Transport Policy 127 (2022) 116–129

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Transport Policy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tranpol

Spatial assessment of audience accessibility to historical monuments and

museums in Qatar during the 2022 FIFA World Cup
Shawky Mansour a, b, *, Mohammed Alahmadi c, Ammar Abulibdeh d
a
Geography Department, College of Arts and Social Sciences, Sultan Qaboos University, El Khodh, Aseeb, Muscat, Oman
b
Department of Geography and GIS, Faculty of Arts, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Al Shatby, Egypt
c
Earth and Space Science Institute, Future Economies Sector, King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology (KACST), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
d
Department of Humanities, College of Arts and Sciences, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Hosting mega sports events is a key driver for sustainable development, particularly through fostering tourism
GIS marketing and planning. Although the 2022 FIFA World Cup has received considerable attention, as the first
Audience accessibility global event hosted in the Middle East and Arab world, studies that highlight and investigate the potential
Archaeological heritage
benefits of hosting such an event are rare. This study assessed the geographical accessibility to archaeological
Museums
2022 FIFA World cup
sites, monuments, and museums across Qatar, providing clear guidelines on how to represent the national cul­
Qatar tural and historical heritage to global audiences during the 2022 mega event, to maximise socioeconomic
revenue.
Spatial data were assembled within GIS platforms to assess accessibility utilising geospatial techniques, such as
the average nearest neighbour, near analysis, spatial autocorrelation (Moran ‘I Index), and cost distance to es­
timate travel times. The analysis indicated that the archaeological sites are spatially clustered, predominantly
concentrated in Doha and Al-Rayan municipalities, where historical and cultural landmarks are located. How­
ever, most castles, forts, and archaeological sites located outside the capital zone are less accessible, and at a long
distance from hotels and residential areas. As the hosting stadiums are located along the northeast coast and
within the most populous zone, the museums, towers, and cultural landscapes are easily accessible within a short
travel time (less than 10 min). As a host community, planners and policymakers in Qatar may benefit from this
research, as a spatial guideline to promote sustainable development of tourism, through facilitating accessibility
to monuments and museums, as well as enriching the representation of the national tangible heritage to a global
audience.

1. Introduction and theoretical background
Mega-sport events, such as the FIFA World Cup, are important for
tourism by increasing the number of visitors on an unprecedented scale.
Hence, these events are important for the global development of the
entertainment industry and sports tourism, as well as for the sustainable
development of tourist destinations. Mega-sport events can also help to
promote the culture of the host country, by encouraging the participants
and fans to visit museums, and archaeological and cultural heritage
sites, as well as positively changing visitors’ attitudes.
Sports and tourism are multidimensional social and cultural systems
comprising a large network of interconnections on different geograph­
ical scales (i.e., local, regional, and international), maintaining
multilateral relations with various aspects of social, cultural, and eco­
nomic life. Furthermore, sports and tourism connect cultures and na­
tions, influencing local and global political decisions. Indeed, the
synergy between sport and tourism helps to develop the tourism in­
dustry, by promoting a destination image through hosting mega-sport
events. In the literature, the link between sport and tourism is referred
to as the sportification of tourism, or touristification of sport (Mal­
chrowicz-Mosko and Munsters, 2018).
Sports tourism is gaining momentum and more popularity over time,
now viewed as an autonomous phenomenon of social reality, playing an
increasingly significant socio-cultural role. It is defined as “leisure-based
travel that takes individuals temporarily outside of their home com­
munities, to participate in physical activities, to watch physical

