Structural equations model of land use patterns, location choice, and travel behavior: Seattle, Washington, compared with Lisbon, Portugal

Transportation Research Record

Volumn , Issue 2135, 2009, Pages 106-113

  De Abreu E Silva, João ^a   Goulias, Konstadinos G ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LISBON   (Portugal)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ECONOMICS; URBAN TRANSPORTATION;

CHOICE BEHAVIORS; COMPREHENSIVE MODELING; LAND USE PATTERN; LOCATION CHOICE; MODELLING FRAMEWORK; PORTUGAL; SEATTLE; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELS; TRAVEL BEHAVIOUR; WASHINGTON;

LAND USE;

EID: 76149103870     PISSN: 03611981     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3141/2135-13     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. de Abreu e Silva, J., T. F. Golob, and K. G. Goulias. The Effects of Land Use Characteristics on Residence and Employment Location and Travel Behavior of Urban Adult Workers. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No.1977, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2006, pp. 121-131.
2. Newman, P., and J. Kenwortthy. Cities and Automobile Dependence, an International Sourcebook. Gower Technical, Aldershot, United Kingdom, 1989.
3. Giuliano, G. New Directions for Understanding Transportation and Land Use. Environment and Planning A, Vol.21, 1989, pp. 145-159.
4. Giuliano, G. The Weakening Transportation-Land Use Connection. Access, Vol.6, 1995, pp. 3-11.
5. Newman, P., J. Kenworthy, and P. Vintilar. Can We Overcome Automobile Dependence? Physical Planning in an Age of Urban Cynicism. Cities, Vol.12, No.1, 1995, pp. 53-65.
6. Neuman, M. The Compact City Fallacy. Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol.25, 2005, pp. 11-25.
7. Gomez-Ibañez, J. A. A Global View of Automobile Dependence. Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol.57, No.3, 1991, pp. 376-379.
8. Gordon, P., and H. W. Richardson. Are Compact Cities a Desirable Planning Goal? In Environment Land Use and Urban Policy (D. Banister, K. Button, and P. Nijkamp, eds.), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, United Kingdom, 1999.
9. Boarnet, M. G., and R. Crane. The Influence of Land Use on Travel Behavior: Specification and Estimation Strategies. Transport Research Part A, Vol.35, No.9, 2001, pp. 823-845.
10. Crane, R. The Influence of Urban Form on Travel: An Interpretative Review. Journal of Planning Literature, Vol.15, No.1, 2000, pp. 3-23.
11. Handy, S. L. Methodologies for Exploring the Link Between Urban Form and Travel Behavior. Transportation Research Part D, Vol.1, No.2, 1996, pp. 151-165.
12. Cervero, R. Built Environments and Mode Choice: Toward a Normative Framework. Transportation Research Part D, Vol.7, No.4, 2002, pp. 265-284.
13. Van Wee, B. Land Use and Transport: Research and Policy Challenges. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol.10, 2002, pp. 259-271.
14. Miller, E. J. Land Use Transportation Modeling. In Transportation Systems Planning: Methods and Applications (K. G. Goulias, ed.), CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla., 2003.
15. Handy, S. L. Critical Assessment of the Literature on the Relationship Among Transportation, Land Use and Physical Activity. Transportation Research Board and the Institute of Medicine Committee on Physical Activity, Health, Transportation and Land Use, 2004, trb.org. Accessed Nov. 2004.
16. Cervero, R. The Built Environment and Travel: Evidence from the United States. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research, Vol.3, No.2, 2003, pp. 119-137.
17. Bagley, M. N., and P. Mokhtarian. The Impact of Residential Neighborhood Type on Travel Behavior: A Structural Equations Modeling Approach. The Annals of Regional Science, Vol.36, 2002, pp. 279-297.
18. Krizek, K. J. Planning, Household Travel, and Household Lifestyles. In Transportation Systems Planning, Methods and Applications, Kostadinos G. Goulias (ed), CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla., 2003.
19. Stead, D., and S. Marshall. The Relationships Between Urban Form and Travel Patterns. An International Review and Evaluation. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research, Vol.1, No.2, 2001, pp. 113-141.
20. Golob, T. F. Structural Equation Modeling for Travel Behavior Research. Transportation Research Part B, Vol.37, No.1, 2003, pp. 1-25.
21. Golob, T. F. Structural Equation Modeling. In Transportation Systems Planning. Methods and Applications (K. G. Goulias, ed.), CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla., 2003.
22. Goulias, K. G., N. Kilgren, and T. Kim. A Decade of Longitudinal Travel Behavior Observation in the Puget Sound Region: Sample Composition, Summary Statistics, and a Selection of First Order Findings. Presented at 10th International Conference on Travel Behavior Research: Moving Through Nets, The Physical and Social Dimensions of Travel, Lucerne, France, 2003.
23. Goulias, K. G., L. Blain, N. Kilgren, T. Michalowski, and E. Murakami. Catching the Next Big Wave: Observed Behavioral Dynamics of Baby Boomers Force Rethinking of Regional Travel Demand Models? Final report. Federal Highway Administration and the Puget Sound Regional Council, Santa Barbara, Calif., 2006.
24. Goulias, K. G., L. Blain, N. Kilgren, T. Michalowski, and E. Murakami. Catching the Next Big Wave: Do Observed Behavioral Dynamics of Baby Boomers Force Rethinking of Regional Travel Demand Models? In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No.2014, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2007, pp. 67-75.
25. Domencich, T. A., and D. McFadden. Urban Travel Demand: A Behavioral Analysis. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1975.
26. Kockelman, K. M. Travel Behavior as a Function of Accessibility, Land Use Mixing, and Land Use Balance: Evidence from the San Francisco Bay Area. Master's thesis. University of California, Berkeley, 1996. www.ce.utexas.edu. Accessed April 2005.
27. Kaplan, D. Structural Equation Modeling: Foundations and Extensions. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, Calif., 2000.
28. Muthén, B. A Structural Probit Model with Latent Variables. Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol.74, No.368, 1979, pp. 807-811.
29. Muthén, B. A General Structural Equation Model with Dichotomous, Ordered Categorical, and Continuous Latent Variable Indicators. Psychometrika, Vol.49, No.1, 1984, pp. 115-132.
30. Golob, T. F., and A. C. Regan. Trucking Industry Adoption of Information Technology: A Multivariate Discrete Choice Model. Transportation Research Part C, Vol.10, No.3, 2002, pp. 205-228.
31. Jöreskog, K., and D. Sörbom. LISREL 8: User's Reference Guide. Scientific Software International, Lincolnwood, Ill., 2001.
32. Jöreskog, K., and D. Sörbom. LISREL 8: Structural Equation Modeling with the SIMPLIS Command Language. Scientific Software International, Lincolnwood, Ill., 1993.
33. Schermelleh-Engel, K., H. Moosbruggrer, and H. Müller. Evaluating the Fit of Structural Equation Models: Tests of Significance and Descriptive Goodness-of-Fit Measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, Vol.8, No.2, 2003, pp. 1-22. www.dgps.de/fachgruppen/methoden/ mpr-online/. Accessed Nov. 2008.