Systematic review and methodological comparison of TOD typologies based on the node-place model

Abstract

This study conducts a systematic review of 65 papers on Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) typology based on the node-place model and performs a subsequent site study on the Chukyo Metropolitan Area (CMA) and Nagoya to examine two modeling approaches—the heuristic models based on the previous framework and the exploratory factor models—applied at two different spatial scales, resulting in four comparative cases. Our review classified research trends into five method types: NPM (Node-Place Model), extended NPM, mixed NPM, validated NPM, and visually supported NPM. Major methodological gaps shared across these types include (1) indicator assignment to dimensions such as node, place, and walkability, and (2) the variation arising from spatial scopes. Subsequent empirical comparisons provide the following results and implications for future studies: First, exploratory-derived factors were more detailed than the heuristic dimensions, indicating the potential for nuanced classification, while the overall patterns partially validated the existing frameworks. This finding suggests that the distinguishing between transit accessibility measures and transit network performance, including modal differences, can function as an alternative station assessment. Second, spatial scope must be carefully considered in TOD typologies, which is supported by the detailed results at the city scale, in contrast to the cohesive representation at the metropolitan scale. Third, the internal correlations among indicators defined under walkability or functionality support the validity of the literature, yet underscore the need for exploring indicator-level relationships. Finally, we suggest an integration of the heuristic and data-driven approaches to enable multidimensional interpretation and support sequential decision-making.