* Corresponding author Geography Department, College of Arts and Social Sciences, Sultan Qaboos University, El Khodh, Aseeb, Muscat, Oman
E-mail address: shmansour@squ.edu.om (S. Mansour).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2022.08.022
Received 13 August 2021; Received in revised form 20 July 2022; Accepted 30 August 2022
Available online 3 September 2022
0967-070X/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S. Mansour et al.
activities, or to venerate attractions associated with physical activities”
(Gibson, 1998: 155–179). Richards (1996, 2001) defined sports tourism
as “the movement of persons to cultural attractions (such as museums,
heritage sites, artistic performances, and festivals) away from their
normal place of residence, with the intention to gather new information
and experiences to satisfy their cultural needs”. Sport-related travel has
become one of the fastest developing fields of local, regional, and in­
ternational tourism. Recently, around 25–30% of the world’s tourism
economy was due to sport-related travel, and it is predicted that such
travel will continue to increase, contributing to the development of the
tourist industry globally (Malchrowicz-Mosko and Munsters, 2018;
Malchrowicz-Mo’sko & Poczta, 2018).
Two types of sports tourism have been identified in the literature
(Woodham, 2016; Malchrowicz-Mo’sko & Poczta, 2018; Taks, 17 –1
July 2017; 2009): active sports tourism, which is based on physical
participation in a sporting event, mainly as an athlete, and passive sports
tourism, that is, mainly participating in a sporting event as a supporter
or spectator. This study focuses on the passive sports tourists, because
they use different types of transportation, particularly public trans­
portation (Gibson, 1998; Hinch and Higham, 2009, 2011). Both passive
and active sports tourism have a strong cultural element, as participating
in or watching sports relates to cultural behaviour, and sports tourism
includes cultural trips based on sport. Therefore, sports tourism is a form
of cultural tourism that allows both active and passive participants to
learn about the material/tangible, and non-material/intangible heritage
of sport, and the hosting country.
There is a lack of research regarding transport accessibility of tourists
to museums, cultural heritage, and archaeological sites during mega-
sport events, with many studies on accessible tourism (also known as
tourism for all, inclusive tourism, and universal tourism) focused on the
concept of accessibility to all people with/without disabilities, including
those with mobility, cognitive, hearing, intellectual and psychosocial
disabilities, older people, and those with temporary disabilities. Un­
derstanding the accessibility of a destination during mega-sport events,
based on the location of the tourists’ accommodation, could help pro­
vide a valuable source of information to authorities, to assess tourism
opportunities and implement policies to activate them.
This paper focuses on the distributional effects of the accessibility of
the transport system in Qatar during the FIFA World Cup 2022, and how
it affects visitor accessibility to museums, cultural heritage, and
archaeological sites. Transport planning in the state of Qatar has been
mainly driven by this mega sports event for almost ten years. Specif­
ically, the study area was divided into two areas. First, we investigate
the transformations implemented in Doha city public transport, partic­
ularly the metro, and visitor accessibility to this system to commute to
the most important tourist destinations. Second, we analyse the acces­
sibility to other archaeological and cultural sites outside Doha city,
where no public transportation is available, and visitors must depend on
private cars, Uber, and taxis.
The potential accessibility to museums and historical sites in Qatar
was investigated during the FIFA World Cup 2022 and the specific ob­
jectives were as follows:
- To classify historical locations and museums according to their
proximity to hotels and residential areas.
- To investigate the spatial pattern distribution and clustering of
archaeological sites and museums.
- To compute travel time estimations from residential units (hotels) to
museums and archaeological sites, to provide planners and decision-
makers with policy recommendations aimed at enhancing the
accessibility to all historical locations across the country.
1.1. Transport accessibility
Accessibility to places using the transport system is a major concern,
117
Transport Policy 127 (2022) 116–129
and the paramount goal of a transportation policy (Niedzielskia and
Kucharskib, 2019; Grengs, 2015). Transport accessibility improvements
are considered the ultimate principle for transport goals, with accessi­
bility being one of the indicators considered in sustainability assess­
ments of transport systems (Tomej and Liburd, 2020; Smith et al., 2013;
Rubulotta et al., 2013; Toth-Szabo and V arhelyi, 2012; Amoroso et al.,
2012; Kwok and Yeh, 2004). It is the measure of spatial separation of
human activities, and the potential for the possibility and ease of spatial
interaction from a particular origin (home, transport corridor, city, or
region) to activities (opportunities, or resources) in other locations, via a
specific mode of transportation (Moscicka et al., 2019; Niedzielski;
Boschmann, 2014; Vandenbulcke et al., 2009; Canzler et al., 2008;
O’Sullivan et al., 2000). Therefore, measuring accessibility indicates
what activity is accessible, for what/whom, from where, and by what
transport mode.
In a single transport mode, accessibility studies usually focus on
vehicles using road networks considering free-flow travel time.
Recently, accessibility studies have considered different elements of
dynamic accessibility, including measuring accessibility throughout the
day (Niedzielskia and Kucharski, 2019; Hu and Downs, 2019; Stępniak
et al., 2019). Furthermore, some studies measured accessibility for
different network conditions, to illustrate the effect of congestion
(Moya-Gómez et al., 2018; Thomas et al., 2018), whereas other studies
considered facility opening times (Delafontaine et al., 2012), and
different population distributions (Järv et al., 2018).
Accessibility is an important concept that represents the interaction
between transportation and land use, to enable commuters to arrive at
their destinations in a reasonable time and cost, use different trans­
portation modes other than personal vehicles, connect their origins with
their destinations, and decrease congestion (Hawas et al., 2016; Canzler
et al., 2008; Stantchev and Menaz, 2006). The transport mode de­
termines the ease of commuting, which in turn reflects the quality of the
services provided by the transport system, whereas the land use reflects
the importance and attractiveness of the destination (Moscicka et al.,
2019; Handy and Niemeier, 1997). The origin and destination can
mutually or unilaterally reach and interact with each other (in one di­
rection or both directions), with land use determined by the spatial di­
versity of the activities at destinations, and their characteristics (Geurs
and Van Wee, 2004).
Recently, transport planners, geographers, and engineers developed
accessibility measures (Da Silva et al., 2019; Borowski et al., 2018;
Deboosere et al., 2018; Curtis, 2008; Farrington, 2007; Bertolini et al.,
2005). For example, by considering commuting from the origin to po­
tential destinations (work and non-work activities), and for people or
locations via a mode of transportation, these can be disaggregated by
different socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, to provide
more insight. Accessibility can be measured for a multi-modal or single
transport system, from a particular location such as work or home
(Tahmasbi and Haghshenasa, 2019; Bocarejo S and Oviedo, 2012; Del­
melle and Casas, 2012; Kaplan et al., 2014; Mamun et al., 2013; Mavoa
et al., 2012; Monzón et al., 2013; Welch and Mishra, 2013), considering
different physical measures, and including the distance from the ori­
gin/destination to the public transport stations/stops, or the length of
the journey (Saghapour et al., 2016; Weber, 2003; Cheng and Chen,
2015). Other studies evaluated the performance of the transportation
infrastructure, the spatial distribution of the activities, the
spatio-temporal participation, and the benefits commuters derive from
accessing different activities at the destinations (Geurs and Van Wee,
2004; Liu and Zhu, 2004).
Public transport accessibility has gained greater momentum for
achieving urban sustainable development, and improving the quality of
urban life. Accessibility to jobs, services, and other activities is consid­
ered key to the development of sustainable transport, land use, and
spatial planning strategies (Ford et al., 2015; Bristow et al., 2009; Liu
and Zhu, 2004; Geurs and van Wee, 2004). The importance of accessi­
