Development of commuter and non-commuter mode choice models for the assessment of new public transport infrastructure projects: A case study
AbstractThis paper uses state of the art stated choice designs to parameterise modal choice models for commuting and non-commuting travel futures in the presence of new public transport infrastructure (variations of new heavy rail, light rail and dedicated busway systems). D-optimal choice experiments are developed for a set of labelled modal alternatives in which respondents establish a reference benchmark based on the existing service levels (for access, linehaul and egress trip legs) which is used in a computer aided personal interview instrument to generate future scenarios of service levels for current and prospective new modals options. We show that a fully integrated stated choice experiment provides all the information required to obtain behaviourally relevant parameter estimates (within a nested logit framework) for all but the mode-specific constants (MSCs). The MSCs can be calibrated for the current modes within a network model setting, giving the transport planner an appropriate model for predicting the patronage potential for proposed new public transport infrastructure services. A useful by-product is a new set of behavioural values of travel time savings for access, egress, linehaul and wait times.
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 Elsevier in its journal Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice.
Volume (Year): 41 (2007)
Issue (Month): 5 (June)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description
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.:
- Fredrik Carlsson & Peter Martinsson, 2003. "Design techniques for stated preference methods in health economics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(4), pages 281-294.
- David Schmeidler, 2000.
"Utility in Case-Based Decision Theory,"
00-06, Ohio State University, Department of Economics.
- Chris Starmer, 2000. "Developments in Non-expected Utility Theory: The Hunt for a Descriptive Theory of Choice under Risk," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 332-382, June.
- Kragt, Marit Ellen & Llewellyn, Rick S., 2013. "Using choice experiments to improve the design of weed decision support tools," Working Papers 147031, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
- 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.
- Driscoll, Áine & Lyons, Sean & Morgenroth, Edgar & Nolan, Anne, 2013. "Comparing the Determinants of Mode Choice across Travel Purposes," MPRA Paper 46034, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- 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.
- Currie, Graham & Rose, John, 2008. "Growing patronage - Challenges and what has been found to work," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 5-11, January.
- Habibian, Meeghat & Kermanshah, Mohammad, 2013. "Coping with congestion: Understanding the role of simultaneous transportation demand management policies on commuters," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 229-237.
- 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.
- De Witte, Astrid & Hollevoet, Joachim & Dobruszkes, Frédéric & Hubert, Michel & Macharis, Cathy, 2013. "Linking modal choice to motility: A comprehensive review," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 329-341.
- Cascetta, Ennio & Cartenì, Armando, 2014. "The hedonic value of railways terminals. A quantitative analysis of the impact of stations quality on travellers behaviour," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 41-52.
- Toshiyuki Yamamoto & Ryosuke Komori, 2010. "Mode choice analysis with imprecise location information," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 491-503, May.
- Clifton, Geoffrey T. & Rose, John M., 2013. "A simulation of the simple Mohring model to predict patronage and value of resources consumed for enhanced bus services," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 259-269.
- Anna Alberini & Stefania Tonin & Margherita Turvani, 2009. "The Value of Reducing Cancer Risks at Contaminated Sites: Are More Heavily Exposed People Willing to Pay More?," Working Papers 2009.60, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
- Arentze, Theo A. & Molin, Eric J.E., 2013. "Travelers’ preferences in multimodal networks: Design and results of a comprehensive series of choice experiments," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 15-28.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.