Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Advertisement

Scientific Reports
  • View all journals
  • Search
  • My Account Login
  • Content Explore content
  • About the journal
  • Publish with us
  • Sign up for alerts
  • RSS feed
  1. nature
  2. scientific reports
  3. articles
  4. article
Sustainable walkability around green, blue, and spiritual spaces in a semi-urban district of coastal Karnataka, India
Download PDF
Download PDF
  • Article
  • Open access
  • Published: 05 February 2026

Sustainable walkability around green, blue, and spiritual spaces in a semi-urban district of coastal Karnataka, India

  • Mohammed Anas1,
  • Senthilkumaran Piramanayagam  ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6746-04212 &
  • Baskaran Chandrasekaran  ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1439-91581,3 

Scientific Reports , Article number:  (2026) Cite this article

We are providing an unedited version of this manuscript to give early access to its findings. Before final publication, the manuscript will undergo further editing. Please note there may be errors present which affect the content, and all legal disclaimers apply.

Subjects

  • Environmental sciences
  • Environmental social sciences
  • Environmental studies
  • Geography

Abstract

Walkability plays a pivotal role in promoting sustainable urban development by influencing physical activity, social cohesion, and environmental well-being. This study aimed to assess the walkability around green (parks, forests), blue (beaches), and spiritual spaces in Udupi, a semi-urban district of coastal Karnataka, using a mixed-methods approach. Walkability was evaluated through three complementary perspectives: internet-based assessments, investigator-led audits, and inhabitant-reported perceptions. In the internet-based phase, Walk Score was determined using geospatial coordinates and proximity to essential amenities. During the investigator-led phase, pathways, traffic conditions, and live footage from five selected sites (two blue, two green, and one spiritual space) were video recorded and analyzed for key walkability determinants such as safety, traffic flow and pedestrian infrastructure. In the inhabitant-reported phase, walkability perceptions were gathered from 45 residents living near these spaces. None of the assessed locations achieved high walkability (> 70%), with all classified as ‘car dependent’. Spiritual spaces (Maruthi Veethika) exhibited relatively better walkability due to higher proximity to amenities, while blue and green spaces suffered from significant pedestrian infrastructure deficiencies. Linear mixed models indicated no significant differences in walkability across locations (χ² = 7.70, p = 0.173), but significant variation was observed between assessment methods (χ² = 44.67, p < 0.001). Inhabitants consistently perceived higher walkability than investigator and internet-based assessments, suggesting perceptual optimism despite infrastructural gaps. These findings highlight the importance of triangulated approaches and context-sensitive evaluation tools in semi-urban mobility research.

Data availability

The primary data is available with the corresponding author and will be made available on request.

References

  1. Banger, A., Grigolon, A., Brussel, M. & Pfeffer, K. Identifying the interrelations between subjective walkability factors and walking behaviour: A case study in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Transp. Res. Interdisciplinary Perspect. 24, 101025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2024.101025 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Rocke, K. D., Howitt, C., Panter, J., Tully, M. & Hambleton, I. Neighbourhood walkability and its influence on physical activity and cardiometabolic disease: A Cross-Sectional study in a Caribbean small Island developing state. Cureus 15, e44060. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.44060 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Su, R. & Goulias, K. Untangling the relationships among residential environment, destination choice, and daily walk accessibility. J. Transp. Geogr. 109, 103595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2023.103595 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Silveira, S. L. & Motl, R. W. Abbreviated neighborhood environment walkability scale in persons with multiple sclerosis: initial validation of score inferences. J. Transp. Health. 19, 100952. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2020.100952 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Elshahat, S., O’Rorke, M. & Adlakha, D. Built environment correlates of physical activity in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review. PLoS One. 15, e0230454. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230454 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Tanwar, R. & Agarwal, P. K. Multimodal integration in india: Opportunities, challenges, and strategies for sustainable urban mobility. Multimodal Transp. 4, 100210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.multra.2025.100210 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Yadav, P. & Chattopadhyay, S. in Intersecting Paths of Sustainable Development, Urbanization, and Women’s Empowerment. (eds E. Revathi, Ishwar Chandra Awasthi, B. Suresh Reddy, & Aditi Madan) 59–86 (Springer Nature Singapore).

  8. CAI-Asia. (ed Shakti Sustainable Energy Foundation) Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities (CAI-Asia) Center, New Delhi. March (2011).