bility for socioeconomic and environmental sustainability is underlined
S. Mansour et al.
by the increased emphasis on sustainable urban development. Transport
accessibility in cities enhances the economic and environmental per­
formance, as it overcomes the negative impact of using private cars, such
as traffic congestion, air pollution, and traffic accidents (Bok and Kwon,
2016). Consequently, accessibility reduces transport externalities, and
promotes equity of the right to move between residents (Abulibdeh,
2018; Martin et al., 2008; Litman, 1999, 2003; Sallis et al., 2004). The
main benefit of a public transport system is providing access to work­
places, services, and goods (El-Geneidy et al., 2009; Litman, 2014;
Grengs, 2010; Lucas and Jones, 2012; Mavoa et al., 2012). Furthermore,
commuters will be motivated to use an accessible public transport sys­
tem rather than their cars, which may result in a mode shift towards
public transport (Owen and Levinson, 2015).
The methods of spatial accessibility have been applied extensively, to
address the effects of road networks and transportation systems on
fostering economic growth, through providing equitable access, partic­
ularly in developing nations (e.g., Delmelle and Casas, 2012; Jin et al.,
2022; Rebstock, 2017). For example, Wang et al. (2020) investigated
how to optimise Tourism Carrying Capacity (TCC), and increase tourist
activities across all tourism destinations, specifically through govern­
ment investment in infrastructure, and tourism resources. Similarly, Kim
et al. (2021) implemented a three-step floating catchment area, and
logistic regression techniques, to assess the temporal variations of
transportation modes and spatial accessibility to medical services.
Moyano et al. (2018) employed location and schedule-based accessi­
bility approaches, to analyse time at destination and trip costs along the
Spanish High-speed rail.
Some transit accessibility indices combine spatial and temporal
measures, while others are limited to spatial measures (Mansour, 2016;
Tribby and Zandbergen, 2012; Farber et al., 2014, 2016; Hawas et al.,
2016). The simulation or analytical modal type consider the temporal
dimension of transit accessibility (Hawas et al., 2016), using different
variables to measure the accessibility of a transportation network, such
as travel time and cost (Mavoa et al., 2012; Tribby and Zandbergen,
2012). Travel time is commonly used as the impedance of transport
accessibility, and is estimated based on simplifying assumptions,
considering walk links for access, transfer waiting times, in-vehicle time,
transfer interchanges, route frequencies, egress, and route speeds
(Kaplan et al., 2014; Lei and Church, 2010; Salonen and Toivonen,
2013). For instance, Hawas et al. (2016) selected transit coverage,
transit supply, and route diversity as three benchmarks to evaluate
transit accessibility. Curtis and Scheurer (2010) concluded that there is
no single preferred or perfect accessibility indicator or measure due to
the diversity of approaches, hence it is important to apply several. Al
Mamun and Lownes (2011) identified three components for transit
accessibility, mainly trip coverage, temporal coverage, and spatial
coverage. Other variables that affect accessibility to destination are the
urban spatial structure, space-time, and transport mode.
Wang et al. (2020) adopted the average nearest neighbour (ANN)
method to measure the spatial pattern of tourist attractions and scenic
spots in China, indicating that the tourist attractions were distributed
across the plains and flatlands, and highly concentrated near urban
transport infrastructure. Euclidean distance analysis is an incisive
measure in public transport systems. Duarte-Duarte et al. (2021) pro­
posed an integrated methodology that includes clustering and Euclidean
distance measures, to identify the best tourist routes in Colombia. Dixit
et al. (2021) examined the impacts of transit network circuity (the ratio
of the network to Euclidean distance travelled from origin to final
destination) on journey time in Amsterdam, revealing that the
low-income population favour travel time per Euclidean distance, and
thus have more circuitous journeys compared to other travellers. The
spatial autocorrelation technique is increasingly used to investigate the
associations between transportation systems and accessibility to urban
services, for example, to assess the effects of urban rail transit on
accessibility and housing values (Diao, 2015). Within this empirical type
of spatial literature, the emphasis is often on distributional patterns,
118
Transport Policy 127 (2022) 116–129
particularly bivariate spatial associations and spatial relationships be­
tween facilities, services, and travel behaviours (Gutiérrez et al., 2017;
Bree et al., 2020; Jiao et al., 2020).
1.2. Accessibility to museums, cultural heritage and archaeological sites
Several studies highlight and evaluate the concept of accessibility.
One of the most well-known is by Litman (2008), who discussed the
concept of accessibility and explained how it can be applied in trans­
portation and network sectors. Furthermore, the author suggested
different planning strategies to improve road and transport network
connectivity. Museums, archaeological, and cultural heritage sites are
recognised as important for the marketing of a country or destination,
and are product providers of the tourism industry (Wiastuti et al., 2018).
However, studies that investigate tourism accessibility to museums or
archaeological sites focused on how disabled people visited these places
independently, and with dignity and equity (Darcy and Dickson, 2009).
Mega sports events may promote the development of cultural tourism, as
fans and athletes visit the country, its cities, museums, and other cultural
attractions.
Tourism accessibility is essential and important to maintain desti­
nations’ competitiveness (Naniopoulos and Tsalis, 2015; Michopoulou
et al., 2015). Medlik (2003) considered accessibility one of three
determining elements of a tourist destination’s importance, and defined
accessibility as “a function of distance from the population centre, which
constitutes tourist markets, and external transport, which enables a
destination to be reached” (p. 4). UNWTO (2016) defined the concept of
accessible tourism as the adaptation of environments and tourism ser­
vices and products to enable access, under the principle of universal
design. Thus, accessible tourism involves transportation, information,
universal design, and common requirements, but public transport is
considered insufficient in the literature, because it is not convenient for
disabled people, particularly those with mobility issues (Sanmargaraja
and Wee, 2015).
Recently, the importance and prime responsibility of museums
shifted from their collections to their visitors (Kotler et al., 2016).
Indeed, cultural heritage, monument buildings, museums, and archae­
ological sites should be accessible to everyone, residents and tourists
alike (Naniopoulos et al., 2015). However, the tourism industry in many
countries still lacks awareness of the importance of accessibility to many
archaeological and cultural sites during mega-sport events, such as the
FIFA World Cup, thus hindering access to locations that reflect the
country’s history and culture. Such large sporting events can play a
significant role in promoting and increasing visitations to accessible
archaeological and cultural sites, but if such places are not accessible,
they lose their quality as a common asset, hindering visitors under­
standing of the history and culture.
Many archaeological sites are located in remote areas far from the
major cities, therefore increasing accessibility can be challenging. Public
transport plays a critical role in sustainable tourism development in
rural destinations, therefore appropriate policy and planning on the
supply side, and behavioural change on the demand side are needed
(Hall et al., 2017; Hergesell et al., 2018; Higham et al., 2013). Tourist
transport in remote areas contradicts the principles of sustainable
mobility, as such tourist attractions are scattered, often with vast dis­
tances between sites, so visitors must rely on cars more than public
transport (Briedenhann and Wickens, 2004). Furthermore, the low
population densities, high car ownership, and features of land use
discourage investment in the public transit network, and encourage
car-dependent mobility, hence this mode of transport is the choice for
both locals and visitors alike (Dickinson and Robbins, 2007; Le-Kl€ahn
et al., 2014). Also, the lack of an appropriate transport system may
exclude some from visiting remote destinations, thus these locations are
disadvantaged when competing for visitors, and are excluded from the
benefits of hosting tourists.
Despite the large body of literature regarding spatial planning of
S. Mansour et al. Transport Policy 127 (2022) 116–129

