IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa04p60.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An analysis of parking behaviour using discrete choice models calibrated on SP datasets

Author

Listed:
  • Stephane Hess
  • John W. Polak

Abstract

Parking policy is an important component of contemporary travel demand management policies. The effectiveness of many parking policy measures depends on influencing parking type choice, so that understanding the factors affecting these choices is of considerable practical importance. Yet, academic interest in this issue has been, at best, intermittent. This paper reports the results of an analysis of parking choice behaviour, based on a stated preference (SP) dataset, collected in various city centre locations in the UK. The analysis advances the state of the art in the analysis of parking choice behaviour by using a mixed multinomial logit (MMNL) model, capable of accommodating random heterogeneity in travellersÂ’ tastes and potential correlation structure induced by repeated observations being made of the same individuals. The results of the analysis indicate that taste heterogeneity is a major factor in parking type choice. Accommodating this heterogeneity leads to significantly different conclusions regarding the influence of substantive factors such as access, search and egress time and on the treatment of potential fines for illegal parking. It also has important effects on the implied willingness to pay for timesavings and on the distribution of this willingness in the population. Our analysis also reveals important differences in parking behaviour across different journey purposes, and the models reveal an important locational effect, in such that the results of the analysis vary substantively across the three locations used in the SP surveys. Finally, the paper also discusses a number of technical issues related to the specification of taste heterogeneity that are of wider significance in the application of the MMNL model.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephane Hess & John W. Polak, 2004. "An analysis of parking behaviour using discrete choice models calibrated on SP datasets," ERSA conference papers ersa04p60, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa04p60
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa04/PDF/60.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bhat, Chandra R., 2000. "A multi-level cross-classified model for discrete response variables," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 567-582, September.
    2. David Revelt and Kenneth Train., 2000. "Customer-Specific Taste Parameters and Mixed Logit: Households' Choice of Electricity Supplier," Economics Working Papers E00-274, University of California at Berkeley.
    3. Bhat, Chandra R., 1998. "Accommodating variations in responsiveness to level-of-service measures in travel mode choice modeling," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 495-507, September.
    4. Stephane Hess & John Polak, 2003. "An alternative method to the scrambled Halton sequence for removing correlation between standard Halton sequences in high dimensions," ERSA conference papers ersa03p406, European Regional Science Association.
    5. Brownstone, David & Train, Kenneth, 1998. "Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 109-129, November.
    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. Algers, S. & Bergstrom, P. & Dahlberg, M. & Dillen, J.L., 1998. "Mixed Logit Estimation of the Value of Travel Time," Papers 1998:15, Uppsala - Working Paper Series.
    8. H C W L Williams, 1977. "On the Formation of Travel Demand Models and Economic Evaluation Measures of User Benefit," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 9(3), pages 285-344, March.
    9. Kenneth Train ., 2000. "Halton Sequences for Mixed Logit," Economics Working Papers E00-278, University of California at Berkeley.
    10. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    11. 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.
    12. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, January.
    13. Hensher, David A. & King, Jenny, 2001. "Parking demand and responsiveness to supply, pricing and location in the Sydney central business district," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 177-196, March.
    14. David Revelt & Kenneth Train, 1998. "Mixed Logit With Repeated Choices: Households' Choices Of Appliance Efficiency Level," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 647-657, November.
    15. Kenneth E. Train, 1998. "Recreation Demand Models with Taste Differences over People," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(2), pages 230-239.
    16. Bhat, Chandra R. & Castelar, Saul, 2002. "A unified mixed logit framework for modeling revealed and stated preferences: formulation and application to congestion pricing analysis in the San Francisco Bay area," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 593-616, 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. José Javier Soto Martínez & Luis Gabriel Márquez Díaz & Luis Fernando Macea Mercado, 2018. "Preferencias sobre alternativas de estacionamiento en Cartagena: ¿cuánto están dispuestos a pagar los conductores?," Documentos de Trabajo 018327, Universidad Tecnológica de Bolívar.
    2. Lehner, Stephan & Peer, Stefanie, 2019. "The price elasticity of parking: A meta-analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 177-191.
    3. Liangpeng Gao & Yanjie Ji & Xingchen Yan & Yao Fan & Weihong Guo, 2021. "Incentive measures to avoid the illegal parking of dockless shared bikes: the relationships among incentive forms, intensity and policy compliance," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 1033-1060, April.
    4. José Javier Soto Martínez & Luis Gabriel Márquez Díaz & Luis Fernando Macea Mercado, 2018. "Preferencias sobre alternativas de estacionamiento en Cartagena: ¿cuánto están dispuestos a pagar los conductores?," Documentos de Trabajo 018277, Universidad Tecnológica de Bolívar.
    5. José Javier Soto Martínez & Luis Gabriel Márquez Díaz & Luis Fernando Macea Mercado, 2018. "Preferencias sobre alternativas de estacionamiento en Cartagena: ¿Cuánto están dispuestos a pagar los conductores?," Revista Economía y Región, Universidad Tecnológica de Bolívar, vol. 12(2), pages 163-180, December.
    6. Macea, Luis F. & Serrano, Iván & Carcache-Guas, Camila, 2023. "A reservation-based parking behavioral model for parking demand management in urban areas," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).

