Página Principal Explorar Ajuda
Iniciar Sessão
ardo
/
Obsidian
1
0
Fork 0
Ficheiros Problemas 0 Pull Requests 0 Wiki
Árvore: 49b8810ad7
Ramos Etiquetas
Obsidian
/
Zotero
/
001_artiklid
/
tsigdinosconnectivityproximityplanningrural2026.md

tsigdinosconnectivityproximityplanningrural2026.md 93 KB
Histórico Em bruto

category: literaturenote citekey: tsigdinosconnectivityproximityplanningrural2026 title: "Connectivity or proximity planning in rural areas? Accessibility and equity insights from Crete, Greece" authors: "Tsigdinos, Stefanos; Kourounioti, Olympia" year: 2026 date: 2026-01-01 2026-01-01 doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2025.103928 publication: Journal of Rural Studies url: "https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0743016725003699" zotero_key: WIJ4JM42 zotero_storage: T3RVXWCS collections: magistritöö / kohalikud teed folder: 001_artiklid firstAuthor: "Tsigdinos, Stefanos"

status: converted

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Rural Studies

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jrurstud

Connectivity or proximity planning in rural areas? Accessibility and equity insights from Crete, Greece

Stefanos Tsigdinos a,* , Olympia Kourounioti b

  • a School of Rural, Surveying Engineering and Geoinformatics Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, 15780, Athens, Greece
  • b Department of Surveying and Geoinformatics Engineering, University of West Attica, Agiou Spiridonos 28, Egaleo, 12243, Greece

ARTICLE INFO

Keywords: Accessibility Rural areas Public transport Regional analysis Basic amenities Scenario planning

ABSTRACT

This study endeavours to shed light on the debate between connectivity and proximity planning in car-centric rural settings. To this end, this research will examine connectivity (new public transport lines) versus proximity (new amenities) scenarios in terms of accessibility to basic amenities and equity implications. Based on that, this research could identify policy insights for improving access to daily needs. The study area is the municipality of Amari in Crete, Greece, a remote mountainous area characterised by a prevalent reliance on cars.

Delving into the method, four distinct scenarios are investigated; the first one assesses the existing condition, the second one proposes a redistribution of amenities (proximity), the third one explores the expansion of the public transport network (connectivity), and the final one considers the combined effect of new amenities and new public transport lines. Employing spatial analysis techniques and welfare economics indices, helps measure accessibility to basic amenities like supermarkets, healthcare services and public administration as well as equity conditions for households without cars in the study area.

The findings demonstrate that connectivity-focused solutions enhance equity, while proximity-based strategies improve accessibility conditions. However, the most effective scenario in terms of both accessibility and equity, adopts a combinatorial approach, introducing both new amenities and new public transport lines. The study's contribution lies in its quest for key solutions tailored to rural areas, exemplified by the challenging case of Amari. Moreover, the replicability of the method, supported by an analytical methodological framework, could be helpful for policymakers and planners.

1. Introduction

Fossil fuel dependent transport systems have exceeded their limits, thus resulting in severe problems like traffic congestion, inaccessible urban and periurban areas as well as public health problems (Elzen, 2005; Regidor, 2020). Consequently, cities and regions strive to overcome car-centric policies and embrace a different mobility culture (Holden et al., 2020). Bearing upon this sincere shift towards less personalised vehicles, sustainable mobility has become a pivotal concern in the ongoing efforts to create prosperous and safe communities (Griffiths et al., 2021; Holden et al., 2019). Promoting sustainable modes like active modes and public transport even more robustly than today, will be a game-changer for achieving favourable conditions for another mobility ethos (Gallo and Marinelli, 2020).

A great role should be given to public transport, a collective mode that could be deemed as the backbone of sustainable transport systems. However, when looking for sustainability, accessibility should be also considered. This notion may be defined "as the ease of reaching desired destinations (amenities) by modes of a specific transport system" (Guti´errez, 2009). Accessible communities should be recognised as a fundamental right, ensuring that all individuals, regardless of their location or abilities, have the means to access essential services and opportunities (Moseley, 2023; Groβe, 2024). This implies that transport systems should be equitable as well (Loh and Kim, 2020). After all, making communities accessible is one side of the coin, whereas the other is to safeguard truly equitable distributions, without creating favourable and unfavourable spatial or social clusters (Litman, 2022). While urban and suburban areas have experienced significant advancements in transport infrastructure and policy (Budd and Ison, 2020; Nikitas et al., 2021; Porru et al., 2020), through promoting diverse solutions such as 15-min city, transit-oriented development, public transport appraisal (new lines, free public transport), etc., one critical question remains, are these

E-mail address: distlp@mail.ntua.gr (S. Tsigdinos).

* Corresponding author.

developments reaching rural regions?

According to relevant literature, rural areas continue to face substantial challenges, with a persistent reliance on private cars (Zhao and Yu, 2020; Sz´ekely and Novotný, 2022). This dependence not only limits mobility options but also exacerbates inequities, particularly for those without access to a private vehicle. Therefore, promoting accessibility with sustainable modes in rural areas could be transformative, offering better and equitable access to essential facilities such as healthcare, education, shops and public services. Equitable access is crucial for fostering social inclusion and ensuring that rural populations are not left behind in the shift toward sustainable mobility (Pereira et al., 2017). In this context, two broad planning concepts have been incorporated to improve accessibility: a) connectivity planning and b) proximity planning. The former is defined as "planning by connectivity", meaning that basic amenities could be accessed by public transport services (Levine et al., 2019) and the latter is conceptualised as "planning by proximity", meaning (active modes) accessibility improvement via establishing new activities and basic amenities within an acceptable time or distance threshold (Gil Sol´ a and Vilhelmson, 2019; Pucci and Vecchio, 2024).

Although current literature remains elusive on this matter (Martínez S´ anchez-Mateos and Ruiz Pulpon, ´ 2021), it presents a promising avenue for further investigation. Hence, considering that connectivity planning as well as proximity planning in rural areas require further and more detailed research, this paper endeavours to examine the level of public transport accessibility to basic amenities in rural inland areas, while addressing equity implications for households lacking personal motorised vehicles. Notably, the interest is not limited only to the current conditions, but also to potential future scenarios.

To this end, this research follows a novel, while simple approach for calculating accessibility in rural areas that could be very useful for policymakers and planners. Traditional measures of accessibility, such as gravity-based models or cumulative opportunity indices typically evaluate how quickly or when people can reach destinations (Tsigdinos et al., 2024b). It should be acknowledged that while these methods are well established in urban contexts, they could be less suitable for rural areas, where the crucial problem is not the travel delay but the inability of residents to reach essential services (within a daytime frame) at all. Our approach addresses this gap by evaluating whether residents can reach basic amenities, rather than when they arrive. In doing so, it embraces the principle that every traveller should be able to access at least the highest possible number of amenities within a day. This shift of focus makes the method explicitly appropriate for rural contexts with low-density population and limited basic amenities.

