IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v105y2017icp1-13.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the factors affecting the choice of regional transit for commuting in Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area: Application of an advanced RP-SP choice model

Author

Listed:
  • Rashedi, Zohreh
  • Mahmoud, Mohamed
  • Hasnine, Sami
  • Habib, Khandker Nurul

Abstract

This paper presents a jointly estimated Revealed Preference – Stated Preference (RP-SP) choice model to explore mode choice behavior of commuters in a multimodal regional transportation system in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA). The paper focuses on the commuting trips that are long enough to be served by more than one transit services (local and regional transit services) in the GTHA (hence denoted by cross-regional commuting). This type of trips represents a unique travel market for which multimodal transportation services compete with each other. The study uses a dataset collected by a purposely designed SP pivoted on RP choices of cross-regional commuters in the GTHA. An advanced RP-SP model structure is specified to enhance parameter estimation from the SP choices by explicitly capturing the correlations between the SP choices and corresponding elicited confidence ratings. The econometric model also accounts for serial correlations between SP choices of the same respondents as well as inertia effects between RP and SP choices. The estimated choice model is used to predict the effectiveness of different strategies on commuting mode choice behaviour of cross-regional commuters. The results of the empirical investigation revealed many behavioural details such as the effect of eliminating co-fare between local and regional transit services and providing Wi-Fi on regional transit vehicles on increasing the share of regional transit modes. It is found that monetizing park and ride at transit stations will deter some individuals from using transit, however, this strategy can be considered as a way to manage the increasing parking demand at regional transit stations and to improve the access time of park and ride users.

