Commuting Impacts of Spatial Decentralization: A Comparison of Atlanta and Boston
AbstractThe change in commuting time in the process of spatially decentralized development has generated debates on the commuting impacts of spatial decentralization. Using Atlanta and Boston as two sizable but contrasting regions, this research compares commuting and urban spatial structure across space and over time, and examines commuting length increase in relation to the simultaneous decentralization of employment and residence. The empirical results indicate that, while decentralized development is unavoidable in growing regions, alternative decentralization pathways can result in very different transportation outcomes. The relatively spatially constrained decentralization in Boston results in a shorter commuting time and distance compared to the much more sprawling Atlanta.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Mid-Continent Regional Science Association in its journal Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy.
Volume (Year): 35 (2005)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Rouwendal, Jan, 1998. "Search Theory, Spatial Labor Markets, and Commuting," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 1-22, January.
- Cervero, Robert, 1989. "Jobs-Housing Balancing and Regional Mobility," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt7mx3k73h, University of California Transportation Center.
- Niedzielski, Michael A. & Horner, Mark W. & Xiao, Ningchuan, 2013. "Analyzing scale independence in jobs-housing and commute efficiency metrics," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 129-143.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.