Some Tests of Alternative Accessibility Measures: A Population Density Approach
This paper presents nine alternative accessibility measures and evaluates their usefulness in explaining population distribution. It first evaluates these measures by using the criterion of maximum explanatory power in standard regression analysis. It then performs non-nested tests on these nine measures. The paper concludes that gravity-type accessibility measures generally perform better than other measures. The most commonly used measure, size of opportunity weighted by the reciprocal of distance, is not statistically surpassed by any other measures. Cumulative opportunity within the average commuting distance and the distance to the central business district are the poorest accessibility measures.
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.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:uwp:landec:v:72:y:1996:i:4:p:474-482. 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: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.