When choosing a walking route, do you always take the shortest one?
Probably not. A direct street may be crowded, confusing or blocked by parked motorcycles. A slightly longer route can feel easier — and sometimes even shorter.
Researchers studied this question in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. They examined more than 6,000 walking trips using anonymous GPS data, street images and information about nearby shops and services.
Distance was important, but it was not the only factor.
People preferred simple routes with fewer turns. On a short walk, each extra turn had roughly the same effect on route choice as adding another 40 meters. A street with shops or useful services, however, could make the journey feel shorter.
One result was especially surprising: walkers sometimes chose busy roads over crowded footpaths.
They were not attracted to traffic. Busy roads were often more orderly and predictable, while quieter pavements could be blocked by vehicles, stalls or other obstacles. A clear route beside traffic could therefore feel easier than a messy path away from it.
Choices also changed throughout the day. In the morning, people were more likely to choose greener streets. At midday, when the tropical heat was strongest, they focused on reaching their destination quickly. In the evening, they preferred active streets with shops, services and better lighting.
The study also found a gap between maps and real experience. In one central district, people could comfortably reach only about 38 percent of the area that appeared walkable on paper.
This matters because a city is not truly walkable simply because two places are close together. The journey between them must also feel clear, comfortable and convenient.
Better walking does not always require impressive new projects. Sometimes the most useful improvement is much simpler: remove the obstacles, reduce confusion and let people walk without constantly changing direction.
The shortest path is measured in meters. The best path is measured by how it feels.