  9. Watson, V. Locating planning in the new urban agenda of the urban sustainable development goal. Plann. Theory. 15, 435–448. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095216660786 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Geneshka, M., Coventry, P., Cruz, J. & Gilbody, S. Relationship between green and blue spaces with mental and physical health: A systematic review of longitudinal observational studies. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18, 9010. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18179010 (2021).

  11. Rao, A., Nandineni, R. D., Shetty, R. S., Mallaiah, K. & Kamath, G. B. Enhancing walkability for older adults: the role of government policies and urban design. Infrastructures 10, 77. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures10040077 (2025).

  12. Nagesh, P., Bailey, A., George, S. & Subaiya, L. Mobilities and leisure in later ages: the role of religious tourism in the lives of low-income older women in India. J. Aging Stud. 72, 101302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2024.101302 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Planning, P. M. a. S. D. in Economic Survey of Karnataka 2021-2022 (Planning, Programme Monitoring and Statistics Department, 2022).

  14. McPhearson, T. et al. A social-ecological-technological systems framework for urban ecosystem services. One Earth. 5, 505–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2022.04.007 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lucas, K. et al. Talk the walk’: the co-design of socially sustainable mobility solutions in informal settlements. J. Urban Mobil. 7, 100112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urbmob.2025.100112 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Singla, T. & Karki, T. Walkability in planned urban environments: evaluating policy and planning gaps-A case study of Chandigarh. J. Transp. Health 44, 102117 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2025.102117 (2025).

  17. Adlakha, D., Hipp, J. & Brownson, R. Neighborhood-based differences in walkability, physical activity, and weight status in India. J. Transp. Health. 3, 485–499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2016.10.008 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Dash, M. et al. Influence of walkability parameters on people’s mobility in a pilgrimage town: a case study of Nanjungud, India. J. Asian Archit. Building Eng. 24, 4658–4673. https://doi.org/10.1080/13467581.2024.2402775 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wang, R., Zhang, X. & Li, N. Zooming into mobility to understand cities: A review of mobility-driven urban studies. Cities 130, 103939 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103939 (2022).

  20. Pineo, H. Towards healthy urbanism: inclusive, equitable and sustainable (THRIVES) - an urban design and planning framework from theory to praxis. Cities Health. 6, 974–992. https://doi.org/10.1080/23748834.2020.1769527 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Battista, G. A. & Manaugh, K. Generating walkability from pedestrians’ perspectives using a qualitative GIS method. Travel Behav. Soc. 17, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2019.05.009 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Aghaabbasi, M., Moeinaddini, M., Shah, M. & Asadi-Shekari, Z. Addressing issues in the use of Google tools for assessing pedestrian built environments. J. Transp. Geogr. 73, 185–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2018.10.004 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Li, Y., Yabuki, N., Fukuda, T. & Integrating, G. I. S. Deep learning, and environmental sensors for multicriteria evaluation of urban street walkability. Landsc. Urban Plann. 230, 104603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2022.104603 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Adlakha, D., Hipp, J. A. & Brownson, R. C. Adaptation and evaluation of the neighborhood environment walkability scale in India (NEWS-India). Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health. 13, 401. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph13040401 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Suzuki, R., Blackwood, J., Webster, N. J. & Shah, S. Functional limitations and perceived neighborhood walkability among urban dwelling older adults. Front. Public. Health. 9, 675799. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.675799 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Rao, A. & Nandineni, R. D. in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Trends in Architecture and Construction. (eds Anurag Varma, Vikas Chand Sharma, & Elena Tarsi) 253–268 (Springer Nature Singapore).

  27. Abou-Senna, H., Radwan, E. & Mohamed, A. Investigating the correlation between sidewalks and pedestrian safety. Accid. Anal. Prev. 166, 106548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2021.106548 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kim, Y., Choi, B., Choi, M., Ahn, S. & Hwang, S. Enhancing pedestrian perceived safety through walking environment modification considering traffic and walking infrastructure. Front. Public. Health. 11, 1326468. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1326468 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Wang, R. et al. Rethinking the association between green space and crime using spatial quantile regression modelling: do vegetation type, crime type, and crime rates matter? Urban Forestry Urban Green. 101, 128523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2024.128523 (2024).

  30. Tate, C. et al. The contribution of urban green and blue spaces to the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals: An evidence gap map. Cities 145, 104706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2023.104706 (2024).