The research questions are the following: a) which is today's public transport accessibility level to basic amenities in a rural mountainous area and b) which are the impacts of diverse scenarios to (spatial) accessibility and equity? In other words, this study will test proximity (new amenities) vs connectivity (new public transport lines) scenarios for identifying which solutions could be more favourable towards embracing sustainable modes (active or collective ones).

The paper concentrates on a rural area in Greece. Specifically, it uses the municipality of Amari as a case study, an inland mountainous area with a low frequency public transport system and a lack of connectivity between settlements. This fact deters residents to move around and access amenities daily. Moreover, Amari also faces demographic decline (5.8 %), gradual reduction of public transport coverage and weak spatial planning, issues that are becoming increasingly common in similar areas of Greece (Papadopoulos and Baltas, 2024; Tsigdinos et al., 2024a). Amari should thus be deemed not as an isolated case, but as representative of broader accessibility challenges in rural areas. Hence, the examination of this particular area contributes to a better understanding of how connectivity and proximity-based policies can be adapted to areas with similar characteristics, while addressing how accessibility and equity in rural areas can be improved through strategic planning scenarios (Tang et al., 2024).

The specific contributions of this paper are threefold. First, it

provides a decision-support tool for rural municipalities, enabling them to identify areas of low accessibility and develop targeted measures for improvement. Second, it helps identify transport inequities, thereby supporting strategies for socially vulnerable groups such as households without access to motorised vehicles. Last, it introduces a reproducible approach for measuring accessibility in rural areas.

The remainder of the paper is structured as follows: the second section depicts the theoretical framework, while the third section delineates the methodology followed. Next, the fourth section provides a brief description for the study area, followed by the fifth section that presents the outcomes of the research. Then, the sixth section discusses these outcomes with the current literature and recommends policy implications. Last, the final section draws the conclusion of the study.

2. Theoretical framework

2.1. Transport issues in rural areas

Rural areas differ from urban communities especially when it comes to population dynamics, car usage, land use patterns, economic activities and mobility flows (Cowie et al., 2020). More specifically, rural areas are characterised by low population density, wide open spaces, limited basic amenities and a focus on agriculture or natural resource-based economies (Mahieux and Heddebaut, 2012; Cyrek and Cyrek, 2025; Peng et al., 2024; Pot et al., 2023). Moreover, rural transport systems are quite car-centric, with undermined public transport services which are not adequately frequent, lack multimodal integration and present limited coverage (Higgs and White, 1997). This makes public transport an unreliable option for many residents (Nutley, 2003). Subsequently, public transport service authorities face many economic viability challenges, when intending to cover extensive public transport networks in sparsely populated areas, leading to underfunded services that do not meet community needs (Sz´ekely and Novotný, 2022). In addition, the 'one size fits all' approach often used in rural transport planning does not truly consider the diverse needs of rural populations, further limiting the efficiency of public transport as a competitive alternative to personal cars (Wang et al., 2023). Consequently, enhancing connectivity with public transport remains a key challenge in planning endeavours.

2.2. Accessibility challenges in rural areas: proximity vs connectivity planning

The aforementioned problems are quite reflected in relevant accessibility literature. Tellingly, accessibility conditions in rural areas are a constant issue for transport and regional development, mainly because these areas often lack adequate connections to basic amenities and infrastructure. In contrast, urban centres (could) benefit from multiple public transport options (Kundu et al., 2023). This noticeable disparity between rural areas and urban centres results in significant constraints in terms of access to vital amenities (Shergold and Parkhurst, 2012), such as healthcare, shopping, public services, education and employment opportunities, especially in remote areas, away from urban conglomerations. As a result of these limited transport options, residents in rural areas often become heavily reliant on private vehicles to meet their everyday mobility needs. Zhao and Yu (2020) strongly highlighted this serious dependence on private vehicles in rural communities, which presents serious challenges for people without access to personal cars.

In response to the ongoing accessibility challenges faced by rural populations, researchers have proposed a range of solutions aimed at improving public transport availability and coverage in these areas. Nutley (2003) argues for planning strategies that consider access, affordability, and fairness. He promotes a time-space perspective to ensure rural areas are treated equally, stressing the need to connect geographic and social factors in decision-making. Next, building upon the dominant characteristics of rural areas (low population density and

inefficiency of services) Württemberger and Janzen (2024) propose innovative approaches, such as new technologies, demand-responsive transport (DRT) and mobility as a service (MaaS), to address accessibility deficiencies. However, Vitale Brovarone & Cotella (2020) point out that "one-size-fits-all" solutions, like demand-responsive transport, often struggle in diverse local contexts. Instead, they suggest a multilayered policy strategy that addresses the complex reality of rural accessibility. Precisely, they support flexible governance schemes across different levels and sectors encapsulating diverse solutions, allowing policies to be context-sensitive, leading to more effective and appropriate services.

Dianin et al. (2024) examine how demand-responsive automated systems can improve accessibility in rural environments. The study's outcomes demonstrated that scenarios promoting on-demand and rideshared automated services will achieve the highest accessibility gains. Meanwhile, Kolte et al. (2025) highlight the value of village-based and community-led transport solutions to foster rural sustainability. Tomej & Liburd (2019) developed a framework for evaluating sustainable accessibility. Through implementing this framework in the West Balaton Region in Hungary, they found that the combination of active travel modes with public transport is an efficient way to enhance rural accessibility. Another perspective of addressing accessibility issues through diverse strategies is reflected in mobile service platforms (e.g., healthcare, food, materials, etc.). As discussed in Pizzinini et al. (2023) rethinking the notion of basic amenities might offer promising solutions to bridge mobility gaps in underserved areas.

Based on the above, the existing literature tries to articulate the challenges when it comes to "planning by connectivity", meaning that basic amenities could be accessed by public transport services (Levine et al., 2019). However, new approaches and concepts emerge recently, and as such we may find "planning by proximity". As aforementioned, this concept emphasises on accessibility improvement via enriching activities and basic amenities within an acceptable time or distance threshold (Gil Sola ´ and Vilhelmson, 2019; Silva et al., 2023). Apparently, it is closely related to the 15 min cities concept that is getting quite popular nowadays (Khavarian-Garmsir et al., 2023). Delving into the impacts of proximity-based planning to rural areas, relevant, though very limited, literature demonstrates that this kind of spatial planning approach can play a substantial role in shaping rural accessibility outcomes (Velo, 2024). To be more precise, Poorthuis and Zook (2023) investigated the case of Netherlands and demonstrated that limiting the implementation of the 15-min city to the urban core, might exacerbate climate and social problems. Moreover, Martínez Sanchez-Mateos ´ & Ruiz Pulpon ´ (2021) estimated accessibility by connectivity and proximity in rural Spain, stressing that proximity policies do not assure good accessibility, while underscoring that the location of healthcare and education facilities are key enablers for rural accessibility.

