Commuting trade-offs and distance reduction in two-worker households
Two-worker households have received a great deal of attention in the academic literature pertaining to transportation and land use planning. Two-worker households are likely to play an increasingly important role in determining future transportation demand but their expected impact has been subject to debate. This research uses a novel approach to quantify the degree to which partner commute distance affects individual commute distance. It quantifies the degree to which partners adjust their behavior to reduce total commute distance. It also provides empirical evidence that two-worker households do indeed adjust their residence workplace configuration to reduce commute distance. It does so through the use of an adaptation of common approaches to analyzing commute distance (modeling total as well as individual commute distances) with innovative variables inspired by the literature on household location and tenure. Findings from this study reconfirm the empirical research suggesting that members of two-worker households travel the same or less than one-worker households. They also confirm that partner commute distance has a positive impact on individual commute distance, suggesting partner commute distance is complementary. At the same time, it is shown that this does not imply that partner’s do not trade-off commute distance, rather two-worker households apply strategies to decrease their total commuting distance. This research could help policy makers in better understanding the commuting patterns of two-worker households to help in adapting land use and transportation policies that can address the needs of this growing population group.
If 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 51 (2013)
Issue (Month): C ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Madden, Janice Fanning, 1980. "Urban Land Use and the Growth in Two-Earner Households," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(2), pages 191-197, May.
- Dora L. Costa & Matthew E. Kahn, 2000.
"Power Couples: Changes in the Locational Choice of the College Educated, 1940–1990,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
Oxford University Press, vol. 115(4), pages 1287-1315.
- Dora L. Costa & Matthew E. Kahn, 1999. "Power Couples: Changes in the Locational Choice of the College Educated, 1940-1990," NBER Working Papers 7109, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Kobe Boussauw & Veronique Van Acker & Frank Witlox, 2012. "Excess Travel In Non‐Professional Trips: Why Look For It Miles Away?," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 103(1), pages 20-38, February.
- White, M.J., 1988. "Urban Commuting Journeys Are Not Wasteful," Papers 88-10, Michigan - Center for Research on Economic & Social Theory.
- Hamilton, Bruce W, 1982. "Wasteful Commuting," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(5), pages 1035-1051, October.
- David Levinson, 1998. "Accessibility and the Journey to Work," Working Papers 199802, University of Minnesota: Nexus Research Group.
- A. E. Green, 1997. "A Question of Compromise? Case Study Evidence on the Location and Mobility Strategies of Dual Career Households," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(7), pages 641-657.
- Levinson, David & El-Geneidy, Ahmed, 2009.
"The minimum circuity frontier and the journey to work,"
Regional Science and Urban Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 732-738, November.
- David Levinson & Ahmed El-Geneidy, 2007. "The Minimum Circuity Frontier and the Journey to Work," Working Papers 200905, University of Minnesota: Nexus Research Group.
- Genevieve Giuliano & Kenneth A. Small, 1993. "Is the Journey to Work Explained by Urban Structure?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 30(9), pages 1485-1500, November.
- 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.
- Plaut, Pnina O., 2006. "The intra-household choices regarding commuting and housing," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(7), pages 561-571, August.
- Jos van Ommeren, 2000. "Job and residential search behaviour of two-earner households," Papers in Regional Science, Springer;Regional Science Association International, vol. 79(4), pages 375-391.
- White, Michelle J, 1988. "Urban Commuting Journeys Are Not "Wasteful."," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(5), pages 1097-1110, October.
- Mette Deding & Trine Filges & Jos Van Ommeren, 2009. "Spatial Mobility And Commuting: The Case Of Two-Earner Households," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1), pages 113-147.
- White, Michelle J, 1986. "Sex Differences in Urban Commuting Patterns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(2), pages 368-372, May.
- 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. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:51:y:2013:i:c:p:12-28. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.