transport accessibility (e.g., Delafontaine et al., 2012; Delmelle and estimate travel times to each location.
Casas, 2012; Bristow et al., 2009; Farber et al., 2016; Ford et al., 2015;
Moscicka et al., 2019), spatial assessment of audience accessibility to 3.1. Average nearest neighbour
historical and archaeological sites during a mega sports event has not
been conducted in GCC countries, or Qatar as the host of the 2022 World The ANN process involves calculating the distance between each
Cup. Accordingly, this research attempts to bridge this gap by utilising archaeological site and its closest neighbour, as well as computing the
GIS techniques to spatially measure accessibility and travel times to average of all distances (Clark and Evans, 1954; O’Sullivan and Unwin,
historical landmarks, as well as explore the proximity of museums and 2010), as shown below. An ANN ratio lower than 1 indicates a clustering
monuments to the transport network. This analysis could be valuable pattern for the archaeological sites, while a value larger than 1 denotes
and contribute to enhancing the accessibility of the World Cup audience dispersion, and a value close to 1 reflects a random distribution.
to all historical landmarks and museums within Qatar. √̅̅̅
dmin n
R= = 2dmin (1)
2. Study area E(d) a

Qatar is currently experiencing high rates of population growth due where

to massive urban development, rising government expenditure, and ∑
n
dmin (si )
large-scale investment projects (Abulibdeh et al., 2019), which have
dmin = i=1 (2)
resulted in a sharp and unanticipated rise in immigrant workers. Doha n
city is the capital of the state of Qatar, and the most populous city
located in the east of the country, on the west coast of the Arabian Gulf. 1
E(d) = √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ (3)
The city has experienced significant economic growth and urban 2 n/a
expansion during the past three decades, and is an urban primacy city in
the Gulf region, considered the hub of the state of Qatar in terms of dmin specifies the ANN distance of the observed spatial pattern, while
economic development, population, and culture. It also serves as a base dmin (si ) denotes the distance of si (archaeological sites) to its nearest
for regional development. With the rapid urban transformation in Doha neighbour, n refers to the total number of archaeological sites, E(d)
city, the scale, rate, and forms of environmental impact have been demonstrates the expected value for the mean nearest neighbour dis­
fundamentally altered, because of rapid population growth and eco­ tance under a complete spatial random pattern, and a is the size of study
nomic development. The city’s location has contributed to it becoming a area.
junction of transport routes (Abulibdeh et al., 2019).
The country has also seen a rapid increase in the number of private 3.2. Euclidean distance and near analysis
vehicles, with car ownership regarded as a status symbol. Indeed, many
people prefer private vehicles because of the lack of diverse transport The Euclidean distance measures a spatial relationship between each
options, and the inferior public transport services available. Thus, point and a source or a set of sources, based on a straight-line distance
vehicle ownership is a fundamental element in the travel-related deci­ such as a point X (X1, X2, etc.) and a point Y (Y1, Y2, etc.):
sion-making process in Qatar. As an arid and semi-arid country with a
∑
n
hot summer and mild winter, commuting using bicycles or walking in d(x, y) = (xi − yj )2
Qatar is difficult and not advisable, particularly during the summer i=1
season. Since its establishment in 1970, Qatar planned and built its
transportation system around automobiles, with public transportation where xi represents the attributes of point I, xj illustrates the charac­
only considered when the country succeeded in hosting the 2022 FIFA teristics of point j, and n refers to the total number of points.
World Cup. Billions of dollars have been spent on developing the
transportation infrastructure, including the public transportation 3.3. Spatial autocorrelation (Moran’ I index)
network. In 2002, the government launched Mowasalat to ensure the
provision of integrated ground transport services, and, subsequently, a The Moran’s I index is computed as follows:
public transportation system was developed to compete with private ∑n ∑n
n wi,z zi zj
cars. The bus network was expanded, with minimal fares ranging be­ I=
n=1
∑nj=1 2
S0 z
tween QR 3–4 ($0.8–1) inside Doha and QR 4–9 ($1–2.5) outside the i=1 i