2.3. Equity implications in rural accessibility

Moving beyond, it should be noted that accessibility is closely linked to equity. According to Martens (2016), equitable access to transport is a basic right. Equity has been thoroughly examined, under a geographical perspective, in urban areas highlighting spatial disparities and insufficiencies (e.g., DeWeese et al., 2022; Gori et al., 2020; Pereira, 2019; Pritchard et al., 2019; Tsigdinos et al., 2024b). However, in rural areas, even though people without personal cars often face serious transport access deficiencies (Sz´ekely and Novotný, 2022) and considering that these inequities are even more exacerbated by the limited investment in public transport (Franklin et al., 2018), studies underpinning a geographical perspective on equity are still limited. Only qualitative studies or surveys have mainly discussed equity implications (e.g. Berg and Ihlstrom, ¨ 2019; Kaiser and Barstow, 2022). Specific implications of equity through a spatial perspective in rural areas were highlighted in few studies; such as Sun et al. (2023) who used indicators like the unserved rural population (NSRP) to reveal global transport inequities that could benefit infrastructure improvements, Macuchova and Brandt (2025) who examined public transport supply in rural Sweden through both vertical and horizontal equity indicators, Sz´ekely and Novotný (2022) who demonstrated that rural areas are marginalised or excluded from public transport services in relation to daily accessibility of regional centres and Carroll et al. (2020) who identified hotspots of transport disadvantage in rural Ireland, illustrating potential areas for clear-cut sustainable mobility policies.

2.4. Spatial planning in rural areas and scenario development

Spatial planning in rural areas presents different challenges compared to urban areas (Galli et al., 2024). Many conventional spatial planning models and tools are often based on urban-centric assumptions, being therefore unable to capture rural problems especially those pertaining to accessibility and transport equity (Geurs and van Wee, 2004; Gu et al., 2025). In particular, existing approaches in many rural contexts are frequently monothematic, focusing on single-sector solutions, and fail to address the linkage between mobility and land uses (Díaz-Jara et al., 2024). Moreover, spatial plans in rural areas promote zoning practices involving housing-only settlements or municipal units, rather than fostering multifunctionality (Bielska et al., 2024). This increases reliance on private motorised transport (Wiersma et al., 2017). Additionally, institutional difficulties and governance fragmentation cannot sustain integrated planning perspectives, thus leading to insufficient coordination across sectors, topics and stakeholders (Demazi`ere, 2018). Last but not least, there is still a substantial lack of envisioning scenarios in the current spatial plans or if any, they might be just generic or trivial pathways without actionable endeavours (Voskamp et al., 2022).

In this regard, scenario planning is a strategic method used to envision and evaluate possible future developments by exploring various hypothetical situations and assumptions as well as their possible outcomes (Tori et al., 2025). This could be very helpful to this study, when examining issues related to accessibility and spatial equity. What is more, scenario planning calls for creativity since "the future cannot solely be anticipated or forecasted but can also be planned (Lyons et al., 2021)". In this context, the backcasting approach proves to be very useful, as it is a method for articulating a desired future condition (Broman and Rob`ert, 2017). Usually, the process involves the analysis of the existing conditions, envisions a few future pathways, and then unfolds the policy measures that are expected to bring the desired outcomes (Holtl ¨ et al., 2017).

2.5. Research gap

It should be underlined that studies explicitly comparing connectivity (reflected by public transport services) with proximity (new basic amenities) in rural areas through formulating new scenarios and revealing equity implications are still very sparse in the literature. Hence, this research tries to fill this gap by examining connectivity versus proximity planning, a recent debate on the relevant spatial planning literature. In particular, this paper builds three new scenarios (as mentioned above), based on this main assumption: these new pathways will involve either connectivity or proximity-oriented solutions. In addition, the evaluation of these future scenarios will be conducted through transport equity indicators. Therefore, the present study contributes to the literature by providing insights to accessibility and equity conditions related to basic amenities in rural areas and specifically in a remote mountainous area. Nonetheless, it goes beyond the mere calculation of today's conditions and distinctly examines some probable future pathways that entail proximity and connectivity strategies.

3. Methodology

The developed methodology involves two key stages: a) scenario formulation and b) the evaluation process which consists of accessibility measurement and equity calculations. Scenario planning was conducted to test several strategies for improving both accessibility and equity, such as introducing new transport lines and adding more basic amenities. Concerning accessibility evaluation in rural areas, we analysed the ease with which residents can reach basic amenities like supermarkets or groceries, healthcare services and public services (Pot et al., 2023) using existing public transport networks filtered by the frequency of connections. To calculate settlements' accessibility to amenities, an algorithm was developed in Python, Google Collaboratory. As regards the equity of accessibility to basic amenities through the lens of car ownership, we calculated the Palma Ratio and the Concentration Index, using the statistical programming language R. This approach guides effective, data-driven policy decisions for enhancing sustainable mobility in rural areas.

3.1. Scenario formulation

To assess the impact of different strategies (connectivity vs proximity) on accessibility and equity, four different scenarios were developed, each representing a different combination of amenities distribution and public transport network adjustments. This process took also into account the spatial characteristics of the study area (population dynamics and existing basic amenities). The conceptualisation of the scenarios is shown in Fig. 1: The first scenario represents existing conditions, while the second scenario explores the impact of introducing new amenities without changing the existing public transport network. The third scenario examines the implementation of new public transport lines while maintaining existing amenities and the fourth scenario combines both new public transport lines and new amenities configurations.

