IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cor/louvco/2016034.html

Scale effect in a LUTI model of Brussels: challenges for policy evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • JONES, Jonathan

    (Université catholique de Louvain, CORE, Belgium)

  • PEETERS, Dominique

    (Université catholique de Louvain, CORE, Belgium)

  • THOMAS, Isabelle

    (Université catholique de Louvain, CORE, Belgium)

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to assess the reliability of policy evaluation based on Land Use and Transport Interactions models, relative to the choice of the Basic Spatial Units. An UrbanSim (+ MATsim) model applied to Brussels (Belgium) is used as the case study. The evolution of the study area over ten years is forecasted for four levels of Basic Spatial Units and five scenarios (business-as-usual and four alternatives). Results show larger variations between Basic Spatial Units levels than across scenarios. These findings are valid for various sustainability indicators and for a simple cost-benefit analysis aiming at ranking the scenarios. The direction of the variations resulting from the implementation of the scenarios remains, however, the same for all Basic Spatial Units levels. Hence, the influence of the scale on policy evaluation based on Land Use and Transport Interactions models appears limited when it is only intended to compare scenarios, but it will have a crucial role when evaluations are based on absolute variations or threshold values.

Suggested Citation

  • JONES, Jonathan & PEETERS, Dominique & THOMAS, Isabelle, 2016. "Scale effect in a LUTI model of Brussels: challenges for policy evaluation," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2016034, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    • Handle: RePEc:cor:louvco:2016034
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://sites.uclouvain.be/core/publications/coredp/coredp2016.html
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eliasson, Jonas, 2009. "A cost-benefit analysis of the Stockholm congestion charging system," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 468-480, May.
    2. David Simmonds & Paul Waddell & Michael Wegener, 2013. "Equilibrium versus Dynamics in Urban Modelling," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 40(6), pages 1051-1070, December.
    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. Arnaud Adam & Jean-Charles Delvenne & Isabelle Thomas, 2018. "Detecting communities with the multi-scale Louvain method: robustness test on the metropolitan area of Brussels," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 363-386, October.
    2. Sipulova Marta Hustava & Yamu Claudia van der Laag & Östh John, 2025. "The Conundrum of the Modified Areal Unit Problem (MAUP) for Urban Decision-Making Across Scales: A Critical Reflection," Economic Themes, Sciendo, vol. 63(1), pages 23-43.
    3. Gelauff, George & Ossokina, Ioulia & Teulings, Coen, 2019. "Spatial and welfare effects of automated driving: Will cities grow, decline or both?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 277-294.

    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. Vonk Noordegraaf, Diana & Annema, Jan Anne & van Wee, Bert, 2014. "Policy implementation lessons from six road pricing cases," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 172-191.
    2. Odeck, James, 2019. "Estimating and predicting the operational costs of road tolls: An econometric assessment using panel data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 466-478.
    3. McArthur, David Philip & Thorsen, Inge & Ubøe, Jan, 2009. "Congested Interregional Infrastructure, Road Pricing and Regional Labour Markets," Discussion Papers 2009/3, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    4. Milenković, Marina & Glavić, Draženko & Maričić, Milica, 2019. "Determining factors affecting congestion pricing acceptability," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 58-74.
    5. De Borger, Bruno & Russo, Antonio, 2017. "The political economy of pricing car access to downtown commercial districts," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 76-93.
    6. Attard, Maria & Ison, Stephen G., 2010. "The implementation of road user charging and the lessons learnt: the case of Valletta, Malta," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 14-22.
    7. Hensher, David A. & Li, Zheng, 2013. "Referendum voting in road pricing reform: A review of the evidence," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 186-197.
    8. Maarten van 't Riet, 2011. "The link approach to measuring consumer surplus in transport networks," CPB Discussion Paper 199.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    9. Paul Besseling & Maarten van 't Riet, 2009. "Welfare analysis in transport networks," CPB Discussion Paper 130, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    10. Ben-Dor, Golan & Ogulenko, Aleksey & Klein, Ido & Ben-Elia, Eran & Benenson, Itzhak, 2024. "Simulation-based policy evaluation of monetary car driving disincentives in Jerusalem," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    11. Meng, Qiang & Liu, Zhiyuan & Wang, Shuaian, 2012. "Optimal distance tolls under congestion pricing and continuously distributed value of time," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 937-957.
    12. Coria, Jessica & Bonilla, Jorge & Grundström, Maria & Pleijel, Håkan, 2015. "Air pollution dynamics and the need for temporally differentiated road pricing," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 178-195.
    13. Zheng, Zuduo & Liu, Zhiyuan & Liu, Chuanli & Shiwakoti, Nirajan, 2014. "Understanding public response to a congestion charge: A random-effects ordered logit approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 117-134.
    14. Ossokina, Ioulia V. & Verweij, Gerard, 2015. "Urban traffic externalities: Quasi-experimental evidence from housing prices," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 1-13.
    15. Wilmsmeier, Gordon & Kreuzer, Fabian Maximilian, 2014. "Energy efficiency and mobility: A roadmap towards a greener economy in Latin America and the Caribbean," Documentos de Proyectos 37148, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    16. Börjesson , Maria & Kristoffersson, Ida, 2017. "The Swedish congestion charges: ten years on: - and effects of increasing charging levels," Working papers in Transport Economics 2017:2, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    17. Xin Li & John W. Shaw & Daizong Liu & Yun Yuan, 2019. "Acceptability of Beijing congestion charging from a business perspective," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 753-776, June.
    18. Dieplinger, Maria & Fürst, Elmar, 2014. "The acceptability of road pricing: Evidence from two studies in Vienna and four other European cities," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 10-18.
    19. Hyard, Alexandra, 2012. "Cost-benefit analysis according to Sen: An application in the evaluation of transport infrastructures in France," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 707-719.
    20. Welde, Morten, 2011. "Demand and operating cost forecasting accuracy for toll road projects," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(5), pages 765-771, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cor:louvco:2016034. 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: Alain GILLIS (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/coreebe.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.