IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/transr/v32y2011i2p221-239.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Accommodating Risk Attitudes in Freight Transport Behaviour Research

Author

Listed:
  • Zheng Li
  • David Hensher

Abstract

Behavioural choice modelling is growing in interest as a framework to understand the decision-making of shippers, freight forwarders and other freight agents. Since the 1980s, we have witnessed an increasing number of freight behaviour studies, primarily the freight mode choice, where the roles of one or more freight decision-makers has been addressed, which was neglected in the traditional aggregate approach to freight demand modelling. Stated preference techniques have become a main approach to establishing the role of attributes that define the key drivers in the freight distribution chain. The underlying theory of choice is based on the neoclassical economic assumption that a decision-maker, in choosing, acts as if they are a utility maximizer (working to deliver a profit maximization or cost minimization outcome for the freight business), and this utility maximizing behaviour engenders a population theory of Random Utility Maximization (RUM). Despite the continuing appeal of the RUM framework in applied travel choice studies, a number of specific application assumptions have been questioned by studies in psychology and behavioural economics, arguing that the decisions made by agents are often conditioned on a number of underlying psychological components, one of which is risk attitude. This paper reviews recent freight behaviour studies established on RUM, and presents a major limitation of adopting a risk-neutral assumption through its linear utility specification. Using an existing freight stated choice data set, a nonlinear utility model is estimated which reveals risk-taking attitudes of transporters and shippers. An alternative behavioural paradigm, Rank-Dependent Utility Theory (RDUT), is introduced and incorporated to better accommodate trip time variability, a feature of growing importance in transport systems (passenger and freight). The proposed attribute-specific extended RDUT framework that accommodates the attitude towards risk and preference in freight transport behaviour modelling requires new data, which we detail.

Suggested Citation

  • Zheng Li & David Hensher, 2011. "Accommodating Risk Attitudes in Freight Transport Behaviour Research," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(2), pages 221-239, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:transr:v:32:y:2011:i:2:p:221-239
    DOI: 10.1080/01441647.2011.645906
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01441647.2011.645906
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01441647.2011.645906?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. Hollander, Yaron, 2006. "Direct versus indirect models for the effects of unreliability," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 699-711, November.
    2. Bates, John & Polak, John & Jones, Peter & Cook, Andrew, 0. "The valuation of reliability for personal travel," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 37(2-3), pages 191-229, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Li, Baibing, 2019. "Measuring travel time reliability and risk: A nonparametric approach," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 152-171.
    2. Carrion, Carlos & Levinson, David, 2012. "Value of travel time reliability: A review of current evidence," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 720-741.
    3. Sun, Lijun & Tirachini, Alejandro & Axhausen, Kay W. & Erath, Alexander & Lee, Der-Horng, 2014. "Models of bus boarding and alighting dynamics," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 447-460.
    4. Dixit, Vinayak V. & Harb, Rami C. & Martínez-Correa, Jimmy & Rutström, Elisabet E., 2015. "Measuring risk aversion to guide transportation policy: Contexts, incentives, and respondents," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 15-34.
    5. Zhang, Zheng & Fujii, Hidemichi & Managi, Shunsuke, 2014. "How does Commuting Behavior Change Due to Incentives? An Empirical Study of the Beijing Subway System," MPRA Paper 54691, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Fosgerau, Mogens & Karlström, Anders, 2010. "The value of reliability," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 38-49, January.
    7. van Loon, Ruben & Rietveld, Piet & Brons, Martijn, 2011. "Travel-time reliability impacts on railway passenger demand: a revealed preference analysis," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 917-925.
    8. de Jong, Gerard C. & Bliemer, Michiel C.J., 2015. "On including travel time reliability of road traffic in appraisal," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 80-95.
    9. Chakrabarti, Sandip & Giuliano, Genevieve, 2015. "Does service reliability determine transit patronage? Insights from the Los Angeles Metro bus system," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 12-20.
    10. Abegaz, Dereje & Hjorth, Katrine & Rich, Jeppe, 2017. "Testing the slope model of scheduling preferences on stated preference data," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 409-436.
    11. Soza-Parra, Jaime & Raveau, Sebastián & Muñoz, Juan Carlos, 2021. "Travel preferences of public transport users under uneven headways," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 61-75.
    12. Batley, Richard & Ibáñez, J. Nicolás, 2012. "Randomness in preference orderings, outcomes and attribute tastes: An application to journey time risk," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 157-175.
    13. Kato, Hironori & Kaneko, Yuichiro & Soyama, Yoshihiko, 2014. "Economic benefits of urban rail projects that improve travel-time reliability: Evidence from Tokyo, Japan," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 202-210.
    14. Zheng Li & Alejandro Tirachini & David A. Hensher, 2012. "Embedding Risk Attitudes in a Scheduling Model: Application to the Study of Commuting Departure Time," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 170-188, May.
    15. Börjesson, Maria & Eliasson, Jonas, 2011. "On the use of "average delay" as a measure of train reliability," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 171-184, March.
    16. Kawasaki, Tomoya & Hanaoka, Shinya & Nguyen, Long Xuan, 2014. "The valuation of shipment time variability in Greater Mekong Subregion," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 25-33.
    17. Li, Hao & Tu, Huizhao & Hensher, David A., 2016. "Integrating the mean–variance and scheduling approaches to allow for schedule delay and trip time variability under uncertainty," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 151-163.
    18. Fu, Jianhua & Zhang, Yongqing, 2020. "Valuation of travel time reliability: Considering the traveler's adaptive expectation with an indifference band on daily trip duration," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 337-353.
    19. Roberto Cominetti & Alfredo Torrico, 2016. "Additive Consistency of Risk Measures and Its Application to Risk-Averse Routing in Networks," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 41(4), pages 1510-1521, November.
    20. Mark Wardman & Richard Batley, 2014. "Travel time reliability: a review of late time valuations, elasticities and demand impacts in the passenger rail market in Great Britain," Transportation, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 1041-1069, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:transr:v:32:y:2011:i:2:p:221-239. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/TTRV20 .

    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.