Scenario 0 (S0) reflects the existing state of the study area. It includes the current public transport lines and amenities as they are presently configured. By establishing a baseline, we can assess the current levels of accessibility and identify existing strengths and weaknesses in the public transport system and the distribution of basic amenities like healthcare facilities, markets, public administration offices, post offices, and banks. In Scenario 1 (S1), we explore the impact of introducing new amenities while keeping the existing public transport lines unchanged. New amenities might involve the development or expansion of the most basic of these, such as additional healthcare facilities, markets, or public administration offices. The distribution of these new amenities was based on a rule combining population size and existing amenities. Specifically, municipal units with more than 200 residents and more than two existing amenities will not receive new ones. On the other hand, municipal units with more than 200 residents and two or fewer existing amenities will receive one more amenity. Finally, among municipal units with fewer than 200 residents, half will receive new amenities, while the other half will not. This allocation will be determined randomly, giving each settlement a 50 % chance of receiving a new amenity. This approach aims to reflect the inherent uncertainty and unpredictability that often exists in real-world planning and decisionmaking processes (e.g., political priorities, geographic opportunities, or funding availability especially for small units). To do so, we used a random points tool in the QGIS software. The threshold of 200 residents was chosen since it was found in relevant papers and reports, as the minimum size for defining a small settlement unit (Dijkstra et al., 2021; Department of HousingLocal Government and Heritage, 2024; OECD, 2024; Hellenic Republic, 2025). For simplicity reasons, we assumed that all types of amenities share the same catchment area, although we acknowledge that in reality each has a different functional range. This scenario helps us understand how changes in amenities without corresponding adjustments to public transport, could affect accessibility and service provision.

Scenario 2 (S2) examines the impact of introducing new public transport lines while maintaining current amenities. These new public transport lines constitute circular lines connecting settlements within the northern part and the southern part of the municipality respectively. By evaluating it, we can assess how improvements to public transport infrastructure alone can affect accessibility to key amenities and potentially address current accessibility gaps. Scenario 3 (S3) combines both the introduction of new public transport lines and the installation of new amenities as they are proposed in the S1 and S2 respectively. This allows us to analyse the combined impact of these changes on accessibility and equity, providing insights into how integrated transportation

Fig. 1. Conceptual development of scenarios.

and amenity planning can optimise meeting the residents' needs.

As stated above; by analysing these four scenarios, we can gain a deeper understanding of how different combinations of public transport and amenities changes impact accessibility. This scenario planning approach helps in identifying potential improvements and guiding strategic decision-making to enhance the effectiveness and equity of public transport systems. Although these scenarios are not the only possible solutions, they comprehensively cover a range of realistic planning options and pinpoint the possible trade-offs between different strategies, accessibility outcomes and impacts on equity.

3.2. Scenario evaluation

3.2.1. Accessibility measurement

To evaluate the spatial accessibility, (slightly modified) gravitybased measures were used. This approach accounts for the influence of distance, quantifying how easily residents can access essential amenities, considering the proximity of amenities and providing a nuanced understanding of accessibility levels. By applying the proposed method, we can evaluate how well public transport serves rural communities, identifying areas where accessibility is lacking and where improvements are needed. Geographic-oriented methods have been one crucial tool for identifying accessibility and equity implications in spatial planning (Devipriya and Thomas, 2025). Fig. 2 presents the steps that were followed for the calculation of the gravity index.

Apparently, the complete code for accessibility calculation can be found in: https://github.com/olympiakou/REG-A, thus facilitating its reproducibility.

Step I: Spatial data collection

The data collection process leverages spatial information derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), an open access platform that provides detailed, geospatial data. The purpose of using OSM is to obtain accurate, up-to-date information on amenities and transportation networks that are critical to the study. This data source is important because it provides extensive coverage, allowing for a comprehensive spatial analysis that can be replicated or extended to other locations. For some small settlements, not all available amenities are available in OSM, so they had to be manually imported into the accessibility calculation process.

The spatial data collected for this study relate to the settlement's centres, the road network and the municipal boundaries. These datasets create a fundamental geographic framework that supports detailed spatial analysis of connectivity, accessibility and service reach across the study area. This information is important as it enables understanding and accurate modelling of travel patterns, access to amenities, and spatial relationships between areas.

Isochrone polygons are then generated around the centre of each settlement for a specified walking distance (Eq. (1)). Mathematically, this is expressed as:

$$WD = WS^*TL \tag{1}$$

Where:

WD is the maximum distance an individual can walk within the specified time,

WS is the walking speed of an average person (metres/minute),

TL is the time frame within which a person is expected to be able to walk.

To calculate this distance, two key factors are taken into account: the walking speed of an average person and the time frame within which the person is expected to be able to walk.

The purpose of generating the isochronous polygons is to find the area in which the residents of a settlement can reach on foot in a given walking time from a central point, such as the settlement centre, to be served by amenities. Furthermore, by taking for granted that the public transport station is located within this polygon, i.e. within walking distance from the village centre, it will be possible to study which amenities are accessible by residents transferring from one settlement to another.

Step II: Amenities categorisation

In the second step, the amenities were allocated to each settlement based on their spatial distribution within the isochronous polygons. This process aims to identify the amenities that are directly accessible in each settlement and those that are only accessible by travelling to neighbouring areas. This step generates a vector matrix that represents the total number of available amenities in each settlement. This is an important distinction as it highlights accessibility inequalities and helps to understand dependence on public transport. For settlements with onsite amenities, access is provided five days a week, supporting the daily needs of residents. However, for settlements without local amenities, access is dependent on public transport timetables. The assessment of the current situation influences decisions on transport planning and service provision, with the ultimate aim of improving equitable access to essential amenities.

Step III: Exploiting GTFS files

The third step focuses on assessing the connectivity of public transport between settlements. This is achieved by utilising the municipality's GTFS (General Transit Feed Specification) files and by creating a table showing the availability of transport connections between settlements on working days. This step aims to quantify transport accessibility, providing valuable information on the frequency of public transport across the municipality. Understanding transit patterns is critical to identifying areas that may lack adequate transportation options, which can impede residents' access to essential amenities, employment opportunities, and education (Kaeoruean et al., 2020).

Fig. 2. Methodological flow.

Step IV: Accessibility measurement

The fourth step evaluates the accessibility of each settlement to local amenities, taking into account two critical factors: the frequency of public transport and the geographical distribution of amenities throughout the municipality. This approach ensures that not only the available public transport routes but also the presence or absence of amenities in each settlement will be considered. In isolated areas, for instance, public transport may only operate on certain days of the week or may not be available, which can significantly affect residents' access to basic amenities. To calculate the accessibility score Ai, for settlement (Eq. (2)) is calculated as the cross-product of the transport frequency matrix and the amenity vector. This is represented as (Hansen, 1959; Geurs and van Wee, 2004):

$$Ai = \sum{i=1}^n F_{ij} U_j \tag{2}$$

Where:

Ai is the accessibility score for settlement i,

Fij is the frequency of public transport connecting settlement i to settlement j,

Uj is the number of amenities in settlement j,

n is the total number of settlements.

