Toward User-Inclusive, Purpose-Specific, and Context-Sensitive Walkability Measurement: A Review of 46 Instruments Through an Adapted Walking-Needs Framework

Walkability measurement has expanded from a small set of generic neighbourhood-level proxies into a heterogeneous field of indices, scored audits, perceived-environment scales, route-based instruments, and context-specific assessment instruments. This expansion has improved the sensitivity of walkability research, but it has also made it increasingly difficult to judge which instruments are appropriate for different users, walking purposes, and urban or environmental contexts. This review addresses this problem by comparing operational walkability instruments through an adapted walking-needs framework derived from the Expanded Hierarchy of Walking Needs (HoWN). Publications from 1990 to 2025 were identified through a structured search and screening workflow covering general walkability measurement, population-sensitive instruments, purpose-specific instruments, climate- and exposure-sensitive instruments, and urban-form-specific instruments. After eligibility assessment and consolidation, 46 walkability instruments were retained for comparative analysis. For this review, the framework is adapted from a behavioural hierarchy into an instrument-level comparative structure, with feasibility re-specified as basic environmental passability. The instruments are then compared across five tiers: feasibility, accessibility, safety, comfort, and pleasurability. The review shows that walkability measurement remains strongly concentrated in lower-order and functionally measurable dimensions, especially pedestrian infrastructure, destination access, connectivity, and traffic safety. By contrast, comfort, pleasurability, environmental exposure, personal security, and user-specific constraints are less consistently formalised and often appear only in specialised instruments. Population-, purpose-, climate-, and urban-form-sensitive instruments do not merely add indicators; they alter which walking needs become foundational in specific assessment scenarios. This review contributes a fit-for-purpose comparative logic for walkability measurement. It shows how a shared walking-needs framework can be used to diagnose coverage imbalance, identify scenario-specific threshold conditions, and guide the selection, adaptation, and transfer of instruments across different users, walking purposes, environmental exposures, and urban forms.