  31. Fior, M., Galuzzi, P., Pasqui, G. & Vitillo, P. in (Re)Discovering Proximity: Generating New Urbanity—An Action Research for Milan (eds Marika Fior, Paolo Galuzzi, Gabriele Pasqui, & Piergiorgio Vitillo) 71-102 (Springer International Publishing, 2022).

  32. Wilmut, K. & Purcell, C. Why are older adults more at risk as pedestrians? A systematic review. Hum. Factors. 64, 1269–1291. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720821989511 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Dommes, A., Granié, M. A., Cloutier, M. S., Coquelet, C. & Huguenin-Richard, F. Red light violations by adult pedestrians and other safety-related behaviors at signalized crosswalks. Accid. Anal. Prev. 80, 67–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2015.04.002 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kabisch, N., van den Bosch, M. & Lafortezza, R. The health benefits of nature-based solutions to urbanization challenges for children and the elderly - A systematic review. Environ. Res. 159, 362–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2017.08.004 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Nghiem, L. et al. Equity in green and blue spaces availability in Singapore. Landsc. Urban Plann. 210, 104083. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2021.104083 (2021).

  36. Moulaei, K., Bastaminejad, S. & Haghdoost, A. Health challenges and facilitators of Arbaeen pilgrimage: a scoping review. BMC Public. Health. 24, 132. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-17640-9 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Roy, S. & Chowdhury, I. R. Intoxication in the city: investigating Spatial patterns and determinants of drugs and alcohol-related illegal activities in india’s geostrategic corridor. Appl. Geogr. 171, 103386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2024.103386 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Chappell, A. L. Towards a sociological critique of the normalisation principle. Disabil. Handicap Soc. 7, 35–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/02674649266780041 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Chan, E. T. H., Li, T. E., Schwanen, T. & Banister, D. People and their walking environments: an exploratory study of meanings, place and times. Int. J. Sustainable Transp. 15, 718–729. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2020.1793437 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Koohsari, M. J. et al. Place attachment and walking behaviour: mediation by perceived neighbourhood walkability. Landsc. Urban Plann. 235, 104767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2023.104767 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Buttazzoni, A. & Irwin, B. Place attachment and sense of community in natural and built pedestrian spaces: an equity-informed systematic review. Cities Health 9, 1095–1117. https://doi.org/10.1080/23748834.2025.2502192 (2025).

  42. Mondschein, A. Walking and walkability in delhi: dissonance between environmental perception and behavior. Transp. Res. Rec. 2678, 878–890. https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981231210541 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Jehle, U., Baquero Larriva, M. T., BaghaiePoor, M. & Büttner, B. How does pedestrian accessibility vary for different people? Development of a perceived user-specific accessibility measure for walking (PAW). Transp. Res. Part. A: Policy Pract. 189, 104203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2024.104203 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Roy, S., Bailey, A. & van Noorloos, F. The affects and emotions of everyday commutes in kolkata: shaping women’s public transport mobility. Mobilities 20, 125–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2024.2389843 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Askarizad, R. et al. A cross-cultural study to identify social behaviours of pedestrians in urban public spaces: evidence from Iran, Spain, Italy, and Australia. Sci. Rep. 15 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-16421-7 (2025).

  46. Pessi, A. et al. Developing a methodological tool for exploring sense of safety in religious spaces. Front. Psychol. 16 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1448951 (2025).

  47. Hoffimann, E., Barros, H. & Ribeiro, A. I. Socioeconomic inequalities in green space quality and accessibility-evidence from a Southern European City. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health 14, 916. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14080916 (2017).

  48. Zumelzu, A. & Herrmann-Lunecke, M. Mental well-being and the influence of place: conceptual approaches for the built environment for planning healthy and walkable cities. Sustainability 13, 6395. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116395 (2021).

  49. Middleton, J. The socialities of everyday urban walking and the right to the city’. Urban Stud. 55, 296–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098016649325 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  50. Stratford, E., Waitt, G. & Harada, T. Walking City streets: Spatial qualities, Spatial justice, and democratising impulses. Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. 45, 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1111/tran.12337 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Waitt, G., Stratford, E. & Harada, T. Rethinking the geographies of walkability in small City centers. Annals Am. Association Geographers. 109, 926–942. https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2018.1507815 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  52. Correa, F., Bartorila, M., Ribeiro-Palacios, M., Pérez-Soto, G. & Rodríguez-Reséndiz, J. Toward the human scale in smart cities: exploring the role of active mobility in ecosystemic urbanism. Smart Cities. 7, 4002–4024. https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities7060155 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  53. Camhi, S. M. et al. Associations between walk score and objective measures of physical activity in urban overweight and obese women. PLoS One. 14, e0214092. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214092 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  54. Skeime, O. & Koglin, T. Walking as Spatial mobilities: a critical investigation of walkability in transportation planning studies. Mobilities. 21, 249–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2025.2534628 (2025).

