On the relationship between travel time and travel distance of commuters Reported versus network travel data in the Netherlands
This paper gives a detailed empirical analysis of the relationships between different indicators of costs of commuting trips by car: difference as the crow flies, shortest travel time according to route planner, corresponding travel distance, and reported travel time. Reported travel times are usually rounded in multiples of five minutes. This calls for special statistical techniques. Ignoring the phenomenon of rounding leads to biased estimation results for shorter distances. Rather surprisingly, the distance as the crow flies and the network distance appear to be slightly better proxies of the reported travel time compared with the shortest network travel time as indicated by the route planner. We conclude that where actual driving times are missing in commuting research the other three indicators mentioned may be used as proxies, but that the following problems may emerge: actual travel times may be considerably higher than network times generated by route planners, and the average speed of trips increases considerably with distance, implying an overestimate of travel time for long distance commuters. The only personal feature that contributes significantly to variations in reported travel times is gender: women appear to drive at lower average speeds according to our data. As indicated in the paper this may be explained by the differences in the car types of male and female drivers (females drive older and smaller cars) as well as higher numbers of stops/trip chaining among women. A concise analysis is carried out for carpoolers. Car-pooling leads to an increase in travel time of some 17% compared with solo drivers covering the same distance. In the case of car poolers, the above mentioned measures appear to be very poor proxies for the actual commuting times.
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): 33 (1999)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
|Note:||Received: November 1996/Accepted: January 1998|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.springer.com|
|Order Information:||Web: http://link.springer.com/journal/168|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:anresc:v:33:y:1999:i:3:p:269-287. 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: (Sonal Shukla)or (Rebekah McClure)
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.