city. However, this system is not popular, and is used mainly by low-
where zi indicates the deviation of a characteristic for a spatial feature i
income migrants, particularly from India, the Philippines, Bangladesh,
from its mean value (xi - X), wi,j refers to the spatial weight between
and other Asian nationalities. Mowasalat also operates the taxi system
features i, j, while n denotes the total number of features (points), and S0
and Doha Limousine Service. However, there are fewer taxis and lim­
is the aggregated value of all weights:
ousines than those required by residents. Therefore, proposing a new
public transport mode in a vehicle-oriented society requires the inves­ n ∑
∑ n

tigation of transport user preferences for private vehicle ownership, and S0 = wi,j
future user preferences for a mode shift towards an alternative.
i=1 j=1

zi is calculated as follows:
3. Methods
I − E [I]
Zi = √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
This section provides an overview of the methods and techniques V[I]
used to analyse and investigate spatial patterns of transport accessibility
to archaeological sites, monuments, and museums. First, the ANN was where E [I] = − 1/(n - 1), V[I] = E [I2] - E [I]2
computed to measure the distance between monuments, archaeological
sites, and museums, then the Euclidean distance and near analysis were 3.4. Cost distance and travel times
calculated to measure their proximity to transport networks. Third,
spatial clustering of sites and locations was assessed employing Moran’s Using raster surfaces and two types of road networks, the travel time
I of spatial autocorrelation, and a cost distance method was used to to historical monuments and museums was computed as follows:

119
S. Mansour et al. Transport Policy 127 (2022) 116–129

∑
n
di across Qatar. The three measures of the ANN analysis [the nearest
Tt = neighbour ratio (NNR), Z-scores, and p-value] indicated that the
i=1
Si
archaeological sites were spatially clustered. The NNR was <1 (0.7496),
where Tt denotes travel time via the road network to historical monu­ with a p-value of 0.0005 (Fig. 2 a), while the z-score value was − 2.7512,
ments and museum locations, di indicates distance value in location i, and the observed mean distance between archaeological sites was 5.4
while Si refers to the average road speed limits (see Fig. 1). km. Overall, the clustering pattern was mainly concentrated in Doha and
Al-Rayan municipalities, where most museums are located, with another
4. Results cluster of forts and castles in the far north (Madinat Al-Shamal).
Using incremental spatial autocorrelation, the global Moran’s I index
4.1. Average nearest neighbour and spatial autocorrelation with a fixed distance was performed for each archaeological site. As z-
scores allow for a standardised comparison of significance by distance (i.
To assess the spatial pattern of distances between archaeological e., larger positive z-scores indicate statistically significant clustering),
sites, the ANN was used to describe the spatial distribution of locations these scores were plotted, identifying the distances (distance to the

Fig. 1. Study area and locations of the 2022 FIFA World Cup stadiums and historical monuments.

120
S. Mansour et al. Transport Policy 127 (2022) 116–129

Fig. 2. Average nearest neighbour (a) and incremental spatial autocorrelation of historical monuments and museums (b).

nearest hotel) at which the clustering was most significant (Fig. 2 b). The
highest cluster intensity was observed in the 30,000–35000 m interval.
4.2. Spatial accessibility to archaeological sites and monuments
Accessibility to historical monuments and museums can be con­
ceptualised as how easily visitors can reach these sites and locations. The
spatial accessibility to the archaeological sites and monuments was
measured using the Euclidean distance function, and each location was
used to develop a spatial surface of distances. As illustrated in Fig. 3,
most museums located in Doha and Al- Rayyan municipalities are
characterised by a high level of spatial accessibility, while the least
accessible monuments were found in the marginal municipalities in the
northwest, as well as the middle west (Madinat Al-shamal, Al-Khor, and
Al-Ghuwairiah). This means that monuments and museums located in
high population density municipalities, particularly the capital, are the
most accessible, and can be easily reached in a short time, whereas most
castles and forts located within marginal areas and municipalities are
less accessible.
A deeper understanding of the accessibility to archaeological sites
and monuments, particularly during the World Cup, arises from the
consideration of hotels and hospitality locations across Qatar. Employ­
ing the near analysis tool within the GIS environment, Fig. 4 shows the
distance from each monument location to the nearest hotel, with shorter
distances in the capital zone (Doha) and Al-Rayyan Municipality.
Additionally, as most hotels are concentrated across the eastern coast­
line, the lowest distances (less than 8 km) are mainly found in a linear
strip from the north to the south, characterised by the highest level of
population density. Accordingly, in most places, visitors and hotel guests
can walk short distances either from the hotel or the nearest metro
station to reach several nearby museums (e.g., Qatar national, Islamic
Arts, Doha fort museums) (see Figs. 4 and 5). In contrast, monuments in
the north and northwest (Madinat Al-shamal, Al-Jemailiya municipal­
ities) are characterised by large distances (greater than 40 km) to the
nearest hotel, thus less accessible. Fig. 5 shows 500m buffer zone around
each metro station. Looking at the spatial distribution of monuments,
museums, and historical sites, most of museums and sites are located
within 500m from the metro stations. Similarly, walking distance to
these buildings is relatively short and thus proximity from each metro
station to most of the museums and historical sites is higher. Therefore,
the metro stations put visitors in a close proximity to monuments and
museums within Doha, Al-Wakra, and Al-Rayyan Municipalities.
Fig. 6 shows the distances from each monument to the nearest hotel.
Several castles were located 20 km from hotels, such as Al-Ghuwair and
Al-Thaqab located in the northwest (Fig. 6a). Similarly, many historical
forts were also located along the northwest coast and far from the res­
idential areas, such as the fort of Zubarah ancient city. These forts have
low-level accessibility, particularly Al-Husin, Zikrit, and Merweb
(Fig. 6b). Of the four recognised towers, Barzan tower was the furthest
from the nearest hotel, while the rest of the towers were located very
close to hotels (within 2 km) (Fig. 6c). The historical mosques offer a
window into Islamic civilisation in Qatar, with most mosques located
outside Doha, and further than 10 km from the nearest hotel (Fig. 6d).
The old mosques were mostly located in less densely populated areas,
often along or close to coasts.
All stadiums and relevant infrastructure have been entirely created
and equipped with all necessary technologies, facilities, and modular
elements, considering several criteria, particularly post-tournament
legacy, comfortability, sustainability, and accessibility. The stadiums
are located mainly within the capital and most populous zones across the
country, close to the eastern coast and within districts with an urban
infrastructure, as well as public transport systems. In addition, the
government implemented huge investments to reshape inequalities of
access and opportunities, particularly within the Doha and Al-Rayyan
municipalities, through the provision of public facilities and transport
services. Fig. 7 illustrates the spatial distribution pattern of archaeo­
logical sites, museums, and historical monuments to stadium locations,
indicating that most museums and towers are within short distances
from stadiums (less than 8 km), while most forts are located more than
45 km away, particularly those within the Madinat Al-shamal and Al-
Jemailiya zones. Generally, the historical monuments located in the
northwest part of the country are less accessible.
4.3. Spatial distribution of travel times (mins) to historical monuments
and museums
During mega sports events, such as the World Cup, the global audi­
ence is often influenced by several factors to make decisions regarding
travelling and visiting historical monuments, archaeological sites, and
cultural landscapes. Creating a cost distance map through a trans­
portation network, Fig. 8 shows the spatial pattern of estimated travel
times to historical monuments and museums across the country. The
map demonstrates spatial heterogeneity patterns and variations be­
tween locations regarding travelling times, with most museums, towers,
and cultural landscapes within the capital zone accessible within a short
time (less than 10 min). The monuments and museums typically located

