IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/itsrrp/qt2gt23996.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Statewide Optimal Resource Allocation Tool Using Geographic Information Systems, Spatial Analysis, and Regression Methods

Author

Listed:
  • Goulias, Konstadinos G.
  • Golob, Thomas F.
  • Yoon, Seo Youn

Abstract

The overall objective of this project is to develop an optimal resource allocation tool for the entire state of California using Geographic Information Systems and widely available data sources. As this tool evolves it will be used to make investment decisions in transportation infrastructure while accounting for their spatial and social distribution of impacts. Tools of this type do not exist due to lack of suitable planning support tools, lack of efforts in assembling data and information from a variety of sources, and lack of coordination in assembling the data. Suitable planning support tools can be created with analytical experimentation to identify the best methods and the first steps are taken in this project. Assembly of widely available data is also demonstrated in this project. Coordination of fragmented jurisdictions remains an elusive task that is left outside the project. When this project begun we confronted some of these issues and embarked in a path of feasibility demonstration in the form of a pilot project that gave us very encouraging results. In spite of this pilot nature aiming at demonstration of technical feasibility, substantive conclusions and findings are also extracted from each analytical step. In this project we have two parallel analytical tracks that are a statewide macroanalysis (called the zonal based approach herein) and an individual and household based microanalysis (called the person based approach herein). In the statewide macroanalysis we study efficiency and equity in resource allocation. Resources are intended as infrastructure availability and access to activity participation offered by the combined effect of transportation infrastructure and land use measured by indicators of accessibility. Stochastic frontiers are used to study efficiency and a particular type of inequality measurement called the Theil fractal inequality index is used to study equity in the macroanalysis. The outcome of this analysis are maps identifying places in California that enjoy higher levels of service when compared to the entire state and places which succeeded in allocating resources in a relatively better way than others. In the individual microanalysis we use the accessibility indicators from the macronalysis and expand them by defining a new set of indicators at a second level of spatial (dis)aggregation. Then we use them as explanatory factors of travel behavior with focus on the use of different travel models (e.g., driving alone, use of public transportation and so forth). As expected infrastructure availability and accessibility to activity opportunities has a significant and substantive effect on the use of different modes. Many resource allocation decisions, then, will impact behavior, which in turn influences the optimality and equity conditions. This implies that decisions about where and when to allocate resources in public and private transportation needs to account for changes in behavior in a dynamic fashion, using scenarios of accessibility provision and assessing their impact by studying activity and travel behavior changes.

Suggested Citation

  • Goulias, Konstadinos G. & Golob, Thomas F. & Yoon, Seo Youn, 2008. "A Statewide Optimal Resource Allocation Tool Using Geographic Information Systems, Spatial Analysis, and Regression Methods," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt2gt23996, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdl:itsrrp:qt2gt23996
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/2gt23996.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Greene, William H., 1980. "Maximum likelihood estimation of econometric frontier functions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 27-56, May.
    2. Ajit K. Ghose, 2004. "Global inequality and international trade," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 28(2), pages 229-252, March.
    3. Konstantina Gkritza & Kumares Sinha & Samuel Labi & Fred Mannering, 2008. "Influence of highway construction projects on economic development: an empirical assessment," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 42(3), pages 545-563, September.
    4. Berechman, Joseph, 1994. "Urban and regional economic impacts of transportation investment: A critical assessment and proposed methodology," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 351-362, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. B. E. Bravo‐Ureta & L. Rieger, 1990. "Alternative Production Frontier Methodologies And Dairy Farm Efficiency," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 215-226, May.
    2. Mehdi Farsi & Aurelio Fetz & Massimo Filippini, 2007. "Benchmarking and Regulation in the Electricity Distribution Sector," CEPE Working paper series 07-54, CEPE Center for Energy Policy and Economics, ETH Zurich.
    3. Xavier Ramos, 2008. "Using Efficiency Analysis to Measure Individual Well-being with an Illustration for Catalonia," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Nanak Kakwani & Jacques Silber (ed.), Quantitative Approaches to Multidimensional Poverty Measurement, chapter 9, pages 155-175, Palgrave Macmillan.
    4. Joe Kerkvliet & William Nebesky & Carol Tremblay & Victor Tremblay, 1998. "Efficiency and Technological Change in the U.S. Brewing Industry," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 271-288, November.
    5. Julien Prat, 2010. "The rate of learning-by-doing: estimates from a search-matching model," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(6), pages 929-962.
    6. Shamsa Kanwal & Abdul Hameed Pitafi & Muhammad Yousaf Malik & Naseer Abbas Khan & Rao Muhammad Rashid, 2020. "Local Pakistani Citizens’ Benefits and Attitudes Toward China–Pakistan Economic Corridor Projects," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(3), pages 21582440209, July.
    7. Valeria Cosmo, 2013. "Ownership, Scale Economies and Efficiency in the Italian Water Sector," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 399-415, September.
    8. Martin, Sheila Ann, 1992. "The effectiveness of state technology incentives: evidence from the machine tool industry," ISU General Staff Papers 1992010108000011381, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    9. Bos, J.W.B. & Schmiedel, H., 2007. "Is there a single frontier in a single European banking market?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 2081-2102, July.
    10. Martín, Juan Carlos & Voltes-Dorta, Augusto, 2011. "The econometric estimation of airports' cost function," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 112-127, January.
    11. César Salazar & Roberto Cárdenas-Retamal & Marcela Jaime, 2023. "Environmental efficiency in the salmon industry—an exploratory analysis around the 2007 ISA virus outbreak and subsequent regulations in Chile," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(8), pages 8107-8135, August.
    12. Jorid Kalseth & Jørn Rattsø, 1998. "Spending and Overspending in Local Government Administration: A Minimum Requirement Approach Applied to Norway," Chapters, in: Jørn Rattsø (ed.), Fiscal Federalism and State–local Finance, chapter 19, pages 339-351, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Sickles, Robin C. & Song, Wonho & Zelenyuk, Valentin, 2018. "Econometric Analysis of Productivity: Theory and Implementation in R," Working Papers 18-008, Rice University, Department of Economics.
    14. Bravo-Ureta, Boris E. & Rieger, Laszlo & Quiroga, Ricardo E., 1990. "Fixed Effects and Stochastic Frontier Estimates of Firm-Level Technical Efficiency," 1990 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Vancouver, Canada 270867, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    15. Smith, H. Arlen & Taylor, C. Robert, 1998. "Finite Mixture Estimation Of Size Economies And Cost Frontiers In The Face Of Multiple Production Technologies," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 30(2), pages 1-10, December.
    16. Massimo Del Gatto & Adriana Di Liberto & Carmelo Petraglia, 2011. "Measuring Productivity," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(5), pages 952-1008, December.
    17. Gabriela Pérez Quesada, 2017. "Technical efficiency of dairy farms in Uruguay: a stochastic production frontier analysis," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 0517, Department of Economics - dECON.
    18. Reza Kiani Mavi & Denise Gengatharen & Neda Kiani Mavi & Richard Hughes & Alistair Campbell & Ross Yates, 2021. "Sustainability in Construction Projects: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-24, February.
    19. Parmeter, Christopher F., 2021. "Is it MOLS or COLS?," Efficiency Series Papers 2021/04, University of Oviedo, Department of Economics, Oviedo Efficiency Group (OEG).
    20. Elkin Castaño & Santiago Gallón, 2017. "A solution for multicollinearity in stochastic frontier production function models," Lecturas de Economía, Universidad de Antioquia, Departamento de Economía, issue 86, pages 9-23, Enero - J.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cdl:itsrrp:qt2gt23996. 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: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/itucbus.html .

    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.