    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. Fosgerau, Mogens & Bierlaire, Michel, 2007. "A practical test for the choice of mixing distribution in discrete choice models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 784-794, August.
    2. Martin Achtnicht, 2012. "German car buyers’ willingness to pay to reduce CO 2 emissions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 113(3), pages 679-697, August.
    3. David Hensher & William Greene, 2003. "The Mixed Logit model: The state of practice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 133-176, May.
    4. Paleti, Rajesh, 2018. "Generalized multinomial probit Model: Accommodating constrained random parameters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 248-262.
    5. Frick, Bernd & Barros, Carlos Pestana & Prinz, Joachim, 2010. "Analysing head coach dismissals in the German "Bundesliga" with a mixed logit approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 151-159, January.
    6. Deka, Devajyoti & Carnegie, Jon, 2021. "Predicting transit mode choice of New Jersey workers commuting to New York City from a stated preference survey," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    7. Haghani, Milad & Sarvi, Majid & Shahhoseini, Zahra, 2015. "Accommodating taste heterogeneity and desired substitution pattern in exit choices of pedestrian crowd evacuees using a mixed nested logit model," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 58-68.
    8. Swait, Joffre, 2023. "Distribution-free estimation of individual parameter logit (IPL) models using combined evolutionary and optimization algorithms," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    9. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    10. Anderson, Christopher M. & Das, Chhandita & Tyrrell, Timothy J., 2006. "Parking preferences among tourists in Newport, Rhode Island," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 334-353, May.
    11. Campbell, Danny & Hutchinson, W. George & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2006. "Using Discrete Choice Experiments to Derive Individual-Specific WTP Estimates for Landscape Improvements under Agri-Environmental Schemes: Evidence from the Rural Environment Protection Scheme in Irel," Sustainability Indicators and Environmental Valuation Working Papers 12220, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    12. Mariel, Petr & Ayala, Amaya de & Hoyos, David & Abdullah, Sabah, 2013. "Selecting random parameters in discrete choice experiment for environmental valuation: A simulation experiment," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 44-57.
    13. Helveston, John Paul & Feit, Elea McDonnell & Michalek, Jeremy J., 2018. "Pooling stated and revealed preference data in the presence of RP endogeneity," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 70-89.
    14. Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M., 2010. "Construction of experimental designs for mixed logit models allowing for correlation across choice observations," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 720-734, July.
    15. Fredrik Carlsson, 2003. "The demand for intercity public transport: the case of business passengers," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(1), pages 41-50.
    16. Eran Ben-Elia & Robert Ishaq & Yoram Shiftan, 2013. "“If only I had taken the other road...”: Regret, risk and reinforced learning in informed route-choice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 269-293, February.
    17. Campbell, Danny, 2007. "Combining mixed logit models and random effects models to identify the determinants of willingness to pay for rural landscape improvements," 81st Annual Conference, April 2-4, 2007, Reading University, UK 7975, Agricultural Economics Society.
    18. Lee, Han Bum & McNamara, Paul E., 2017. "Deconcentrating the poor via public housing policy: What really matters?," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 67-78.
    19. Francisco Javier Amador & Rosa Marina González & Juan de Dios Ortúzar, 2004. "Preference heterogeneity and willingness to pay for travel time," Documentos de trabajo conjunto ULL-ULPGC 2004-12, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas de la ULPGC.
    20. Tanaka, Makoto & Ida, Takanori & Murakami, Kayo & Friedman, Lee, 2014. "Consumers’ willingness to pay for alternative fuel vehicles: A comparative discrete choice analysis between the US and Japan," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 194-209.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa04p60. 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: Gunther Maier (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    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.