121
S. Mansour et al.
Fig. 3. Spatial accessibility to the closest historical monuments and museums.
in densely populated areas, primarily within Doha and Al-Rayyan, are
accessible and within walking distance, whereas spatial patterns with
longer travel times (greater than 50 min) were mainly found within the
outer administrative zones and far from the host stadiums.
5. Discussion
While many researchers and planners in developed countries are
concerned with improving accessibility to archaeological sites through
sports events, these issues have received much less attention in the
122
Transport Policy 127 (2022) 116–129
Global South. During a mega sports event, such as the FIFA World Cup,
attention initially should be paid to the sportification of tourism, as a
useful policy to market and represent the historical and cultural heritage
of the host country (Malchrowicz-Mosko and Munsters, 2018). Never­
theless, the literature on the socioeconomic benefits of hosting
mega-sports events is still predominately focused on developed nations
in North America and Europe, with a few notable exceptions (e.g.,
Malchrowicz-Mo’sko and Poczta, 2018; Taks, 17 –1 July 2017).
Accordingly, our analysis attempts to provide an insight into how Qatar
can maximise the benefits of hosting the 2022 FIFA World Cup, by
S. Mansour et al.
Fig. 4. Spatial distances from hotels to the closest historical monuments and museums.
marketing its historical and cultural heritage.
Mega sporting events are great opportunities for the host countries to
gain various economic and socio-cultural benefits. During the 2022
event, the Qatari government will seek economic outcomes, but can also
contribute to the nation-building process and declare a national identity,
by representing all cultural and archaeological heritage to global visitors
and audiences. For the Qatari government, the World Cup is not prof­
itable, therefore, maximising the benefits of tourism and enriching the
representation of the national cultural and historical heritage should be
considered. Although Objective S2 of the stainability strategy devel­
oped by the Qatari government, which states that the FIFA World Cup
Qatar 2022 emphasises the promotion of cultural exchange and
123
Transport Policy 127 (2022) 116–129
enhancing understanding of the culture of Qatar, the tangible monu­
ments and archaeological landscape should be major targets of inter­
national tourism. Through the powerful catalyst of sports tourism and a
large number of international participants and attendees, the Qatari
archaeological and historical monuments can be well represented and
understood.
Facilitating spatial and temporal accessibility to cultural and his­
torical heritage during the World Cup should be at the forefront of the
country’s policies, providing an effective avenue to promote the national
identity globally (Wiastuti et al., 2018; Naniopoulos and Tsalis, 2015;
Michopoulou et al., 2015). In this study, GIS techniques were utilised to
spatially analyse accessibility to historical monuments and
S. Mansour et al.
Fig. 5. Illustrates 500m buffer zone around metro stations.
archaeological sites across Qatar considering the 2022 FIFA World Cup,
indicating that museums were typically clustered within the capital zone
where the major concentration of population, built-up areas, and sports
infrastructure is found. Therefore, historical monuments in this area
were highly accessible in contrast to the less accessible cluster of forts
and castles across the northwest coast. The shortest distances between
sites of interest and the nearest hotel were mainly found across the
eastern coastline, and within Doha and Al-Rayyan municipalities,
reflecting high accessibility levels from residential units to historical
heritage. Measuring the distance from each monument to the nearest
hotel revealed that many castles (e.g., Al-Thaqab and Al-Ghuwair) are
located within 20 km, with several forts (e.g., Zubarah and Al-Husian)
more than 50 km away. Local mobility predominately relies on cars to
access marginal areas, such as the northwest, the eastern shore, and
southern parts; therefore, considering comfort and travel time, cars will
be the best choice for visitors.
Transportation and travel times to tourist destinations are vital for
passive sports tourists and global audiences (Gibson, 1998; Hinch &
Higham). As spatial accessibility is not the only determinant of access to
124
Transport Policy 127 (2022) 116–129
historical monuments and museums, for more nuanced measurement, a
distance cost was performed, incorporating road networks and surfaces,
to create a travel time map. Most monuments were within the capital
zone and around the stadiums, so require short travel times (less than 10
min), while all forts and most castles and traditional mosques were not
accessible by public transport and the subway. Furthermore, the travel
time analysis showed that the historical sites and monuments located
along the northwest coast were characterised by travel times of 50 min
and greater.
6. Policy implications and recommendations
This research opens new avenues for future work and could raise new
questions related to enhancing spatial accessibility to all archaeological
sites and historical locations not only during the mega sport event of the
2022 World Cup but also thereafter. Decision makers and planners
should focus on spatial measurements of travel times at private transport
particularly for all locations outside the capital zones. Similarly, it is
quite important to develop public transport strategies including
S. Mansour et al.
Fig. 6. Spatial distances from each historical monument and museum to the nearest hotel: (a) distances from castles to the nearest hotel (b) distances from forts to the
nearest hotel (c) distances from towers to the nearest hotel (d) distances from mosques to the nearest hotel.
establishing new bus routes to increase the accessibility of the relatively
far archaeological sites and monument’s locations that are located
outside the metro stations network. Another policy recommendation
that can be drawn from our analysis is that local governments and
planning authorities should address and integrate transport infrastruc­
ture, residential areas, hotels, stadium’s locations and accessibility
planning to effectively enable global audiences to visit all monuments
and historical sites located in the northwest of the country. For example,
a sustained program should be implemented to increase the number of
visitors to these far sites and locations through free shuttle bus services.
The spatial analysis of accessibility to historical, archaeological sites and
museums in Qatar could be enhanced more if information and geo­
databases are integrated with transport system. This certainly will lead
to high accessibility levels to all monuments including those that are
located in marginal areas. This analysis could also benefit global audi­
ences, to access historical monuments and tangible heritage across
Qatar, particularly individuals who will be in areas far from monument
locations. Moreover, ministry of transport in Qatar should rely heavily
on the advantages and powerful capabilities of GIS particularly the
intelligent techniques of GPS, mobile and web GIS to manage trans­
portation, monitor network traffic and population mobility, and pro­
mote accessibility to tourist sites and other amenities. Policymakers may
benefit from maps showing travel times to archaeological sites and
monuments, to improve accessibility. Additionally, the underlying
spatial measurement is transferable and can be adapted for new appli­
cations, not only to gauge accessibility to archaeological sites and
monuments, but also to assess and define spatial patterns of accessibility
to other facilities and locations. Our maps are also useful for tourist and
transport planning, specifically during the FIFA World Cup and there­
after, which offers great opportunities to encourage and support various
tourism activities. Critically, by freely providing geospatial approaches
to make custom maps of travel times and spatial accessibility, we also
enable cultural and tourism professionals to characterise accessibility to
the Qatari monuments and historical heritage.
This analysis could also benefit global audiences, to access historical
125
Transport Policy 127 (2022) 116–129
monuments and tangible heritage across Qatar, particularly individuals
who will be in areas far from monument locations. Moreover, ministry of
transport in Qatar should rely heavily on the advantages and powerful
capabilities of GIS particularly the intelligent techniques of GPS, mobile
and web GIS to manage transportation, monitor network traffic and
population mobility, and promote accessibility to tourist sites and other
amenities.
Policymakers may benefit from maps showing travel times to
archaeological sites and monuments, to improve accessibility. Addi­
tionally, the underlying spatial measurement is transferable and can be
adapted for new applications, not only to gauge accessibility to
archaeological sites and monuments, but also to assess and define spatial
patterns of accessibility to other facilities and locations. Our maps are
also useful for tourist and transport planning, specifically during the
FIFA World Cup and thereafter, which offers great opportunities to
encourage and support various tourism activities. Critically, by freely
providing geospatial approaches to make custom maps of travel times
and spatial accessibility, we also enable cultural and tourism pro­
fessionals to characterise accessibility to the Qatari monuments and
historical heritage.
7. Conclusion
Historically, Qatar has successfully hosted a few major regional
sporting events such as the 1995 FIFA U-20 World Cup, the 2015 World
Handball Championships, and the 2006 Asian Games. However, the
FIFA World Cup will certainly have a positive socio-cultural impact on
the country, and be a stimulant for adopting strategies and policies that
benefit from media broadcasting, to promote international tourism ac­
tivities, and visits to cultural and archaeological heritage sites.
Currently, all required infrastructure and facilities to host the World
Cup have been accomplished, creating a comfortable, welcoming, and
respectful environment for global audiences. Nonetheless, to contribute
to Qatar’s social development and craft the international image of the
country, the historical and cultural heritage sites should be easily
S. Mansour et al.
Fig. 7. Spatial distances from the stadiums to the nearest historical monuments and museums.
accessible to all global attendees. To grant accessibility to cultural and
historical monuments, accessibility options and travel modes need to be
increased regarding archaeological heritage, particularly those located
outside Doha and Al-Rayan areas. Additionally, the government should
prepare free bus charters to the archaeological sites and historical pla­
ces, to offer exclusive tourist attractions. As a tremendous opportunity
for the Middle East, the Qatar World Cup is a crucial platform to promote
the historical heritage to global visitors. Importantly, the maps produced
are reliable spatial guidelines of accessibility to historical heritages and
monuments, thus could help in increasing the popularity of monuments,
museums, and archaeological sites.
In this analysis of space and time accessibility, visitors’ characteris­
tics such as gender, age, and physical disabilities have not been taken
126
Transport Policy 127 (2022) 116–129
into account. Likewise, the accessibility of local populations to monu­
ments and sites has not been considered. Despite these limitations, the
spatial accessibility maps, distances to the nearest hotels, and travel
times to monuments could be used to prioritise transportation
improvement, and trips to historical places and monuments.
To the best of our knowledge, the maps of spatial accessibility and
travel times to sites of interest are the first, local-scale maps of this
archaeological heritage accessibility metric in Qatar, thus have the po­
tential to make substantial contributions to the tourism, and spatial
analysis research communities, by providing estimates of the time
required to reach all locations of tangible heritage from every hotel,
housing unit, or residential district, at any time.
S. Mansour et al. Transport Policy 127 (2022) 116–129

