Influence of the residential and work environment on car use in dual-earner households

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice

Volumn 43, Issue 7, 2009, Pages 654-664

  Maat, Kees ^a,b   Timmermans, Harry J P ^c  

^a DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

^b DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

^c EINDHOVEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Built environment; Car use; Dual earners; Household interdependencies; Work location

Indexed keywords

EMPLOYMENT; HOUSES; HUMAN ENGINEERING; LOCATION;

BUILT ENVIRONMENT; CAR USE; DUAL-EARNERS; HOUSEHOLD INTERDEPENDENCIES; PAPER ANALYSIS; RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT; WORK ENVIRONMENTS; YOUNG CHILDREN;

AUTOMOBILES;

CAR OWNERSHIP; CAR USE; COMMUTING; WORKING CONDITIONS; WORKPLACE;

EID: 67650713486     PISSN: 09658564     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2009.06.003     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Arentze T.A., and Timmermans H.J.P. A learning-based transportation oriented simulation system. Transportation Research Part B 38 7 (2004) 613-633
2. Badoe D.A. Modelling work-trip mode choice decisions in two-worker households. Transportation Planning and Technology 25 (2002) 49-73
3. Badoe D.A., and Miller E.J. Transportation-land-use interaction: empirical findings in North America and their implications for modeling. Transportation Research Part D 5 4 (2000) 235-263
4. Banister D., and Marshall S. Encouraging Travel Alternatives (2000), The Stationery Office, London
5. Banister D. Transport Planning. second ed. (1994), E&FN SPON, London
6. Batty M., Besussi E., Maat K., and Harts J.J. Representing multifunctional cities: density and diversity in space and time. Built Environment 30 4 (2004) 324-337
7. Bhat C.R., and Pendyala R.M. Modeling intra-household interactions and group decision-making. Transportation 32 (2005) 443-448
8. Borgers A.W.J., and Timmermans H.J.P. Transport facilities and residential choice behavior: a model of multi-person choice processes. Papers in Regional Science 72 (1993) 45-61
9. Cervero R. Mixed land-uses and commuting: evidence from the American housing survey. Transportation Research Part A 30 (1996) 261-377
10. Cervero R. Traditional neighborhoods and commuting in the San Francisco Bay area. Transportation 23 4 (1996) 373-394
11. Cervero R. Built environments and mode choice: toward a normative framework. Transportation Research Part D 7 4 (2002) 265-284
12. Cervero R., and Gorham R. Commuting in transit versus automobile neighborhoods. Journal of the American Planning Association 6 2 (1995) 210-225
13. Chatman D.G. How density and mixed uses at the workplace affect personal commercial travel and commute mode choice. Transportation Research Record 1831 (2003) 193-201
14. Chen C., Gong H., and Paaswell R. Role of the built environment on mode choice decisions: additional evidence on the impact of density. Transportation 35 (2008) 285-299
15. Dargay J., and Hanly M. Volatility of car ownership, commuting mode and time in the UK. Transportation Research Part A 41 10 (2007) 934-948
16. Dieleman F.M., Dijst M.J., and Spit T. Planning the compact city: the Randstad Holland experience. European Planning Studies 7 5 (1999) 605-621
17. Ewing R., and Cervero R. Travel and the built environment: synthesis. Transportation Research Record 1780 (2001) 87-112
18. Frank L.D., and Pivo G. Impacts of mixed use and density on utilization of three modes of travel: single-occupant vehicle, transit, and walking. Transportation Research Record 1466 (1995) 44-52
19. Geurs K.T., and Van Wee B. Ex-post evaluation of thirty years of compact urban development in the Netherlands. Urban Studies 43 (2006) 139-160
20. Giuliano G., and Dargay J. Car Ownership, travel and land use: a comparison of the US and Great Britain. Transportation Research Part A 40 (2005) 106-124
21. Golob T.F. A simultaneous model of household activity participation and trip chain generation. Transportation Research Part B 34 (2000) 355-376
22. Handy S. Smart growth and the transportation-land use connection: what does the research tell us?. International Regional Science Review 28 2 (2005) 146-167
23. Horner M.W. Spatial dimensions of urban commuting: a review of major issues and their implications for future geographic research. Professional Geographer 56 (2004) 2, 160-173
24. Kennisinstituut voor Mobiliteitsbeleid (KiM) (2007). Mobiliteitsbalans 2007 (Transport Statistics 2007; with English Summary). KiM, The Hague.
25. Pinjari A.R., Pendyala R.M., Bhat C.R., and Waddell P.A. Modeling residential sorting effects to understand the impact of the built environment on commute mode choice. Transportation 34 5 (2007) 557-573
26. Pisarski A.E. Commuting in America. Issues in Science and Technology 23 2 (2007) 76-80
27. Plaut P.O. Intra-household choices regarding commuting and housing. Transportation Research Part A 40 7 (2006) 561-571
28. Redmond L.P., and Mokhtarian P. The positive utility of the commute: modeling ideal commute time and relative desired commute amount. Transportation 28 (2001) 179-205
29. Roorda M.J., Carrasco J.A., and Miller E.J. An integrated model of vehicle transactions, activity scheduling and mode choice. Transportation Research Part B 43 2 (2009) 217-229
30. Rosenbloom, S. (2006) Understanding women's and men's travel patterns: the research challenge. In: Research on Women's Travel Issues: Report of a Conference. Conference Proceedings 35. Transportation Research Board.
31. Schwanen T., and Mokhtarian P.L. What affects commute mode choice: neighborhood physical structure or preferences toward neighborhoods?. Journal of Transport Geography 13 1 (2005) 83-99
32. Schwanen T., Dieleman F.M., and Dijst M. Travel behaviour in Dutch monocentric and policentric urban systems. Journal of Transport Geography 9 (2001) 173-186
33. Schwanen T., Dijst M., and Dieleman F.M. Policies for urban form and their impact on travel: the Netherlands experience. Urban Studies 41 (2004) 579-603
34. Scott Long J., and Freese J. Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata (2006), Stata Press, College Station
35. Sermons M.W., and Koppelman F.S. Representing the differences between female and male commute behavior in residential location models. Journal of Transport Geography 9 2 (2001) 101-110
36. Shiftan Y., and Barlach Y. Effect of employment site characteristics on commute mode choice. Transportation Research Record 1781 (2002) 19-25
37. Statistics Netherlands, 2002/2005/2007. Statline. Available from: .
38. Susilo Y.O., and Maat K. The influence of built environment to the trends in commuting journeys in the Netherlands. Transportation 34 5 (2007) 589-610
39. Timmermans H.J.P., and Zhang J. Modeling household activity travel behavior: examples of state of the art modeling approaches and research agenda. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 43 2 (2009) 187-190
40. Transportation Research Board (2001). Making Transit Work: Insight from Western Europe, Canada, and the United States. Special Report 257. National Research Council, Washington, DC.
41. Van de Coevering P., and Schwanen T. Re-evaluating the impact of urban form on travel patterns in Europe and North-America. Transport Policy 13 3 (2006) 229-239
42. Van Ham M. Job access at labour market entry and occupational achievement in the life course. International Journal of Population Geography 9 (2003) 387-398
43. Van Ommeren J. Job and residential search behaviour of two-earner households. Papers in Regional Science 79 4 (2000) 375-391
44. Van Ommeren J., Vlist van der A., and Nijkamp P. Transport-related fringe benefits: implications for moving and the journey to work. Journal of Regional Science 46 3 (2006) 493-506
45. Zhang J., Timmermans H.J.P., and Borgers A. A model of household task allocation and time use. Transportation Research Part B 39 (2004) 81-95