Suggested Citation

  • Rashedi, Zohreh & Mahmoud, Mohamed & Hasnine, Sami & Habib, Khandker Nurul, 2017. "On the factors affecting the choice of regional transit for commuting in Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area: Application of an advanced RP-SP choice model," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 1-13.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:105:y:2017:i:c:p:1-13
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2017.08.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856417301192
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2017.08.008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. von Haefen, Roger H. & Phaneuf, Daniel J., 2008. "Identifying demand parameters in the presence of unobservables: A combined revealed and stated preference approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 19-32, July.
    2. Loomis, John & Ekstrand, Earl, 1998. "Alternative approaches for incorporating respondent uncertainty when estimating willingness to pay: the case of the Mexican spotted owl," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 29-41, October.
    3. Habib, Khandker M. Nurul & Sasic, Ana, 2014. "A GEV model with scale heterogeneity for investigating the role of mobility tool ownership in peak period non-work travel mode choices," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 46-59.
    4. Víctor Cantillo & Juan de Dios Ortúzar & Huw C. W. L. Williams, 2007. "Modeling Discrete Choices in the Presence of Inertia and Serial Correlation," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(2), pages 195-205, May.
    5. Swait, Joffre & Adamowicz, Wiktor, 2001. "The Influence of Task Complexity on Consumer Choice: A Latent Class Model of Decision Strategy Switching," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 28(1), pages 135-148, June.
    6. Brownstone, David & Bunch, David S. & Train, Kenneth, 2000. "Joint mixed logit models of stated and revealed preferences for alternative-fuel vehicles," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 315-338, June.
    7. Rose, John M. & Beck, Matthew J. & Hensher, David A., 2015. "The joint estimation of respondent-reported certainty and acceptability with choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 141-152.
    8. Cherchi, Elisabetta & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios, 2006. "On fitting mode specific constants in the presence of new options in RP/SP models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 1-18, January.
    9. Habib, Khandker Nurul, 2017. "Improving choice model parameter estimates by jointly modelling the SP choices with corresponding elicited certainty ratings," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 305-319.
    10. Brownstone, David & Bunch, David S. & Train, Kenneth, 2000. "Joint mixed logit models of stated and revealed preferences for alternative-fuel vehicles," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 315-338, June.
    11. Karen Blumenschein & Glenn C. Blomquist & Magnus Johannesson & Nancy Horn & Patricia Freeman, 2008. "Eliciting Willingness to Pay Without Bias: Evidence from a Field Experiment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(525), pages 114-137, January.
    12. John C. Whitehead & Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & George L. Van Houtven & Brett R. Gelso, 2008. "Combining Revealed And Stated Preference Data To Estimate The Nonmarket Value Of Ecological Services: An Assessment Of The State Of The Science," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 872-908, December.
    13. Idris, Ahmed Osman & Nurul Habib, Khandker M. & Shalaby, Amer, 2015. "An investigation on the performances of mode shift models in transit ridership forecasting," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 551-565.
    14. Roy Brouwer & Thijs Dekker & John Rolfe & Jill Windle, 2010. "Choice Certainty and Consistency in Repeated Choice Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(1), pages 93-109, May.
    15. Wang, Hua, 1997. "Treatment of "Don't-Know" Responses in Contingent Valuation Surveys: A Random Valuation Model," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 219-232, February.
    16. Lee, Lung-Fei, 1983. "Generalized Econometric Models with Selectivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(2), pages 507-512, March.
    17. Sandow, Erika & Westin, Kerstin, 2010. "The persevering commuter - Duration of long-distance commuting," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 433-445, July.
    18. Bhat, Chandra R. & Sardesai, Rupali, 2006. "The impact of stop-making and travel time reliability on commute mode choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 709-730, November.
    19. Dissanayake, Dilum & Morikawa, Takayuki, 2010. "Investigating household vehicle ownership, mode choice and trip sharing decisions using a combined revealed preference/stated preference Nested Logit model: case study in Bangkok Metropolitan Region," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 402-410.
    20. Elisabetta Cherchi & Francesco Manca, 2011. "Accounting for inertia in modal choices: some new evidence using a RP/SP dataset," Transportation, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 679-695, July.
    21. David A. Hensher & John M. Rose, 2012. "The Influence of Alternative Acceptability, Attribute Thresholds and Choice Response Certainty on Automobile Purchase Preferences," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 46(3), pages 451-468, September.
    22. Richard C. Ready & Patricia A. Champ & Jennifer L. Lawton, 2010. "Using Respondent Uncertainty to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias in a Stated Choice Experiment," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 86(2), pages 363-381.
    23. William Greene & David Hensher, 2010. "Does scale heterogeneity across individuals matter? An empirical assessment of alternative logit models," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 413-428, May.
    24. Train, Kenneth & Wilson, Wesley W., 2008. "Estimation on stated-preference experiments constructed from revealed-preference choices," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 191-203, March.
    25. Patricia Champ & Richard Bishop, 2001. "Donation Payment Mechanisms and Contingent Valuation: An Empirical Study of Hypothetical Bias," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(4), pages 383-402, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Emami, Maryam & Haghshenas, Hossein & Talebian, Ahmadreza & Kermanshahi, Shahab, 2022. "A game theoretic approach to study the impact of transportation policies on the competition between transit and private car in the urban context," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 320-337.
    2. Jingni Song & Feng Chen & Qunqi Wu & Weiyu Liu & Feiyang Xue & Kai Du, 2019. "Optimization of Passenger Transportation Corridor Mode Supply Structure in Regional Comprehensive Transport Considering Economic Equilibrium," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, February.
    3. Wissam Qassim Al-Salih & Domokos Esztergár Kiss, 2022. "Activity Chains Modelling of Travellers by Using Logit Models Based on the Utility Function," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-36, March.
    4. Kun Gao & Minhua Shao & Kay W. Axhausen & Lijun Sun & Huizhao Tu & Yihong Wang, 2022. "Inertia effects of past behavior in commuting modal shift behavior: interactions, variations and implications for demand estimation," Transportation, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 1063-1097, August.
    5. Xu Wang & Jingni Song & Qunqi Wu, 2021. "An Economic Equilibrium Model for Optimizing Passenger Transport Corridor Mode Structure Based on Travel Surplus," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    2. Fifer, Simon & Rose, John M., 2016. "Can you ever be certain? Reducing hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments via respondent reported choice certaintyAuthor-Name: Beck, Matthew J," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 149-167.
    3. John C. Whitehead & Daniel K. Lew, 2020. "Estimating recreation benefits through joint estimation of revealed and stated preference discrete choice data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 58(4), pages 2009-2029, April.
    4. Habib, Khandker Nurul, 2017. "Improving choice model parameter estimates by jointly modelling the SP choices with corresponding elicited certainty ratings," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 305-319.
    5. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Macro-scale analysis of literature and effectiveness of bias mitigation methods," Papers 2102.02945, arXiv.org.
    6. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Integrative synthesis of empirical evidence and conceptualisation of external validity," Papers 2102.02940, arXiv.org.
    7. Dekker, Thijs & Hess, Stephane & Brouwer, Roy & Hofkes, Marjan, 2016. "Decision uncertainty in multi-attribute stated preference studies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 57-73.
    8. Regier, Dean A. & Sicsic, Jonathan & Watson, Verity, 2019. "Choice certainty and deliberative thinking in discrete choice experiments. A theoretical and empirical investigation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 235-255.
    9. Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M., 2011. "Experimental design influences on stated choice outputs: An empirical study in air travel choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 63-79, January.
    10. Adelina Gschwandtner & Jose Eduardo Ribeiro & Cesar Revoredo-Giha & Michael Burton, 2021. "Combining Stated and Revealed Preferences for valuing Organic Chicken Meat," Studies in Economics 2113, School of Economics, University of Kent.
    11. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Macro-scale analysis of literature and integrative synthesis of empirical evidence from applied economics, experimental psychology and neuroimag," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    12. Li, Zili & Washington, Simon P. & Zheng, Zuduo & Prato, Carlo G., 2023. "A Bayesian hierarchical approach to the joint modelling of Revealed and stated choices," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    13. Thijs Dekker & Paul Koster & Roy Brouwer, 2014. "Changing with the Tide: Semiparametric Estimation of Preference Dynamics," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 90(4), pages 717-745.
    14. Hermann Donfouet & Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu & Eric Malin, 2013. "Using respondents’ uncertainty scores to mitigate hypothetical bias in community-based health insurance studies," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 14(2), pages 277-285, April.
    15. Anders Jensen & Elisabetta Cherchi & Juan Dios Ortúzar, 2014. "A long panel survey to elicit variation in preferences and attitudes in the choice of electric vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 973-993, September.
    16. Cheranchery, Munavar Fairooz & Maitra, Bhargab, 2021. "Improving quality of ordinary bus service in Kolkata city: Integrating conflicting requirements of users and transit operator," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 17-27.
    17. Beck, Matthew J. & Rose, John M. & Hensher, David A., 2013. "Consistently inconsistent: The role of certainty, acceptability and scale in choice," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 81-93.
    18. Ana Bedate & Luis Herrero & José Sanz, 2009. "Economic valuation of a contemporary art museum: correction of hypothetical bias using a certainty question," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 33(3), pages 185-199, August.
    19. Sund, Björn, 2009. "Certainty calibration in contingent valuation - exploring the within-difference between dichotomous choice and open-ended answers as a certainty measure," Working Papers 2009:1, Örebro University, School of Business.
    20. Elisabetta Cherchi & Juan de Dios Ortúzar, 2011. "On the Use of Mixed RP/SP Models in Prediction: Accounting for Systematic and Random Taste Heterogeneity," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(1), pages 98-108, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:105:y:2017:i:c:p:1-13. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.