IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ndjtrf/262653.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Welfare Measures to Reflect Home Location Options When Transportation Systems Are Modified

Author

Listed:
  • Ma, Shuhong
  • Kockelman, Kara M.

Abstract

Transportation system improvements do not provide simply travel time savings, for a fixed trip table; they affect trip destinations, modes, times of day, and, ultimately, home and business location choices. This paper examines the welfare (or willingness-to-pay) impacts of system changes by bringing residential location choice into a three-layer nested logit model to more holistically anticipate the regional welfare impacts of various system shifts using logsum differences (which quantify changes in consumer surplus). Here, home value is a function of home price, size, and accessibility; and accessibility is a function of travel times and costs, vis-?-vis all mode and destination options. The model is applied to a sample of 60 Austin, Texas, zones to estimate home buyers? welfare impacts across various scenarios, with different transit fares, automobile operating costs, travel times, and home prices. Results suggest that new locators? choice probabilities for rural and suburban zones are more sensitive to changing regional access, while urban and central business zone choice probabilities are more impacted by home price shifts. Automobile costs play a more important role in residential location choices in these simulations than those of transit, as expected in a typical U.S. setting (where automobile travel dominates). When generalized costs of automobile travel are simulated to rise 20%, 40%, and 60% (throughout the region), estimated welfare impacts (using normalized differences in logit logsum measures) for the typical new home buying household (with $70,000 in annual income and 2.4 household members) are estimated to be quite negative, at -$56,000, -$99,000, and -$132,000, respectively. In contrast, when auto?s generalized costs fall everywhere (by 20%, 40%, and then 60%), welfare impacts are very positive (+$74,000, $172,500, and $320,000, respectively). Such findings are meaningful for policymakers, planners, and others when anticipating the economic impacts of evolving transportation systems, in the face of new investments, rising travel demands, distance-based tolls, self-driving vehicles, and other changes.

Suggested Citation

  • Ma, Shuhong & Kockelman, Kara M., 2016. "Welfare Measures to Reflect Home Location Options When Transportation Systems Are Modified," Journal of the Transportation Research Forum, Transportation Research Forum, vol. 55(1), April.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ndjtrf:262653
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.262653
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/262653/files/2016v55n1_05_HomeLocationOptions.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/262653/files/2016v55n1_05_HomeLocationOptions.pdf?subformat=pdfa
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.262653?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brian Lee & Paul Waddell, 2010. "Residential mobility and location choice: a nested logit model with sampling of alternatives," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 587-601, July.
    2. Herbert Mohring, 1961. "Land Values and the Measurement of Highway Benefits," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 69, pages 236-236.
    3. Yong Tu & Judy Goldfinch, 1996. "A Two-stage Housing Choice Forecasting Model," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 33(3), pages 517-537, April.
    4. Jos van Ommeren & Piet Rietveld & Peter Nijkamp & Jos van Ommeren & Piet Rietveld & Peter Nijkamp, 2004. "Job Moving, Residential Moving, and Commuting: A Search Perspective," Chapters, in: Location, Travel and Information Technology, chapter 11, pages 223-246, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Kockelman, Kara M. & Lemp, Jason D., 2011. "Anticipating new-highway impacts: Opportunities for welfare analysis and credit-based congestion pricing," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 825-838, October.
    6. Pinto, Santiago M., 2002. "Residential Choice, Mobility, and the Labor Market," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 469-496, May.
    7. Brian H Y Lee & Paul Waddell & Liming Wang & Ram M Pendyala, 2010. "Reexamining the Influence of Work and Nonwork Accessibility on Residential Location Choices with a Microanalytic Framework," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 42(4), pages 913-930, April.
    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. Hasnine, Md Sami & Habib, Khandker Nurul, 2020. "Transportation demand management (TDM) and social justice: A case study of differential impacts of TDM strategies on various income groups," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 1-10.

    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. Maite Blázquez & Carlos Llano & Julian Moral, 2010. "Commuting Times: Is There Any Penalty for Immigrants?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 47(8), pages 1663-1686, July.
    2. Marc Brechot & Stephan Nüesch & Egon Franck, 2017. "Does sports activity improve health? Representative evidence using local density of sports facilities as an instrument," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(48), pages 4871-4884, October.
    3. Fatmi, Mahmudur Rahman & Chowdhury, Subeh & Habib, Muhammad Ahsanul, 2017. "Life history-oriented residential location choice model: A stress-based two-tier panel modeling approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 293-307.
    4. Jia Guo & Tao Feng & Harry J. P. Timmermans, 2020. "Modeling co-dependent choice of workplace, residence and commuting mode using an error component mixed logit model," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 911-933, April.
    5. Kamruzzaman, Md. & Baker, Douglas & Washington, Simon & Turrell, Gavin, 2013. "Residential dissonance and mode choice," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 12-28.
    6. Acocella Nicola & Di Bartolomeo Giovanni, 2013. "Population location, commuting and local public goods: A political economy approach," wp.comunite 0105, Department of Communication, University of Teramo.
    7. Verhetsel, Ann & Vanelslander, Thierry, 2010. "What location policy can bring to sustainable commuting: an empirical study in Brussels and Flanders, Belgium," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 691-701.
    8. Lahr, Michael L. & Gibbs, Robert M., 2002. "Mobility of Section 8 families in Alameda County," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 187-213, September.
    9. Peter Bäckström & Erika Sandow & Olle Westerlund, 2016. "Commuting and timing of retirement," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 56(1), pages 125-152, January.
    10. Elio H Londero, 2004. "Measuring Benefits, Tracing Distributional Effects, and Affecting Distributional Outcomes," Public Economics 0407011, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Frederik Priem & Philip Stessens & Frank Canters, 2020. "Microsimulation of Residential Activity for Alternative Urban Development Scenarios: A Case Study on Brussels and Flemish Brabant," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-28, March.
    12. Philippe Gerber & Sébastien Lord & Kevin Manaugh & Veronique Van Acker & Samuel Carpentier-Postel, 2021. "Sustainability Issues of Micro and Macro-Scale Changes in Daily and Residential Mobility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-6, April.
    13. Patrick Schirmer & Christof Zöllig & Kirill Müller & Balz Bodenmann & Kay Axhausen, 2011. "The Zurich case study of UrbanSim," ERSA conference papers ersa11p562, European Regional Science Association.
    14. Ho, Chinh Q. & Hensher, David A. & Ellison, Richard, 2017. "Endogenous treatment of residential location choices in transport and land use models: Introducing the MetroScan framework," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 120-131.
    15. Clark, William A. V. & Huang, Youqin & Withers, Suzanne, 2003. "Does commuting distance matter?: Commuting tolerance and residential change," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 199-221, March.
    16. Cheng Keat Tang, 2016. "Traffic Externalities and Housing Prices: Evidence from the London Congestion Charge," SERC Discussion Papers 0205, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    17. Maria Börjesson & Jonas Eliasson, 2019. "Should values of time be differentiated?," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(3), pages 357-375, May.
    18. Ignacio A. Inoa & Nathalie Picard & Andr� de Palma, 2015. "Effect of an Accessibility Measure in a Model for Choice of Residential Location, Workplace, and Type of Employment," Mathematical Population Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 4-36, March.
    19. Kajosaari, Anna & Hasanzadeh, Kamyar & Kyttä, Marketta, 2019. "Residential dissonance and walking for transport," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 134-144.
    20. Gilles Duranton & Matthew A. Turner, 2011. "The Fundamental Law of Road Congestion: Evidence from US Cities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(6), pages 2616-2652, October.

    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:ags:ndjtrf:262653. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.trforum.org/journal/ .

    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.