  55. Sangeeth, K. & Roy, U. K. Methodology for evaluating sidewalk based on continuous pedestrian movement on the sidewalk segment – A case study of Kochi City. Transp. Res. Interdisciplinary Perspect. 31, 101393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2025.101393 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  56. Roelich, K. Litman-Roventa, N. Public perceptions of networked infrastructure. Local Environ. 25, 872–890. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2020.1845131 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  57. Herrmann-Lunecke, M. G., Figueroa-Martínez, C. & Espinoza, B. O. Older persons’ emotional responses to the built environment: an analysis of walking experiences in central neighbourhoods of Santiago de Chile. Transp. Res. Interdisciplinary Perspect. 28, 101279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2024.101279 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  58. Roy, S., Majumder, S. & Bose, A. Roy Chowdhury, I. Does geographical heterogeneity influence urban quality of life? A case of a densely populated Indian City. Papers Appl. Geogr. 9, 395–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/23754931.2023.2225541 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  59. Fan, P. et al. A framework to evaluate the accessibility, visibility, and intelligibility of green-blue spaces (GBSs) related to pedestrian movement. Urban Forestry Urban Green. 69, 127494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2022.127494 (2022).

  60. Pucher, J., Dill, J. & Handy, S. Infrastructure, programs, and policies to increase bicycling: an international review. Prev. Med. 50, S106–S125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.07.028 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Carr, L., Dunsiger, S. & Marcus, B. Validation of walk score for estimating access to walkable amenities. Br. J. Sports Med. 45, 1144–1148. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2009.069609 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  62. Shamroukh, M., Natapov, A. & Larimian, T. Reliability and scalability of pedestrian monitoring practices: A systematic review. IEEE Access. 13, 147679–147689. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3599283 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  63. Carson, J. R. et al. Neighborhood walkability, neighborhood social health, and self-selection among U.S. Adults. Health Place. 82, 103036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2023.103036 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  64. Olsen, J. R. et al. Individual, social and area level factors associated with older people’s walking: analysis of an UK household panel study (Understanding Society). Soc. Sci. Med. 358, 117083. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117083 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  65. Boateng, G. O., Neilands, T. B., Frongillo, E. A., Melgar-Quiñonez, H. R. & Young, S. L. Best practices for developing and validating scales for Health, Social, and behavioral research: A primer. Front. Public. Health. 6, 149. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  66. Gbban, A. M. Enhancing walkability in Al-Madinah’s sacred spaces: urban renewal policies for religious tourism. J. Umm Al-Qura Univ. Eng. Archit. 16, 799–815. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43995-025-00182-5 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  67. Okyere, S. et al. Walking cities that are (un)walkable: exploring everyday lived realities in low-income neighbourhoods in Accra. Transportation 53, 459–482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-024-10503-7 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  68. Williams, N. J., Cardamone, N. C., Beidas, R. S. & Marcus, S. C. Calculating power for multilevel implementation trials in mental health: meaningful effect sizes, intraclass correlation coefficients, and proportions of variance explained by covariates. Implement. Res. Pract. 5, 26334895241279153. https://doi.org/10.1177/26334895241279153 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  69. Chaudhary, H., Mahmood, S., Su, Y., Mehmood, M. S. & Ahamad, M. I. Urban walkability assessment: methods and implications for city planning. Environ. Dev. Sustain. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-025-06792-2 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  70. Carr, L. J., Dunsiger, S. I. & Marcus, B. H. Validation of walk score for estimating access to walkable amenities. Br. J. Sports Med. 45, 1144–1148. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2009.069609 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  71. Majumder, S., Roy, S., Bose, A. & Chowdhury, I. R. Multiscale GIS based-model to assess urban social vulnerability and associated risk: evidence from 146 urban centers of Eastern India. Sustainable Cities Soc. 96, 104692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.104692 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  72. Keadle, S. K. et al. Using computer vision to annotate video-recoded direct observation of physical behavior. Sensors 24, 2359. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24072359 (2024).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors sincerely thank the Manipal Academy of Higher Education for providing valuable knowledge resources and a supportive research environment.