The resulting accessibility score Ai represents the overall accessibility of settlement i to all settlements. Settlements with a higher frequency of transport to other settlements with amenities will have a higher accessibility score. This ensures that settlements with efficient transport links to amenity-rich settlements are ranked higher in terms of accessibility. Hereby, it should be underscored that inbound trips are considered as 5 days frequency, thus the diagonal of the Origin-Destination (O-D) matrix will equal to 5.

Afterwards, we calculate the accessibility of each municipal community, which is an essential step for preparing the ground for spatial analysis. Therefore, the accessibility of a community pertains to weighted accessibility of its settlements (Eq. (3)). It is weighted based on the population of each settlement. The equations could be found below:

$$A{u} = \frac{w{k}A{k}}{\sum{k} w_{k}}$$ (3)

Where:

k

Au is the accessibility of the municipal community,

Ak is the accessibility of the settlement,

wk is the population of each settlement.

3.2.2. Equity calculations

In our study, we employ the Palma Ratio and the Concentration Index to analyse and quantify disparities in accessibility and socioeconomic conditions (Arellana et al., 2020; Palma and Stiglitz, 2016) on a community scale. These measures offer valuable insights into inequality and distribution, allowing us to assess the effectiveness and equity of public transport systems.

The Palma ratio (Eq. (4)) is a statistical metric used to often assess income inequality in a population (Cobham and Sumner, 2014). It is calculated by dividing the portion of income held by the top 10 % of the population by the portion held by the bottom 40 %. This ratio provides a clear insight on the extent of inequity between the richest and poorest segments of society. In the context of our study, the Palma ratio can be adapted to measure inequalities in access to amenities through public transport or proximity planning. By comparing the accessibility experienced by different socioeconomic groups based on car ownership, we can identify whether certain groups are disproportionately disadvantaged. The equation utilised is presented below (Guzman and Oviedo, 2018):

$$P_k = \frac{A \text{verage accessibility top } 10\% \text{ car owners}}{A \text{verage accessibility bottom } 40\% \text{ car owners}}$$ (4)

Complementary to the aforementioned index, the concentration index (Erreygers, 2009) is used to measure socio-economic inequality, particularly in relation to health and access to amenities. It quantifies the degree of concentration of a particular variable (such as accessibility to public transport or socio-economic status) across different income groups or different proxies resembling income (like car ownership (Cornut and Madre, 2016). The concentration index is calculated in the same way as the Gini Coefficient, but it varies between − 1 and +1, where a value of +1 indicates complete concentration among the richest, − 1 indicates complete concentration among the poorest and 0 represents perfect equality. In our methodology, the concentration index helps us to understand how equally or unequally access to public transport networks and amenities is distributed among different socioeconomic groups. This allows us to assess whether certain groups face greater difficulties in accessing basic amenities. The Concentration Index was calculated by using Eqs. (5) and (5a) (Karner et al., 2024).

$$CCI{a} = \frac{8}{n^{2}(m{x} - n{x})} \sum{i=1}^{n} a{i} w{i}$$ (5)

$$w_i = r_i - \left[ \frac{(n+1)}{2} \right] \tag{5a}$$

Where:

n is the number of the zones within the study area,

mx the upper bounds of the accessibility variable,

nx the lower bounds of the accessibility variable,

ai is the accessibility of zone i,

wi is the weight attributed to the accessibility of zone i,

ri is the socioeconomic rank position of zone i (car ownership).

By integrating the Palma Ratio and Concentration Index into our analysis, we gain a comprehensive understanding of accessibility and inequality within the public transport system. These measures enable us to identify and address disparities, ultimately contributing to more equitable and effective transportation planning.

4. Study area

4.1. General overview

The municipality of Amari is located in the region of Crete, within the Regional Unit of Rethymno (Fig. 3a). Covering an area of 278.85 square kilometres, Amari is characterised by its diverse and rugged terrain. As of the 2021 census, the municipality has a population of 5572 permanent residents, a slight decrease from 5915 residents in 2011. The administrative structure of Amari includes 26 local administrational units and 40 settlements, reflecting the area's dispersed and varied population distribution.

Public transport within Amari consists of two lines with different frequencies, providing essential connectivity to residents. However, the effectiveness of these lines may vary, affecting overall accessibility. The municipality is equipped with 23 key points of interest that serve as basic amenities for its residents. These include seven healthcare facilities, eight marketplaces, three public administration offices, four post offices, and one bank. These points of interest are crucial for meeting the everyday needs of the population. Socioeconomically, car ownership in Amari shows considerable variation. The percentage of households with access to a car for the year 2021, ranges from a minimum of 64.04 % to a maximum of 94.43 % (Fig. 3b). The mean value is 78.35 % and the standard deviation 7.37 %. This variability highlights the reliance on personal vehicles for mobility, which is particularly important given the area's mountainous and remote nature. In an overall view, Amari's public transport infrastructure and car ownership patterns present both

Fig. 3. a) Study area and b) Household car ownership (Source of data: National Greek Census, ELSTAT, 2021).

opportunities and challenges for ensuring adequate accessibility and mobility for its residents.

4.2. Local urban and transport planning in rural Greece

Local spatial and transport planning in rural Greece is shaped by a complex interaction between geographical, institutional and socioeconomic factors (Salvati, 2020). More specifically, in many rural areas in Greece, limited public transport, poor connectivity, and long distances from big settlements or cities often exacerbate spatial inequality and hinder economic and social development. An index of geographical remoteness, for example, has shown strong correlations between poor accessibility, lower levels of economic activity, and reduced human capital in rural areas (Panagiotopoulos and Kaliampakos, 2018). The spatial planning system in Greece is mainly characterised as hierarchical and centralised, structured around national legislation and supervised by the Ministry of Environment and Energy. Despite recent reforms, notably the Kallikratis and Kleisthenes administrative restructurings, local authorities in rural areas often lack the technical, financial, and administrative capacity to effectively carry out their responsibilities in the field of spatial planning (Papageorgiou, 2017). These reforms aimed to decentralise spatial planning responsibilities and strengthen municipalities, but in practice they experienced persistent institutional weaknesses, especially in smaller and more remote areas (Gourgiotis and Tsilimigkas, 2024).

Planning tools, such as Local Spatial Plans (LSPs), have become the basic instruments for determining land uses, building regulations, infrastructure and transport networks, urban boundaries, and protection zones (e.g., Natura, 2000) throughout the municipality, in both urban, peri-urban and rural areas. Furthermore, they are expected to replace the outdated General Urban Plans and Open City Spatial and Housing Organisation Plans providing a more integrated framework. However, their implementation is often delayed, especially in rural communities, due to the complexity of the procedures (Bakogiannis et al., 2020) and the requirement for final approval by the central authorities such as the Ministry of Environment and Energy.