Fig. 8. Map illustrating temporal accessibility to the historical landmarks and museums.

Authors’ contributions Funding

Conceptualization, methodology, data curation, geospatial analysis,
investigation, writing—original draft, Mansour, S.; data curation, wri­
ting—review and editing, Alahmadi, M.; data curation and writing the
introduction section, Abulibdeh, A. All authors reviewed the results and
approved the final version of the article.
This research received no external funding.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

127
S. Mansour et al.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
References
Abulibdeh, A., 2018. Implementing congestion pricing policies in a MENA Region City:
analysis of the impact on travel behaviour and equity. Cities 74 (3), 196–207.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Cities. 2017.12.003.
Al Mamun, M.S., Lownes, N.E., 2011. A composite index of public transit accessibility.
J. Public Transp. 14 (2), 69–87.
Amoroso, S., Caruso, I., Castelluccio, F., 2012. Indicators for sustainable mobility in the
cities. In: Brebbia, C.A., Zubir, S.S. (Eds.), Management of Natural Resources,
Sustainable Development and Ecological Hazards III. WIT Press, Southampton, UK,
pp. 253–263.
Bertolini, L., Le Clercq, F., Kapoen, L., 2005. Sustainable accessibility: a conceptual
framework to integrate transport and land use plan-making. Two test-applications in
The Netherlands and a reflection on the way forward. Transport Pol. 12, 207–220,
2005.
Bocarejo S, J.P., Oviedo, H.D.R., 2012. Transport accessibility and social inequities: a
tool for identification of mobility needs and evaluation of transport investments.
J. Transport Geogr. 24, 142–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2011.12.004.
Bok, J., Kwon, Y., 2016. Comparable measures of accessibility to public transport using
the general transit feed specification. Sustainability 8 (3), 224–236. https://doi.org/
10.3390/su8030224.
Borowski, E., Ermagun, A., Levinson, D., 2018. Disparity of access: variations in transit
service by race, ethnicity, income, and auto availability. Available online: https
://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/bitstream/handle/2123/18780/DisparityOfAccess_Final.
pdf?sequence=4&isAllowed=y. (Accessed 28 December 2020).
Bree, S., Fuller, D., Diab, E., 2020. Access to transit? Validating local transit accessibility
measures using transit ridership. Transport. Res. Pol. Pract. 141, 430–442.
Briedenhann, J., Wickens, E., 2004. Tourism routes as a tool for the economic
development of rural areas—vibrant hope or impossible dream? Tourism Manag. 25
(1), 71–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5177(03)00063-3.
Bristow, G., Farrington, J., Shaw, J., Richardson, T., 2009. Developing an evaluation
framework for crosscutting policy goals: the Accessibility Policy Assessment Tool.
Environ. Plann. 41, 48–62.
Canzler, W., Kaufman, V., Kesselring, S., 2008. Tracing mobilities – an introduction. In:
Canzler, W., Kaufmann, V., Kesselring, S. (Eds.), TracingMobilities: towards a
Cosmopolitan Perspective. Ashgate, Burlington, VT, pp. 1–12.
Cheng, Y.-H., Chen, S.-Y., 2015. Perceived accessibility, mobility, and connectivity of
public transportation systems. Transp. Res. A Policy Pract. 77, 386–403.
Clark, P.J., Evans, F.C., 1954. Distance to nearest neighbor as a measure of spatial
relationships in populations. Ecology 35 (4), 445–453.
Curtis, C., 2008. Planning for sustainable accessibility: the implementation challenge.
Transport Pol. 15, 104–112.
Curtis, C., Scheurer, J., 2010. Planning for sustainable accessibility: developing tools to
aid discussion and decision-making. Prog. Plann. 74 (2), 53–106.
Da Silva, D.C., King, D.A., Lemar, S., 2019. Accessibility in practice: 20-minute city as a
sustainability planning goal. Sustainability 12, 129. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su12010129, 2020.
Darcy, S., Dickson, T., 2009. A whole-of-life approach to tourism: the case for accessible
tourism. J. Hospit. Tourism Manag. 16 (1), 32–44.
Deboosere, R., El-Geneidy, A.M., Levinson, D., 2018. Accessibility-oriented development.
J. Transport Geogr. 70, 11–20.
Delafontaine, M., Neutens, T., van de Weghe, N., 2012. A GIS toolkit for measuring and
mapping space–time accessibility from a place-based perspective. Int. J. Geogr. Inf.
Sci. 26 (6), 1131–1154.
Delmelle, E.C., Casas, I., 2012. Evaluating the spatial equity of bus rapid transit-based
accessibility patterns in a developing country: the case of Cali, Colombia. Transport
Pol. 20, 36–46.
Diao, M., 2015. Selectivity, spatial autocorrelation and the valuation of transit
accessibility. Urban Stud. 52 (1), 159–177.
Dickinson, J.E., Robbins, D., 2007. Using the car in a fragile rural tourist destination: a
social representations perspective. J. Transport Geogr. 15 (2), 116–126. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2006.11.002.
Dixit, M., Chowdhury, S., Cats, O., Brands, T., van Oort, N., Hoogendoorn, S., 2021.
Examining circuity of urban transit networks from an equity perspective.
J. Transport Geogr. 91, 102980.
Duarte-Duarte, J.B., Talero-Sarmiento, L.H., Rodríguez-Padilla, D.C., 2021.
Methodological proposal for the identification of tourist routes in a particular region
through clustering techniques. Heliyon 7 (4), e06655.
El-Geneidy, A.M., Tétreault, P.R., Suprenant-Legault, J., 2009. Pedestrian access to
transit: identifying redundancies and gaps using a variable service area analysis. In:
Paper Presented at the Transportation Research Board 89th Annual Meeting.
Farber, S., Morang, M.Z., Widener, M.J., 2014. Temporal variability in transit-based
accessibility to supermarkets. Appl. Geogr. 53, 149–159.
Farber, S., Ritter, B., Fu, L., 2016. Space–time mismatch between transit service and
observed travel patterns in theWasatch Front, Utah: a social equity perspective.
Travel Behav. Soc. 4, 40–48.
Farrington, J.H., 2007. The new narrative of accessibility: its potential contribution to
discourses in (transport) geography. J. Transport Geogr. 15, 319–330.
128
Transport Policy 127 (2022) 116–129
Ford, A.C., Barr, S.L., Dawson, R.J., James, P., 2015. Transport accessibility analysis
using GIS: assessing sustainable transport in london. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 4,
124–149. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi4010124, 2015.
Geurs, K.T., van Wee, B., 2004. Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport
strategies: review and research directions. J. Transport Geogr. 12, 127–140, 2004.
Gibson, H., 1998. Active sport tourism: who participate? Leisure Stud. 17 (2), 155–179.
Grengs, J., 2010. Job accessibility and the modal mismatch in Detroit. J. Transport
Geogr. 18, 42–54.
Grengs, J., 2015. Nonwork accessibility as a social equity indicator. Int. J. Sustain.
Transport. 9, 1–14.
Gutiérrez, J., García-Palomares, J.C., Romanillos, G., Salas-Olmedo, M.H., 2017. The
eruption of Airbnb in tourist cities: comparing spatial patterns of hotels and peer-to-
peer accommodation in Barcelona. Tourism Manag. 62, 278–291.
Hall, C.M., Le-Kl€ahn, D.-T., Ram, Y., 2017. Tourism, Public Transport and Sustainable
Mobility. Channel View Publications, Bristol, UK.
Handy, S.L., Niemeier, D.A., 1997. Measuring accessibility: an exploration of issues and
alternatives. Environ. Plann.: Econ. Space 29, 1175–1194.
Hawas, E.Y., Hassan, N.M., Abulibdeh, O.A., 2016. A multi-criteria approach of assessing
public transport accessibility. J. Transport Geogr. 57, 19–34.
Hergesell, A., Edwards, D., Zins, A., 2018. Personal interest - (Ir-)responsible tourists. In:
Liburd, J.J., Edwards, D. (Eds.), Collaboration for Sustainable Tourism Development.
Goodfellow Publishers, Oxford, UK, pp. 77–92.
Higham, J., Cohen, S.A., Peeters, P., G€ossling, S., 2013. Psychological and behavioural
approaches to understanding and governing sustainable mobility. J. Sustain.
Tourism 21 (7), 949–967. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2013.828733.
Hinch, T., Higham, J., 2009. Sport and Tourism—Globalization,Mobility and Identity.
Elsevier, Burlington, NJ, USA.
Hinch, T., Higham, J., 2011. Sport Tourism Development. Channel View Publications,
Bristol, UK.
Hu, Y., Downs, J., 2019. Measuring and visualizing place-based space-time job
accessibility. J. Transport Geogr. 74, 278–288.
Järv, O., Tenkanen, H., Salonen, M., Ahas, R., Toivonen, T., 2018. Dynamic cities:
location-based accessibility modelling as a function of time. Appl. Geogr. 95,
101–110.
Jiao, J., Wang, J., Zhang, F., Jin, F., Liu, W., 2020. Roles of accessibility, connectivity and
spatial interdependence in realizing the economic impact of high-speed rail:
evidence from China. Transport Pol. 91, 1–15.
Jin, T., Cheng, L., Wang, K., Cao, J., Huang, H., Witlox, F., 2022. Examining equity in
accessibility to multi-tier healthcare services across different income households
using estimated travel time. Transport Pol. 121, 1–13.
Kaplan, S., Popoks, D., Prato, C.G., Ceder, A.A., 2014. Using connectivity for measuring
equity in transit provision. J. Transport Geogr. 37, 82–92.
Kim, K., Ghorbanzadeh, M., Horner, M.W., Ozguven, E.E., 2021. Identifying areas of
potential critical healthcare shortages: a case study of spatial accessibility to ICU
beds during the COVID-19 pandemic in Florida. Transport Pol. 110, 478–486.
Kotler, N.G., Kotler, P., Kotler, W.I., 2016. Museum Marketing and Strategy: Designing
Missions, Building Audiences, Generating Revenue and Resources, second ed. Wiley,
USA.
Kwok, R.C.W., Yeh, A.G.O., 2004. The use of modal accessibility gap as an indicator for
sustainable transport development. Environ. Plann.: Econ. Space 36 (5), 921–936.
https://doi.org/10.1068/a3673.
