## 4 Discussion
### A New Paradox at Two Specific Sites  
A less well-connected street generates less walking movement flow and fewer economic activities [15; 50], theoretically leading to fewer street vendors. Nevertheless, we found several extreme cases, for example, 18R (cul-de-sac urban area) and 25R (suburban area) were relatively poorly connected to other streets but generated a high prevalence of street vendor activities and numerous pedestrians. These unexpected findings are in line with a few previous studies: [PERSON] et al. (2013) found that participants who lived around less integrated streets in Melbourne reported more walking within public open spaces than participants who lived around more integrated streets [3]. In modern urban planning, pedestrians are likely to emerge in the inner neighbourhood spaces and public open spaces, while motorised transportation uses the major roads which are often peripheral [46; 49]. We conducted on-site observation and interviews to better understand the quantitative findings in these different contexts and uncovered a fine-grained picture of nuanced socio-spatial narratives. In going beyond the quantitative evidence, the researchers participated in rich discussions with participants on the practices of everyday life around street networks, spatial characteristics, street vending and pedestrians. Why does a cul-de-sac attract many street vendors and pedestrians at Site 18R? Through observation, we found that due to there being fewer public spaces around this location and a high population density, a cul-de-sac without heavy vehicle and traffic movement (e.g., safer with fewer competing amenities) had been transformed into a type of de facto public open space that is popular with nearby residents and street vendors. One respondent at 18R noted: \"I am living here because it has a low rental cost, and the everyday expenses are also low\". This indicates that the rental costs and land values in a segregated cul-de-sac tend to be lower than in nearby areas such as high streets, in line with the'movement economy' theory [15]. In fact, this also signifies that the apparent disadvantage of living in a less integrated area can be seen as an advantage for low-income families and young people in the city centre [11]. With many job opportunities in the city centre, these people need to look for an adjacent residential area with lower Integration and Choice as a suitable place to live. The economic needs of these particular social groups and the feature of high-density residential areas correlate with street vendor activity often becoming part of a regular pattern of activity at the same spots at the same times often over a number of years. This provides an alternative understanding of the socio-economic demands of lower-income groups and their inhabitation of less well-connected streets via the'movement economy' theory. At 25R, the suburban area also engages many vendors and pedestrians (Figure 4), which is inconsistent with many existing studies. In theory, due to suburban areas often lacking amenities and with low Integration, the surrounding streets are typically less active with fewer pedestrians [1; 20]. Through observation, we found that the lack of amenities around Site 25R has provided an opportunity for street vendors to 'fill the gap' by serving many residents' basic everyday needs with a wide range of daily provisions, generating pedestrians and vending clients in large numbers and making the area more interesting and active. Besides, taking into account a typical feature of suburban areas, in that many residents at 25R work in other parts of the city, the prediction of space syntax at the macro- and meso-scales of the city (i.e., R5000, R10,000 and Rn) is higher than those at the micro-scales of the neighbourhood. It is also worth noting that compared with 25R, the prediction power at 18R is better at the local scales and less relevant at the global scales (Figure 4).