At the same time, transport planning remains insufficiently integrated into spatial planning processes. While tools such as LSPs theoretically allow transport to be taken into account, in practice a lack of legal clarity and insufficient coordination between actors undermine their effectiveness, particularly in rural and island areas (ITF, 2024). In addition, according to Greek legislation (Hellenic Republic, 2021), Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans (SUMPs) are mandatory only for municipalities with more than 30,000 residents, while their preparation remains optional for the remaining municipalities. However, developing a SUMP requires experienced staff and consultants, a resource in considerable shortage in small and non-touristic municipalities such as Amari. As a result, many rural communities either lack approved SUMPs or continue to treat mobility as a secondary concern rather than a key planning priority. Consequently, accessibility issues, particularly public transport planning and proximity-based solutions, are often neither examined nor adequately addressed.

5. Results

The application of the method provided outcomes related to the spatial formulation of scenarios, to the accessibility levels and the equity implications to households without personal vehicles.

5.1. Scenario formulation

The research formulated four scenarios (Fig. 4). S0 preserves the existing conditions, being the do-nothing. In detail, the current public transport network consists of two bus lines that connect the points of interest. Line 1 operates twice weekly, with one of the buses extending service to additional settlements on one of the two days. Line 2 operates five times per week, although some road segments are serviced only once weekly. In addition, the existing total number of amenities in the settlements of Amari is 23. S1 aims to expand the network by establishing new points of interest in additional settlements while retaining the current transport infrastructure. In particular, the total number of amenities has increased from 23 to 44. S2 retains the same points of interest as S0 (23 amenities) but significantly enhances the bus network. Two new bus lines are proposed: Line 3 operates once weekly, and Line 4 operates twice weekly. These new lines are designed to reach settlements not currently served by the existing network and to improve connectivity among more locations. S3 combines the introduction of new points of interest (44 amenities in total) with additional public transport lines (4 transport lines in total), providing a holistic upgrade to the network and addressing previously underserved areas. By comparing these scenarios, the research offers a comprehensive analysis of potential strategies to optimise transport infrastructure and land use planning.

5.2. Accessibility outcomes

For each scenario, the accessibility values of settlements were

Fig. 4. Proposed scenarios.

evaluated to determine the extent to which residents could access key amenities and services (Fig. 5). The weighted accessibility values were classified into five categories: very low (0–35), low (30–70), medium (70–105), high (105–140), and very high (140–175). Regarding S0 which presents the existing conditions, most settlements exhibit very low accessibility, with a mean value of 41.59, a maximum of 97, a median of 32 and some settlements having no accessibility at all, indicating significant limitations for residents in reaching essential amenities. For S1 which introduces additional points of interest, the accessibility patterns seem to significantly alter. Approximately half of the settlements still experience low or very low accessibility levels, but the remaining half achieve medium, high, or very high accessibility values. In particular, mean values of accessibility rose to 62.39, the maximum to 133, the median to 47 and the minimum to 5. This outcome indicates a more balanced distribution of services, benefiting a larger portion of the population compared to S0. S2 focuses on improving the public transport network while maintaining the same points of interest as S0. The results show moderate improvement over the existing conditions, with a mean of 55.62, a maximum of 107, a median of 49 and a minimum of 16.

In S2, nine settlements advance from very low to low accessibility. However, the accessibility levels of other settlements remain unchanged compared to S0. While this scenario provides gradual benefits, it falls short of the more comprehensive improvements seen in S1. The last one,

S3 combines the creation of new points of interest with an expanded and improved public transport network, resulting in the most substantial accessibility enhancements reaching a mean of 84.64, a maximum of 173, a median of 68 and a minimum of 22, indicating substantial gains in accessibility across the settlements. In this scenario, none of the settlements experience very low accessibility, and ten settlements achieve medium, high or very high accessibility levels. This represents a significant improvement compared to S0, showcasing the potential benefits of a holistic approach to transport and amenities distribution planning. The findings show that progressive changes, such as enhancing transport networks only (S2), bring limited benefits. In contrast, the introduction of new points of interest (S1) or their combination with transport upgrades (S3) leads to significant improvements in accessibility. S3 highlights the value of an integrated strategy covering both infrastructure and availability of amenities.

Fig. 6 depicts the differences in accessibility between the current conditions (S0) and each of the three proposed scenarios. These visualisations offer a clear understanding of how accessibility levels evolve across settlements under each scenario. The accessibility differences were classified into five categories: very low (0–50), low (50–100), medium (100–150), high (150–200), and very high (200–300). S3 demonstrates the most significant improvements in accessibility compared to S0 with an average difference of 83.17 % and a median of 66.02 %. Most settlements experience substantial enhancements, with

Fig. 5. Accessibility conditions for each scenario.

Fig. 6. Accessibility difference for each scenario.

many transitioning to medium, high, or very high accessibility levels. This scenario's success can be attributed to its holistic approach, which integrates the introduction of new points of interest and the development of an expanded, optimised public transport network. The improvements are widespread, addressing both previously underserved areas and settlements that already had moderate accessibility, ensuring a more equitable distribution of services.

S1 results in moderate improvements in accessibility compared to S0 with an average difference of 44.50 % and median of 46.65 %. For most settlements, the changes are limited to low or medium gains, which, while beneficial, do not reach the substantial levels observed in S 3. The introduction of new amenities increases accessibility for some areas, but the lack of corresponding enhancements to the transport network restricts the overall impact. This highlights the importance of balancing service expansion with infrastructure development to achieve more significant accessibility improvements. When comparing S0 to S2, the

accessibility for most settlements remained unchanged while the average difference was 25.71 % and median of 6.05 %. Only four settlements exhibit medium or high improvements. The limited impact of S2 reflects the constraints of focusing solely on transport network enhancements without adding new amenities. These findings point out the importance of adopting an integrated approach that combines infrastructure development with the strategic placement of amenities to maximise accessibility improvements across all settlements.

5.3. Equity implications

To analyse and quantify inequalities in public transport accessibility and socio-economic conditions, two indicators were examined. The first one is "Palma Ratio" and is presented in Fig. 7a across four scenarios (S0 to S3). The Palma Ratio starts at 0.43 in S0, indicating moderate to low inequality. Notably, this ratio decreases across the scenarios, with S1 at

Fig. 7. Equity indices a) Palma ratio and b) Concentration index.

0.41, S2 at 0.36 and S3 at only 0.33, showing a consistent reduction in inequality. The trend suggests that the measures applied in each subsequent scenario contribute to a more equitable distribution, with S3 achieving the lowest level of inequality among the scenarios presented.

