustainability 13 13413 g007
Figure 8. Box plot diagram of the WI of each residential cluster.
Figure 8. Box plot diagram of the WI of each residential cluster.
Sustainability 13 13413 g008
Figure 9. Amount of real estate available in each residential cluster.
Figure 9. Amount of real estate available in each residential cluster.
Sustainability 13 13413 g009
Figure 10. Box plot diagram showing the real estate price of each residential cluster.
Figure 10. Box plot diagram showing the real estate price of each residential cluster.
Sustainability 13 13413 g010
Figure 11. Box plot diagram showing the FPCR2040 of each residential cluster.
Figure 11. Box plot diagram showing the FPCR2040 of each residential cluster.
Sustainability 13 13413 g011
Figure 12. Structural equation modeling of the business center cluster.
Figure 12. Structural equation modeling of the business center cluster.
Sustainability 13 13413 g012
Figure 13. Structural equation modeling of the sprawl cluster.
Figure 13. Structural equation modeling of the sprawl cluster.
Sustainability 13 13413 g013
Table 1. Test statistics for the SEM for each cluster.
Table 1. Test statistics for the SEM for each cluster.
GFIAGFIRMSEA
Inner City Cluster0.9310.8440.128
Business Center Cluster0.9660.9240.094
Mining Industry Cluster0.8410.6410.188
Dense Cluster0.8480.6570.186
Public Housing Cluster0.9090.7960.145
Non-Residential Cluster0.9050.7870.155
Agriculture Cluster0.6030.1070.337
Sprawl Cluster0.9610.9120.092
High-Rise Residential Cluster0.7880.5220.239
Mountain Cluster0.9410.8670.117
Old NT Cluster0.8700.7070.176
Suburban Agriculture Cluster0.6890.3010.286
Rural Cluster0.7640.4700.233
Table 2. Statistical relationships in each residential cluster.
Table 2. Statistical relationships in each residential cluster.
WI Has Positive Impacts on the Real Estate Price.Real Estate Price Has Positive Impacts on FPCR2040.WI Positively Impacts on FPCR2040.
Business Center
Cluster
Apartments for sale (P.C. = 1.88)
Stores for rent (P.C. = 0.44).
Detached houses for rent (P.C. = 0.06)
Detached houses for rent (P.C. = 10.92)
Apartments for sale (P.C. = 0.25)
Apartments for rent (P.C. = 48.39)
Vacant lots for sale (P.C. = 0.07).
Apartments for sale
Sprawl ClusterDetached houses for rent (P.C. = 1.25)
Detached houses for rent (P.C. = 0.00)
Apartments for sale (P.C. = 4.01)
Apartments for rent (P.C. = 0.02)
Stores for rent (P.C. = 0.75).
Vacant lots for sale (P.C. = 0.66).
Apartments for sale (P.C. = 0.08)Apartments for sale
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kato, H.; Takizawa, A. Which Residential Clusters of Walkability Affect Future Population from the Perspective of Real Estate Prices in the Osaka Metropolitan Area? Sustainability 2021, 13, 13413. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313413

AMA Style

Kato H, Takizawa A. Which Residential Clusters of Walkability Affect Future Population from the Perspective of Real Estate Prices in the Osaka Metropolitan Area? Sustainability. 2021; 13(23):13413. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313413

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kato, Haruka, and Atsushi Takizawa. 2021. "Which Residential Clusters of Walkability Affect Future Population from the Perspective of Real Estate Prices in the Osaka Metropolitan Area?" Sustainability 13, no. 23: 13413. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313413

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop