Factors generating boardings at Metro stations in the Seoul metropolitan area

Cities

Volumn 27, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 358-368

  Sohn, Keemin ^a   Shim, Hyunjin ^b  

^a Chung Ang University   (South Korea)

^b Metropolitan Planning Research Group   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Built environment; Centrality; Metro boardings; Multiple regression analysis; Structural equation model (SEM)

Indexed keywords

FACTOR ANALYSIS; METRO SYSTEM; METROPOLITAN AREA; MULTIPLE REGRESSION; NUMERICAL MODEL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; TRAVEL DEMAND;

SEOUL [SEOUL (ADS)]; SEOUL [SOUTH KOREA]; SOUTH KOREA;

EID: 77955516342     PISSN: 02642751     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2010.05.001     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. ALGOGA (2009) http://www.algoga.org/.
2. Anthonisse, JM (1971) The Rush in a Directed Graph. Technical Report BN 9/71, Stichting Mathematisch Centrum, Armsterdam.
3. Bagley M.N., Moktarian P.L. The impact of residential neighborhood type on travel behavior: a structural equations modeling approach. The Annuls of Regional Science 2002, 36:279-297.
4. Bentler P.M., Dudgeon P. Covariance structure analysis: statistical practice, theory, and directions. Annual Review of Psychology 1996, 47:563-592.
5. Bhat C.R., Guo J.Y. A comprehensive analysis of built environment characteristics on household residential choice and auto ownership levels. Transportation Research Part B 2007, 41:506-526.
6. Boyle D.K. Fixed-route transit ridership forecasting and service planning methods. TCRP synthesis 66. Transportation Research Board 2006.
7. Brandes U. A faster algorithm for betweenness centrality. Journal of Mathematical Sociology 2001, 25(2):163-177.
8. Canepa B. Bursting the bubble: determining the transit-oriented development's walkable limits. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2007, (1992):28-34.
9. Cao X., Moktarian P.L., Handi S.L. The relationship between the built environment and non-work travel: a case study of Northern California. Transportation Research Part A 2009, 43:548-559.
10. Cervero R. Alternative approaches to modeling the travel-demand impacts of smart growth. Journal of the American Planning Association 2006, 72(3):285-295.
11. Cervero R., Kockelman K. Travel demand and the 3Ds: density, diversity, and design. Transportation Research Part D 1997, 2(3):199-219.
12. Cervero, R and Murakami, J (2008) Rail+Property Development: A Model of Sustainable Transit Finance and Urbanism. Working Paper, US Berkely Center for Future Urban Transport, UCB-ITS-VWP-2008-5, pp. 82-88.
13. Chu X. Ridership Models at the Stop Level 2004, National Center for Transit Research, Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida.
14. Gonçalves J.A.M., Portugal L.S., Nassi C.D. Centrality indicators as an instrument to evaluate the integration of urban equipment in the area of influence of a rail corridor. Transportation Research Part A 2009, 43:13-25.
15. Estupiñán N., Rodríguez D.A. The relationship between urban form and station boardings for Bogotá's BRT. Transportation Research Part A 2008, 42(2):296-306.
16. Forsyth A., Oakes J.M., Schmitz K.H. The built environment, walking, and physical activity: is the environment more important to some people than others?. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 2009, 14(1):42-49.
17. Frank L., Pivo G. Impacts of mixed use and diversity on utilization of three modes of travel: single-occupant vehicle, transit, and walking. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1994, (1466):44-52.
18. Freeman L.C. Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks 1979, 1:215-239.
19. Hansen W. How accessibility shape land use. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 1959, 25(2):73-76.
20. Jöreskog, KG and Sörbom, D (1984) LISREL VI User's Guide. Scientific Software, Mooresville, IN.
21. Jöreskog K.G., Sörbom D. Structural Equation Modelling with the SIMPLIS Command Language, Chicago 1993, Scientific Sofware International Inc.
22. Khattak A.J., Rodriguez D. Travel behavior in neo-traditional neighborhood developments: a case study in USA. Transportation Research Part A 2005, 39(6):481-500.
23. Kim S., Ulfarsson G.F., Hennessy J.T. Analysis of light rail rider travel behavior: impacts of individual, built environment, and crime characteristics on transit access. Transportation Research Part A 2007, 41:511-522.
24. Kitamura R., Moktarian P.L., Laidet L. A micro analysis of land use and travel in five neighborhoods in San Francisco Bay area. Transportation 1997, 24(2):125-158.
25. Kimpel T.J., Strathman J.G., Dueker K.J. Time Point-level Analysis and Passenger Demand and Transit Service Reliability 2000, Center for Urban Studies, College of Urban and Public Affairs, Portland State University, Portland, Oregon.
26. Kline R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling 2005, Guilford Press, New York. second ed.
27. Koenig J.G. Indicators of urban accessibility: Theory and application. Transportation 1980, 9:145-172.
28. Kuby M., Barranda A., Upchurch C. Factors influencing light-rail station boardings in the United States. Transportation Research Part A 2004, 38(3):223-247.
29. Latora V., Marchiori M. Efficient behavior of small-world networks. Physical Review Letter 2001, 87:198701.
30. Majumdar A., Orcheing W.Y. Factors affecting air traffic controller workload: multivariate analysis based on simulation modeling of controller workload. Transportation Research Record 2004, 1788:58-69.
31. Master plan of Seoul Metro (2007) Seoul Metropolitan Government.
32. Ming Z. Chinese edition of transit-oriented development. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2007, (2038):120-127.
33. Murray A.T., Davis R., Stimson R.J., Ferreira L. Public transportation access. Transportation Research Part D 1998, 3(5):319-328.
34. O'Sullivan S., Morral J. Walking distances to and from light-rail transit stations. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1996, (1538):19-26.
35. Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade and Douglas, Inc. Transit and Urban Form 1996, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
36. Peng Z., Dueker K.J., Strathman J., Hopper J. A simultaneous route-level transit patronage model: demand, supply, and inter-route relationship. Transportation 1997, 24:159-181.
37. Schlossberg M., Brown N. Comparing transit-oriented development sites by walkability indicators. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2004, (1887):34-42.
38. Sohn K., Yun J. Separation of car-dependent commuters from normal-choice riders in mode-choice analysis. Transportation 2009, 36:423-436.
39. Spillar, RJ and Rutherford, GS (1998) The Effects of Population Density and Income on Per Capita Transit Ridership in Western American Cities. Institute of Transportation Engineers' Compendium of Technical Papers: 60th Annual Meeting, August 5-8, pp. 327-331.
40. Steg L. Car use: lust and must. Instrumental, symbolic and affective motives for car use. Transportation Research Part A 2005, 39:147-162.
41. Taylor, BD and Fink, CNY (2007) The Factors Influencing Transit Ridership: A Review and Analysis of the Ridership Literature. Working Paper of UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies.
42. Thompson G.L. Achieving suburban transit potential. Transportation Research Record 1997, 1571:151-162.
43. Transportation Survey (2008) Seoul Metropolitan Government.
44. Wasserman S., Faust K. Social Networks Analysis 1994, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
45. West S.G., Finch J.F., Curran P.J. Structural equation models with non-normal variables: problems and remedies. Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues, and Applications 1995, 56-75. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. R. Hoyle (Ed.).
46. Yao X. Where are public transit needed - examining potential demand for public transit for commuting trips. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 2007.