Le-Kl€ahn, D.-T., Gerike, R., Hall, C.M., 2014. Visitor users vs. non-users of public
transport: the case of Munich, Germany. J. Destin. Market. Manag. 3, 152–161.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2013.12.005.
Lei, T., Church, R., 2010. Mapping transit-based access: integrating GIS, routes and
schedules. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 24, 283–304.
Litman, T., 1999. The Cost of Automobile Dependency and the Benefits of Balanced
Transportation. Victorian Transport Policy Institute, Victoria, BC, Canada.
Litman, T., 2003. Integrating public health objectives in transportation decision making.
Am. J. Health Promot. 18, 103–108.
Litman, T., 2014. Evaluating Transportation Equity: Guidance for Incorporating
Distributional Impacts in Transportation. Victoria Transport Policy Institute,
Victoria.
Litman, T, 2008. Evaluating accessibility for transportation planning. Victoria Transport
Policy Institute. http://www.vtpi.org/access.pdf. (Accessed 20 April 2021).
Liu, S., Zhu, X., 2004. An integrated GIS approach to accessibility analysis. Trans. GIS 8,
45–62.
Lucas, K., Jones, P., 2012. Social Impacts and Equity Issues in Transport: an Introduction.
Pergamon.
Malchrowicz-Mosko, E., Munsters, W., 2018. Sport tourism: a growth market considered
from a cultural perspective. Journal of Martial Arts Anthropology” 18 (4), 25–38.
https://doi.org/10.14589/ido.18.4.4, 2018.
Malchrowicz-Mo’sko, E., Poczta, J., 2018. A small-scale event and a big impact—is this
relationship possible in theWorld of sport? The meaning of heritage sporting events
for sustainable development of tourism—experiences from Poland. Sustainability 10,
4289. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10114289, 2018.
Mamun, S.A., Lownes, N.E., Osleeb, J.P., Bertolaccini, K., 2013. A method to define
public transit opportunity space. J. Transport Geogr. 28, 144–154.
Mansour, S., 2016. Spatial analysis of public health facilities in Riyadh Governorate,
Saudi Arabia: a GIS-based study to assess geographic variations of service provision
and accessibility. Geo Spatial Inf. Sci. 19 (1), 26–38.
Martin, D., Jordan, H., Roderick, P., 2008. Taking the bus: incorporating public transport
timetable data into health care accessibility modeling. Environ. Plann. 40,
2510–2525.
S. Mansour et al.
Mavoa, S., Witten, K., McCreanor, T., O’Sullivan, D., 2012. GIS based destination
accessibility via public transit and walking in Auckland, New Zealand. J. Transport
Geogr. 20, 15–22.
Medlik, S., 2003. Dictionary of Travel, Tourism and Hospitality. Butterworth-
Heinemann, Oxford, UK.
Michopoulou, E., Darcy, S., Ambrose, I., Buhalis, D., 2015. Accessible tourism futures:
the world we dream to live in and the opportunities we hope to have. J. Touris. Fut.
1 (3), 179–188.
Monzón, A., Ortega, E., López, E., 2013. Efficiency and spatial equity impacts of high
speed rail extensions in urban areas. Cities 30, 18–30.
Moscicka, A., Pokonieczny, K., Wilbik, A., Wabinski, J., 2019. Transport accessibility of
warsaw: a case study. Sustainability 11, 5536. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su11195536, 2019.
Moya-Gómez, B., Salas-Olmedo, M.H., García-Palomares, J.C., Gutiérrez, J., 2018.
Dynamic accessibility using big data: the role of the changing conditions of network
congestion and destination attractiveness. Network. Spatial Econ. 18 (2), 273–290.
Moyano, A., Martínez, H.S., Coronado, J.M., 2018. From network to services: a
comparative accessibility analysis of the Spanish high-speed rail system. Transport
Pol. 63, 51–60.
Naniopoulos, A., Tsalis, P., 2015. A methodology for facing the accessibility of
monuments developed and realised in Thessaloniki Greece. J. Touris. Fut. 1 (3),
240–253.
Naniopoulos, A., Panagiotis, T., Papanikolaou, E., Kalliagra, A., Kourmpeti, C., 2015.
Accessibility improvement interventions realised in Byzantine monuments of
Thessaloniki Greece. J. Touris. Fut. 1 (3), 254–268.
Niedzielskia, M.A., Kucharskib, R., 2019. Impact of commuting, time budgets, and
activity durations on modal disparity in accessibility to supermarkets. Transport.
Res. Part D 75, 106–120, 2019.
O’Sullivan, D., Morrison, A., Shearer, J., 2000. Using desktop GIS for the investigation of
accessibility by public transport: an isochrone approach. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 14,
85–104.
O’Sullivan, D., Unwin, D.J., 2010. Geographic Information Analysis and Spatial Data.
Geographic information analysis, pp. 1–32.
Owen, A., Levinson, D.M., 2015. Modeling the commute mode share of transit using
continuous accessibility to jobs. Transport. Res. Pol. Pract. 74, 110–122.
Rebstock, M., 2017. Economic Benefits of Improved Accessibility to Transport Systems
and the Role of Transport in Fostering Tourism for All. International Transport
Forum Discussion Paper.
Richards, G., 1996. The scope and significance of cultural tourism. In: Richards, G. (Ed.),
Cultural Tourism in Europe. CAB International, pp. 19–45.
Richards, G., 2001. The development of cultural tourism in Europe. In: Richards, G.
(Ed.), Cultural Attractions and European Tourism. CABI, pp. 3–29.
Rubulotta, E., Ignaccolo, M., Inturri, G., Rofe, Y., 2013. Accessibility and centrality for
sustainable mobility: regional planning case study. J. Urban Plann. Dev. 139 (2),
115–132. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000140.
Saghapour, T., Moridpour, S., Thompson, R.G., 2016. Public transport accessibility in
metropolitan areas: a new approach incorporating population density. J. Transport
Geogr. 54, 273–285, 2016.
Sallis, J.F., Frank, L.D., Saelens, B.E., Kraft, M.K., 2004. Active transportation and
physical activity: opportunities for collaboration on transportation and public health
research. Transp. Res. A Policy Pract. 38, 249–268.
Salonen, M., Toivonen, T., 2013. Modelling travel time in urban networks: comparable
measures for private car and public transport. J. Transport Geogr. 31, 143–153.
129
Transport Policy 127 (2022) 116–129
Sanmargaraja, S., Wee, S.T., 2015. Accessible transportation system for the disabled
tourist in the national park of johor state Malaysia. Int. J. Soc. Sci. Humanit. 5 (1),
15–21.
Smith, T.W., Axon, C.J., Darton, R.C., 2013. A methodology for measuring the
sustainability of car transport systems. Transport Pol. 30, 308–317. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.tranpol.2013.09.019.
Stantchev, D., Menaz, B., 2006. Third Annual Thematic Research Summary - Equity and
Accessibility. Transport Research Knowledge Centre. http://www.transportresearch.
info/sites/default/files/thematic-analysis/20060831_113124_16514_equityaccessi
bility_D2E_issue1-0.pdf.
Stępniak, M., Pritchard, J.P., Geurs, K.T., Goliszek, S., 2019. The impact of temporal
resolution on public transport accessibility measurement: review and case study in
Poland. J. Transport Geogr. 75, 8–24.
Tahmasbi, B., Haghshenasa, H., 2019. Public transport accessibility measure based on
weighted door to door travel time. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 76, 163–177, 2019.
Taks, M., 17 June–1 July 2017. Governance in sport and the olympic movement: the
future of mega-sport events, 2017, ancient olympia-Greece, international olympic
academy. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Session for Educators of Higher
Institutes of Physical Education. Athens, Greece.
Taks, M., 2009. Factors affecting repeat visitation and flow-on tourism as sources of
event strategy sustainability. J. Sport Tourism 14, 2–3 ([CrossRef]).
Thomas, T., Mondschein, A., Osman, T., Taylor, B.D., 2018. Not so fast? Examining
neighborhood-level effects of traffic congestion on job access. Transport. Res. Pol.
Pract. 113, 529–541.
Tomej, K., Liburd, J.J., 2020. Sustainable accessibility in rural destinations: a public
transport network approach. J. Sustain. Tourism 28 (2), 222–239. https://doi.org/
10.1080/09669582.2019.1607359.
Toth-Szabo, Z., V arhelyi, A., 2012. Indicator framework for measuring sustainability of
transport in the city. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 48, 2035–2047.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.1177.
Tribby, C.P., Zandbergen, P.A., 2012. High-resolution spatiotemporal modeling of public
transit accessibility. Appl. Geogr. 34, 345–355.
Unwto, 2016. Accessible Tourism for All: an Opportunity within Our Reach World
Tourism Organization (Spain: UNWTO).
Vandenbulcke, G., Steenberghen, T., Thomas, I., 2009. Mapping accessibility in Belgium:
a tool for land-use and transport planning? J. Transport Geogr. 17 (1), 39–53.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2008.04.008.
Wang, J., Huang, X., Gong, Z., Cao, K., 2020. Dynamic assessment of tourism carrying
capacity and its impacts on tourism economic growth in urban tourism destinations
in China. J. Destin. Market. Manag. 15, 100383.
Wang, T., Wang, L., Ning, Z.-Z., 2020. Spatial pattern of tourist attractions and its
influencing factors in China. Spatial Sci. 65 (2), 327–344.
Weber, J., 2003. Individual accessibility and distance from major employment centers:
an examination using space-time measures. J. Geogr. Syst. 5, 51–70.
Welch, T.F., Mishra, S., 2013. A measure of equity for public transit connectivity.
J. Transport Geogr. 33, 29–41.
Wiastuti, R.D., Adiati, M.P., Lestari, N.S., 2018. Implementation of accessible tourism
concept at museums in Jakarta. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 126, 012061
https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/126/1/012061, 2018.
Woodham, A., 2016. Sport, history and heritage – studies in public representations. Int.
J. Herit. Stud. 23 (1), 74–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2016.1218913.