What location policy can bring to sustainable commuting: An empirical study in Brussels and Flanders, Belgium

Journal of Transport Geography

Volumn 18, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 691-701

  Verhetsel, Ann ^a   Vanelslander, Thierry ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ANTWERP   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Belgium; Census; Commuting; Location policy; Mobility policy; Spatial planning

Indexed keywords

CLUSTER ANALYSIS; COMMUTING; MOBILITY; PUBLIC TRANSPORT; SPATIAL PLANNING; SUSTAINABILITY; TRANSPORTATION POLICY;

BELGIUM; BRUSSELS [BELGIUM]; FLANDERS;

EID: 77955143146     PISSN: 09666923     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2009.11.003     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Badoe D., Miller E. Transportation-land use interaction: empirical findings in North America, and their implications for modelling. Transportation Research Part D 2000, 5:235-263.
2. Bagley M., Mokhtarian P. The impact of residential neighbourhood type on travel behaviour: a structural equations modelling approach. Annals of Regional Science 2002, 36:279-297.
3. Ben-Akiva M., Lerman S. Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand 1985, MIT Press, Cambridge (Mass), London.
4. Bhat C., Zhao H. The spatial analysis of activity stop generation. Transportation Research Part B 2002, 36:557-575.
5. Cabus P., Vanhaverbeke W. Strategisch Plan Ruimtelijke Economie 2004, Academia Press, Gent.
6. Dieleman F., Dijst M., Spit T. Planning the compact city: the Randstad Holland experience. European Planning Studies 1999, 7(5):605-621.
7. Fujita M. Urban Economic Theory 1989, Cambridge University Press.
8. Ghebreegziabiher, D., Pels, E., Rietveld, P., 2006. The Impact of Rail Transport on Real Estate Prices: An Empirical Analysis of the Dutch Housing Markets. Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper, TI 2006-031/3.
9. Hanssen J. Transportation impacts of office relocation. Journal of Transport Geography 1995, 3:247-256.
10. Hensher D., Button K., Haynes K., Stopher P. Handbook of Transport Geography and Spatial Systems 2000, Pergamom, Amsterdam.
11. Hess, P., 2006. Changes in employee travel and activity associated with office relocations from urban to suburban settings. Annual Meeting of the Association of American Geographers, Chicago.
12. Hwang, K., Giuliano, G. 1990. The Determinants of Ridesharing: Literature Review. Working Paper, UCTC No. 38.
13. Levinson D. Density and dispersion: the co-development of land use and rail in London. Journal of Economic Geography 2008, 8:55-77.
14. Lyons G., Chatterjee K. A Human perspective on the daily commute: costs, benefits and trade-offs. Transport Reviews 2008, 28(2):181-198.
15. Ma K., Banister D. Excess commuting: a critical review. Transport reviews 2006, 26(6):749-767.
16. McNally M. The four-step model. Handbook of Transport Geography and Spatial Systems 2000, 35-53. Pergamom, Amsterdam. D. Hensher, K. Button, K. Haynes, P. Stopher (Eds.).
17. McNally M. The activity-based approach. Handbook of Transport Modelling 2000, 53-69. Pergamom, Amsterdam. D. Hensher, K. Button (Eds.).
18. Ministerie van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap, 1997. Ruimtelijk Structuurplan Vlaandereren, Brussel.
19. Ministerie van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap, 2001. Naar een Duurzame Mobiliteit in Vlaanderen, Ontwerp Mobiliteisplan Vlaanderen, Brussel.
20. Mokhtarian P., Salomon I., Redmond L. Understanding the demand for travel: it's not purely 'derived'. Innovation 2001, 14:355-380.
21. Naess P. Residential location affects travel behaviour - but how and why? The case of Copenhagen metropolitan area. Progress in Planning 2005, 63:167-257.
22. Roorda, M., Saneinejad, S., Miller, E., 2007. Analysis of routine weekly activity/travel patterns. Paper Submitted to the 11th World Conference on Transport Research, June 24-29, San Francisco.
23. Schwanen T., Dieleman F., Dijst M. The impact of metropolitan structure on commute behavior in The Netherlands: a multilevel approach. Growth and Change 2004, 35(3):304-333.
24. Shuttleworth I., Lloyd D. Analysing average travel-to-work distances in Northern Ireland using 1991 census of population: the effects of locality, social composition, and religion. Regional Studies 2005, 39(7):909-921.
25. Timmermans H., Golledge R. Applications of behavioural research on spatial problems II: preference and choice. Progress in Human Geography 1990, 14(3):311-354.
26. Thorpe N., Hills P., Jaensirisak S. Public attitudes to TDM measures: a comparative study. Transport Policy 2000, 7:243-257.
27. Vandenbulcke G., Steenberghen T., Thomas I. Mapping accessibility in Belgium: a tool for land-use and transport planning?. Journal of Transport Geography 2009, 17:39-53.
28. Vandenbulcke G., Thomas I., de Geus B., Degraeuwe B., Torfs R., Meeusen R., Int Panis L. Mapping bicycle use and the risk of accidents for commuters who cycle to work in Belgium. Transport Policy 2009, 16:77-87.
29. Van Ommeren J., Rieteld P., Nijkamp P. Job moving, residential moving, and commuting: a search perspective. Journal of Urban Economics 1999, 46:230-253.
30. van Wee B., van der Hoorn T. Employment location as an instrument of transport policy in The Netherlands. Fundamentals, instruments and effectiveness. Transport Policy 1996, 3(3):81-89.
31. van Wee B. Land use and transport: research and policy changes. Journal of Transport Geography 2002, 10:259-271.
32. Verhetsel A. The impact of planning and infrastructure measures on rush hour congestion in Antwerp, Belgium. Journal of Transport Geography 2001, 9(2):111-123.
33. Verroen, E., Martens, M. and Lange, M., 2000. Research Agenda on 'Integration of Transport and Land Use Planning': The Transland Project. TBO-Report 2000-05, Delft, Department of Transport.
34. Ward J. Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. Journal of American Statistical Association 1963, 58(301):236-244.
35. Wegener M. Overview of land use transport models. Handbook of Transport Geography and Spatial Systems 2004, 129-267. Pergamom, Amsterdam. D. Hensher, K. Button, K. Haynes, P. Stopher (Eds.).