The next index is "Concentration Index" and is illustrated in Fig. 7b across four scenarios, labelled S0 through S3. The index decreases progressively from − 0.17 in S0 to − 0.31 in S3, indicating a noticeable trend toward greater equity. Initially, in S0, the distribution is most unequal, with low car ownership households quite benefited though, but as we move through S1 (− 0.22) and S2 (− 0.29), the distribution becomes increasingly more beneficial to these groups. By S3, the scenario with the lowest concentration index of − 0.31, the distribution is favourable to no-car households. This trend suggests that the measures or policies implemented across these scenarios have effectively reduced inequality, achieving a fairer outcome in S3.

Overall, the progressive reduction in both the Palma Ratio and the Concentration Index across the scenarios highlights the effectiveness of the proposed measures in addressing inequalities in public transport accessibility and socio-economic conditions, with S3 achieving the fairest outcomes. Nevertheless, if we concentrate our interest only on the difference between connectivity and proximity, it is clearly demonstrated that S2 promoting connectivity leads to a better-off situation for no-car households.

6. Discussion

6.1. Key findings

This paper focused on accessibility and equity issues in rural areas, which is a very important issue, remaining yet under-examined from the current literature. In this context, this study shed light on the debate between proximity and connectivity (Silva et al., 2023), though reflected in rural areas. Both undertaking research on public transport and land use planning in the municipality of Amari, our analysis revealed several key findings that provide insights into improving transport systems and addressing accessibility challenges in mountainous and remote regions. Moreover, this study was based on scenario planning, which is very meaningful, when it comes to exploring the impact of future pathways and uncertainty (Tori et al., 2022). Through building different conceptual scenarios and testing them afterwards, this study managed to obtain useful insights for diverse policymaking actions and specifically, the impacts of connectivity versus proximity planning. Relevant studies have also employed scenarios (Dianin et al., 2024; Poorthuis and Zook, 2023) and have demonstrated intriguing results.

Our outcomes explicitly show that the proximity planning scenario (S1) leads to very high accessibility levels and noticeable positive changes in several local communities. This signifies that proximity planning actions could be very helpful in increasing accessibility metrics (see also Pizzinini et al., 2023; Poorthuis and Zook, 2023). However, our

outcomes also indicate that merely increasing the number of well-distributed basic amenities is insufficient to address equity challenges effectively. Tellingly, enhancing accessibility alone, as seen in S1, does not necessarily "translate" into more equitable conditions. On the contrary, the two indices related to equity achieve worse results than S2 and S3. On the other hand, while adding new bus lines (S2) may not achieve higher accessibility levels than S1, equity perspectives unveil completely different insights. To be more precise, the fact that this S2 improves the accessibility conditions of many communities coupled with better equity metrics, makes this scenario the most feasible and straightforward one.

When looking at the most beneficial option for a rural area, then the combined scenario (S3), where both new amenities and new bus lines are introduced, offers the greatest metrics both in terms of accessibility and equity. This implies that proximity and connectivity are not substitutes but complements in rural contexts. A small part of related literature (Tsigdinos et al., 2024b) found that improving accessibility with combinatorial scenarios might not always ensure equitable outcomes; however, other research works like Tomej and Liburd (2019) and Pereira (2019) corroborate with our findings. Therefore, achieving a balance between accessibility and equity is crucial for maximising the effectiveness of rural transport improvements. Apparently, this insight enriches rural spatial planning theory by illustrating that trade-offs between accessibility and equity cannot be resolved by single-strategy approaches. Instead, effective spatial and transport planning in rural areas requires integrated interventions, echoing arguments for flexible, context-sensitive governance in relevant literature (Vitale Brovarone and Cotella, 2020).

Nevertheless, when delving into the differences between connectivity and proximity, the present paper reveals that connectivity planning (S2) might be more favourable related to equity, whereas proximity planning (S1) creates better accessibility conditions. Intuitively, we may end up with the conclusion that the debate of proximity and connectivity planning is a matter of priorities. However, if a complete transition to sustainable modes is in quest, then S3 holds the most suitable answer. This key finding is a new contribution to the literature, since previous research has not delved into such issues in the rural context. Hence, this study is a first step in filling the gap of the under-examined field of connectivity and proximity planning in rural areas.

Regarding other key issues of this research, it should be highlighted that we developed a method that is applicable to other contexts. It is characterised by simple and easy to follow steps with specific data. Hereby, we should also stress that the examination of connectivity through frequency highlights that results can vary significantly depending on the index used to measure accessibility (Martínez Sanchez-Mateos ´ and Ruiz Pulpon, ´ 2021). This variance underscores the complexity of evaluating regional/rural transport systems and suggests that a singular measure may not capture the full scope of accessibility issues (Mo´scicka et al., 2019). Hence, next studies could utilise more than one accessibility metric to obtain broader insights. Notably, this study employed two measures of equity for ensuring more solid results when it comes to the equitable aspect of the scenarios of impacts.

When it comes to the generalisability implications of this study, although the analysis focused on Amari, Crete, the results might resonate with a wider set of rural areas across Southern Europe and beyond. Many mountainous or populating declining regions face similar problems of remoteness, high car reliance and limited planning capacity. The trade-offs identified in this study, accessibility gains through proximity, equity enhancement through connectivity and the prevailing outcomes of combinatorial solutions, are therefore of broader relevance. Consequently, this paper's insights could be meaningful for academic and policymaking purposes on a European and even global scale.

6.2. Policy recommendations

Based on the findings of our research and taking into account the existing spatial policy framework in Greece, we could develop some indicative policy recommendations for improving accessibility and equity in rural areas. First and foremost, all the scenarios indicated that new proximity and connectivity planning endeavours lead to higher accessibility conditions. Therefore, it is crucial to expand bus services in the area through diverse actions. In this framework, regional buses should be strategically designed to cover all settlements, ensuring that even the more remote and less accessible areas receive adequate services. This approach will help mitigate the disparities in connectivity between different parts of the Amari municipality (especially to communities with low population settlements and without basic amenities). Moreover, ensuring that public transport lines operate every day of the week is crucial for maintaining consistent access to essential amenities for residents. Today, daily access resembles an "ideal" situation far from reality.

Based on our findings, we may try to extend the potential solutions by recommending a new transport solution for Greece, which is ondemand public transport services (Tsigdinos et al., 2024a). This is an option implemented in other regions in Europe and beyond (Schasch´e et al., 2022) and could be a good practice for testing in mountainous and rural areas like Amari. This flexible service model can adapt to varying demand levels, providing targeted support where it is most needed. Complementing regular with flexible services could be a game-changer for rural areas, demarcating a complete and adjustable public transport system ready to upgrade connectivity. This proposal could be found in similar studies (Dianin et al., 2024; Sharma et al., 2023).