Funding

Open access funding provided by Symbiosis International (Deemed University).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Exercise and Sports Sciences, Manipal College of Health Professions, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, 625513, Karnataka, India

    Mohammed Anas & Baskaran Chandrasekaran

  2. Department of Tourism Management, Welcomgroup Graduate School of Hotel Administration, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, 625513, Karnataka, India

    Senthilkumaran Piramanayagam

  3. Symbiosis School of Sports Sciences, Symbiosis International (Deemed University), Near Lupin Research Park, Maharashtra, 412115, Lavale, Mulshi, Pune, India

    Baskaran Chandrasekaran

Authors
  1. Mohammed Anas
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Senthilkumaran Piramanayagam
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Baskaran Chandrasekaran
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Baskaran Chandrasekaran conceived the study design, analysed the data, supervised the data collection and reviewed the draft; Mohamed Anas implemented the study, collected data and wrote the original draft, Senthil Kumaran Piramanayagam supervised the data collection and critically reviewed the manuscript. All the authors reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript. Mohammed Anas: Project Administration, Funding aquisition, Writing – original draft; Senthilkumaran Piramanayagam: Writing – review & editing, Formal analysis; Baskaran Chandrasekaran: Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Methodology, Formal analysis, Conceptualization.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Baskaran Chandrasekaran.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

The study was approved by Kasturba Medical College and Kasturba Hospitals Institutional Ethics Committee approval (IEC2/541) on 17th August 2024 and prospectively registered in Clinical Trial Registry of India (CTRI/2024/11/076529) on 11th November 2024. All video recordings for phase 2 (investigator phase) were conducted in the five regions of interest with no targeted filming of individuals, and that no personal identifiers were collected or stored.

Consent to participate/consent to publish

Appropriate written and informed consent was obtained from all the study participants before the conduct of the trial. Further appropriate consent was obtained for publication of the findings.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Anas, M., Piramanayagam, S. & Chandrasekaran, B. Sustainable walkability around green, blue, and spiritual spaces in a semi-urban district of coastal Karnataka, India. Sci Rep (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-38486-8

Download citation

  • Received: 01 July 2025

  • Accepted: 29 January 2026

  • Published: 05 February 2026

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-38486-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Keywords

  • Walkability
  • Air quality
  • Coastal habitats
  • Road safety
  • Urbanization
  • Forest
Download PDF

Associated content

Collection

Health and the built environment

Advertisement

Explore content

  • Research articles
  • News & Comment
  • Collections
  • Subjects
  • Follow us on Facebook
  • Follow us on Twitter
  • Sign up for alerts
  • RSS feed

About the journal

  • About Scientific Reports
  • Contact
  • Journal policies
  • Guide to referees
  • Calls for Papers
  • Editor's Choice
  • Journal highlights
  • Open Access Fees and Funding

Publish with us

  • For authors
  • Language editing services
  • Open access funding
  • Submit manuscript

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

  • Explore articles by subject
  • Find a job
  • Guide to authors
  • Editorial policies

Scientific Reports (Sci Rep)

ISSN 2045-2322 (online)

nature.com sitemap

About Nature Portfolio

  • About us
  • Press releases
  • Press office
  • Contact us

Discover content

  • Journals A-Z
  • Articles by subject
  • protocols.io
  • Nature Index

Publishing policies

  • Nature portfolio policies
  • Open access

Author & Researcher services

  • Reprints & permissions
  • Research data
  • Language editing
  • Scientific editing
  • Nature Masterclasses
  • Research Solutions

Libraries & institutions

  • Librarian service & tools
  • Librarian portal
  • Open research
  • Recommend to library

Advertising & partnerships

  • Advertising
  • Partnerships & Services
  • Media kits
  • Branded content

Professional development

  • Nature Awards
  • Nature Careers
  • Nature Conferences

Regional websites

  • Nature Africa
  • Nature China
  • Nature India
  • Nature Japan
  • Nature Middle East
  • Privacy Policy
  • Use of cookies
  • Legal notice
  • Accessibility statement
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Your US state privacy rights
Springer Nature

© 2026 Springer Nature Limited

Nature Briefing Anthropocene

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Anthropocene