Exploring the relationship between land-use system and travel behaviour - some first findings
AbstractTheories on the reciprocal relationship between land-use and transport address changes in locational decisions and travel behavior of private actors (households and firms) due to alternations in the transport system, respectively land-use system. Although the impact of land-use system on travel behaviour (transport system) has been the subject of much research (for reviews, see, e.g. Handy, 2002; Stead and Marshall, 2001; Crane, 2000; Wegener and Fürst, 1999), there is still no consensus about the strength of this relationship. This may be caused by different types of variables whether or not included in the research. Initially only land-use variables were taken into account, but nowadays socio-economical variables are also incorporated. Still, within ‘homogeneous groups’, there may be attitudes, lifestyles, perceptions, and preferences which can have an impact on land-use and/or travel behaviour. Academic literature on the latter remains scarce and the main focus of the existing behavioural literature is the impact of residential location on travel choices, especially modal choice. However, little work has thus far been done on other dimensions of travel choices (e.g., distance, time) and other location types (e.g., commercial, industrial, recreational). Less is known about the reverse relationship, e.g. the impact of the transport system on location decisions of households and firms (land-use system). A difference in time-scale can be the reason for this. Transformations in land-use occur much slower (years) compared to transformations in travel behaviour (days, weeks, months). In this paper we explore several possibilities to fill in some of the gaps in our knowledge on the land-use/transport system. Understanding the two-way interaction between land-use and travel behaviour involves having (i) data on land-use patterns, socio-economic background of individuals and their attitudes, perceptions and preferences towards land-use and travel; and (ii) a methodology, dealing with potential multiple directions of causality. The first issue can be achieved by combining empirical, revealed and stated preference research. The second methodological question can be solved using structural equation modelling (SEM). This is a modelling technique which can handle a large number of endogenous and exogenous variables. Because of the multiple directions of causality that can be explored, SEM can help us to define the relationship between revealed preference data and stated preference data.
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 InfoPaper provided by European Regional Science Association in its series ERSA conference papers with number ersa05p601.
Date of creation: Aug 2005
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Welthandelsplatz 1, 1020 Vienna, Austria
Web page: http://www.ersa.org
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2006-02-05 (All new papers)
- NEP-DCM-2006-02-05 (Discrete Choice Models)
- NEP-GEO-2006-02-05 (Economic Geography)
- NEP-TUR-2006-02-05 (Tourism Economics)
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.:
- Tim Schwanen & Martin Dijst & Frans M Dieleman, 2002. "A microlevel analysis of residential context and travel time," Environment and Planning A, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 34(8), pages 1487-1507, August.
- Giuliano, Genevieve & Small, Kenneth A., 1993. "Is the Journey to Work Explained by Urban Structure?," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt2ss7x5b1, University of California Transportation Center.
- Mokhtarian, Patricia & Salomon, Ilan, 2001.
"How Derived is the Demand for Travel? Some Conceptual and Measurement Considerations,"
Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series
qt1z26n1r8, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
- Mokhtarian, Patricia L. & Salomon, Ilan, 2001. "How derived is the demand for travel? Some conceptual and measurement considerations," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 695-719, September.
- Mokhtarian, Patricia L & Salomon, Ilan, 2001. "How Derived is the Demand for Travel? Some Conceptual and Measurement Considerations," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt7cx951n5, University of California Transportation Center.
- Bruinsma, Frank R., 1997. "The impact of accessibility on the valuation of cities as location for firms," Serie Research Memoranda 0006, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
- Schwanen, Tim & Mokhtarian, Patricia L., 2003.
"The Extent and Determinants of Dissonance Between Actual and Preferred Residential Neighborhood Type,"
University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers
qt8728p24s, University of California Transportation Center.
- Tim Schwanen & Patricia L Mokhtarian, 2004. "The extent and determinants of dissonance between actual and preferred residential neighborhood type," Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 31(5), pages 759-784, September.
- E I Pas, 1984. "The effect of selected sociodemographic characteristics on daily travel-activity behavior," Environment and Planning A, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 16(5), pages 571-581, May.
- Brian A. Mikelbank, 2004. "Spatial analysis of the relationship between housing values and investments in transportation infrastructure," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 705-726, December.
- Kees Maat & Bert van Wee & Dominic Stead, 2005. "Land use and travel behaviour: expected effects from the perspective of utility theory and activity-based theories," Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 32(1), pages 33-46, January.
- Gordon, Peter & Kumar, Ajay & Richardson, Harry W., 1989. "The influence of metropolitan spatial structure on commuting time," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 138-151, September.
- Golob, Thomas F., 2003. "Structural equation modeling for travel behavior research," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 1-25, January.
- Michael Wegener & Franz Fuerst, 2004. "Land-Use Transport Interaction: State of the Art," Urban/Regional 0409005, EconWPA.
- Tim Schwanen, 2002. "Urban form and commuting behaviour: a cross-European perspective," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 93(3), pages 336-343, 08.
- Patricia L. Mokhtarian & Michael N. Bagley, 2002.
"The impact of residential neighborhood type on travel behavior: A structural equations modeling approach,"
The Annals of Regional Science,
Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 279-297.
- Bagley, Michael N & Mokhtarian, Patricia L, 2001. "The impact of residential neighborhood type on travel behavior: A structural equations modeling approach," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt12q634n2, University of California Transportation Center.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Gunther Maier).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.