Finally, as this study shed light also on proximity planning, i.e., locating more basic amenities, we could claim that new LSPs should be oriented towards mixed-used solutions and leave behind the paradigm of zoning with "housing-only" settlements that prevailed in Greece. It was clearly illustrated that proximity-planning enhances accessibility greatly. However, since equity issues arise as well, we recommend policymakers and stakeholders to adopt an integrated approach combining the redistribution of amenities with a strategic expansion of public transport services. For instance, traditional actions like vehiclebased platforms hosting various basic amenities (e.g., healthcare, food, materials, etc.) already found in Crete, Greece; could be further supported as a solution in-between proximity and connectivity. This is in line with the final scenario which depicted compelling increase of accessibility, while ensuring equitable conditions, especially for households without cars.

Hence, local communities and governments should really embark into integrated and coordinated ways (see also Poltimae ¨ et al., 2022). Addressing spatial planning problems in Greece requires, new policy regulations involving integrated spatial plans analysing and interpreting rural space holistically should be developed in the macroscale, thus articulating a cohesive and coordinated spatial and transport strategy. Integrated solutions matter (e.g., improving public transport lines in parallel with new amenities distribution); however, if this holds serious implementation difficulties, then priorities should be assigned. Bearing upon our results, we suggest municipalities that focus on accessibility improvement to adopt proximity planning, whereas in case of municipalities looking for achieving more equitable futures, we recommend connectivity solutions.

6.3. Limitations and future research

This research could function as a very first step for identifying accessibility and equity implications in diverse planning scenarios. However, soliciting solutions for really improving rural areas, calls for overcoming the present study's limitations. In this context, new future attempts should explore additional dimensions to further enhance our understanding of proximity and connectivity planning actions and their impacts. This research was solely based on frequency in terms of accommodating daily amenities. Hence, investigating the cost and time perspectives associated with different scenarios could provide valuable insights into their economic feasibility and practical implementation. Scrutinising the financial and temporal trade-offs will contribute to evaluating which interventions are most viable and effective.

Additionally, this research thoroughly delved into only the case of a remote-inland municipality, but what about comparative analysis with other municipalities in different geographical contexts? This could lead to more robust and generalisable findings and could facilitate examining the impacts of similar strategies as well. Apparently, such comparisons would provide a broader perspective on the applicability of the proposed solutions. This study outlined scenarios of connectivity and proximity, only focusing on regular public transport and active modes (walking), since they constitute the "usual" solution in rural areas in Greece. Nevertheless, envisioning scenarios that incorporate a wider range of transport modes, such as cycling, ride-sharing, or alternative public transport options, could offer a more comprehensive view of how diverse transport landscapes influence accessibility and equity. Last, employing more socio-economic attributes (gender, income, employment, local/regional development) will be even more revealing for transport disparities. Building upon this endeavour, new studies should go beyond car ownership and run enriched equity analyses.

Finally, while our approach assumes a common catchment area for all amenities, this simplification provides a baseline framework for testing accessibility improvements. In practice, different amenities operate across distinct functional ranges (e.g., healthcare centres versus markets), and incorporating such differences would further increase the realism and policy relevance of the analysis. Tellingly, this represents a promising avenue for future research.

7. Conclusion

Rural areas have been captive to automobiles; however, sustainable modes should be fairly promoted for providing sufficient opportunities to residents and visitors. Spatial accessibility especially, should be considered as a fundamental right for all individuals, ensuring that everyone, regardless of their location or socio-economic status, can access essential amenities daily. In Greece and in the island of Crete, the car-centric nature of the current transport system, along with the weak and fragmented spatial planning framework, create serious challenges that undermine sustainable transport modes.

This study explicitly demonstrated (through a reproducible method) that to address these challenges effectively, it is essential to adopt combinatorial solutions integrating both proximity and connectivity planning aspects. This combined pathway will lead to increased accessibility and equitable futures, as they outperform single-strategy approaches. Nevertheless, as planning sometimes gets hard to implement diverse solutions simultaneously, a debate between connectivity and proximity arises. This study found that in the case of Amari, a remote mountainous area, proximity-based solutions might lead to greater accessibility conditions, whereas connectivity-based actions ensure

S. Tsigdinos and O. Kourounioti Journal of Rural Studies 121 (2026) 103928

more fair conditions for the least well-off, thus contributing to more equitable landscapes. These insights could go beyond the Greek context and be meaningful to other similar areas on a European or global scale.

The pursuit of improved accessibility and equity in rural areas is an ongoing effort that requires both political will and technical innovation. This study could be beneficial to policymakers and stakeholders that intend to bring considerable changes in favour of vivid and fair local communities. Proximity planning should be coupled with incentives for local economy and regional development actions, while connectivity planning should not only focus on regular-fixed solutions but also invest in demand responsive strategies. Integrated planning initiatives could be crucial for revitalising rural areas and fostering a genuine transition towards sustainable mobility solutions.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Stefanos Tsigdinos: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Visualization, Supervision, Methodology, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Olympia Kourounioti: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Visualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Conceptualization.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Data availability

Data will be made available on request.

References

DeWeese, J., Santana Palacios, M., Belikow, A., El-Geneidy, A., 2022. Whose express access? Assessing the equity implications of bus express routes in Montreal, Canada. J Transp Land Use. 15 (1), 35–51. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2022.1879.

  • Dianin, A., Gidam, M., Ravazzoli, E., Hauger, G., 2024. Collective accessibility impacts of public transport automation on rural areas: the case study of Mühlwald, South Tyrol. Int. J. Transp. Sci. Technol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijtst.2024.11.004.
  • Díaz-Jara, A., Manuschevich, D., Grau, A., Zambrano-Bigiarini, M., 2024. Land management drifted: land use scenario modeling of Trancura River Basin, Araucanía, Chile. Land 13 (2), 157.https://doi.org/10.3390/land13020157.
  • Dijkstra, L., Florczyk, A.J., Freire, S., Kemper, T., Melchiorri, M., Pesaresi, M., Schiavina, M., 2021. Applying the degree of urbanisation to the globe: a new harmonised definition reveals a different picture of global urbanisation. J. Urban
  • Econ. 125, 103312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2020.103312. ELSTAT, 2021. Greek population-housing census. https://www.statistics.gr/2021-cen

sus-res-pop-results.

Hellenic Republic, 2025. P.D. Government Gazette D/194/15.04.2025.