Estimating transit accessibility with an alternative method: Evidence from Broward County, Florida

Transportation Research Record

Volumn , Issue 2144, 2010, Pages 62-71

  Alam, Bhuiyan Monwar ^a   Thompson, Gregory L ^b   Brown, Jeffrey R ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO   (United States)

^b FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DECAY (ORGANIC); PARAMETER ESTIMATION;

BROWARD COUNTY; DECAY PARAMETERS; DISTANCE DECAY; FLORIDA; GEOGRAPHICS; GRAVITY-BASED MODELS; MODEL ESTIMATES; PARAMETERS ESTIMATED; SOCIO-ECONOMICS; SURVEY DATA;

SURVEYS;

EID: 78651273916     PISSN: 03611981     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3141/2144-08     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Bach, L. The Problem of Aggregation and Distance for Analyses of Accessibility and Access Opportunity in Location-Allocation Models. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 13, No. 8, 1981, pp. 955-978.
2. Pirie, G. H. Measuring Accessibility: A Review and Proposal. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 11, No. 3, 1979, pp. 299-312.
3. Hanson, S. The Context of Urban Travel: Concepts and Recent Trends. In The Geography of Urban Transportation (S. Hanson and G. Giuliano, eds.), Guilford Press, New York, 2004.
4. Ingram, D. R. A Concept of Accessibility: A Search for an Optimal Form. Regional Studies, Vol. 5, No. 2, 1971, pp. 101-107.
5. Morris, J. M., P. L. Dumble, and M. R. Wigan. Accessibility Indicators for Transportation Planning. Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 13, No. 2, 1979, pp. 91-109.
6. Zakaria, T. Urban Transportation Accessibility Measures: Modifications and Uses. Traffic Quarterly, Vol. 28, No. 3, 1974, pp. 467-479.
7. Hansen, W. G. How Accessibility Shapes Land Use. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, Vol. 25, No. 2, 1959, pp. 73-76.
8. Hanson, S., and M. Schwab. Accessibility and Intraurban Travel. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 19, No. 6, 1987, pp. 735-748.
9. Black, J., and M. Conroy. Accessibility Measures and the Social Evaluation of Urban Structure. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 9, No. 9, 1977, pp. 1013-1031.
10. Martin, K. M., and M. Q. Dalvi. The Comparison of Accessibility by Public and Private Transport. Traffic Engineering and Control, Vol. 17, 1976, pp. 509-513.
11. Allen, W. B., D. Liu, and S. Singer. Accessibility Measures of U.S. Metropolitan Areas. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 27, No. 6, 1993, pp. 439-449.
12. Dong, X., M. E. Ben-Akiva, J. L. Bowman, and J. L. Walker. Moving from Trip-Based to Activity-Based Measures of Accessibility. Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 40, No. 2, 2006, pp. 163-180.
13. Gurmu, S., K. Ihlanfeldt, and W. J. Smith. Job Accessibility and Employment for TANF Cases: Panel Data Evidence. Working paper. DeVoe Moore Center, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Fla., 2005.
14. Sanchez, T. W. The Connection Between Public Transit and Employment: The Cases of Portland and Atlanta. Journal of American Planning Association, Vol. 65, No. 3, 1999, pp. 284-296.
15. Sawicki, D. S., and M. Moody. Developing Transportation Alternatives for Welfare Recipients Moving to Work. Journal of American Planning Association, Vol. 66, No. 3, 2000, pp. 306-318.
16. Ihlanfeldt, K., and D. Sjoquist. Job Accessibility and Racial Differences in Youth Employment Rates. American Economic Review, Vol. 80, No. 1, 1990, pp. 267-276.
17. Taylor, B., and P. Ong. Spatial Mismatch or Automobile Mismatch? An Examination of Race, Residence, and Commuting in the U.S. Metropolitan Areas. Urban Studies, Vol. 32, No. 9, 1995, pp. 1453-1474.
18. Sanchez, T. W. Transit Access Analysis of Welfare Recipients in Portland, Oregon. Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 2, No. 4, 1999, pp. 61-73.
19. Bania, N., C. Coulton, and L. Leete. Public Housing Assistance, Public Transportation, and the Welfare-to-Work Transition. Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research, Vol. 6, No. 2, 2003, pp. 7-44.
20. Handy, S. L., and D. A. Niemeier. Measuring Accessibility: An Exploration of Issues and Alternatives. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 29, No. 7, 1997, pp. 1175-1194.
21. Ben-Akiva, M., and S. R. Lerman. Disaggregate Travel and Mobility Choice Models and Measures of Accessibility. Presented at 3rd International Conference on Behavioral Travel Modeling, Australia, 1977.
22. Domencich, T., and D. McFadden. Urban Travel Demand: A Behavioral Analysis. North-Holland, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1975.
23. Neuburger, H. User Benefit in the Evaluation of Transport and Land Use Plans. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, Vol. 5, No. 1, 1971, pp. 52-75.
24. Ben-Akiva, M., and S. R. Lerman. Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1985.
25. Alam, B. M. Transit Accessibility to Jobs and Employment Prospects of Welfare Recipients Without Cars: A Study of Broward County, Florida, Using Geographic Information Systems and Econometric Model. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2110, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2009, pp. 78-86.
26. Shen, Q. Location Characteristics of Inner-City Neighborhoods and Employment Accessibility of Low-Wage Workers. Environment and Planning Part B, Vol. 25, No. 3, 1998, pp. 345-365.
27. Shen, Q., and T. W. Sanchez. Residential Location, Transportation, and Welfare-to-Work in the United States: A Case Study of Milwaukee. Housing Policy Debate, Vol. 16, No. 3/4, 2005, pp. 393-431.
28. Thompson, G. L. Achieving Suburban Transit Potential: Sacramento Revisited. In Transportation Research Record 1571, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1997, pp. 151-160.
29. Thompson, G. L. New Insights into the Value of Transit: Modeling Inferences from Dade County. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1753, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2001, pp. 52-58.
30. Isard, W. Methods of Regional Analysis: An Introduction to Regional Science. Technology Press of MIT, New York, 1960.
31. Thompson, G. L. Identifying Gainers and Losers from Transit Service Change: A Method Applied to Sacramento. Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol., 17, No. 2, 1998, pp. 125-136.
32. Raphael, S. The Spatial Mismatch Hypothesis and Black Youth Joblessness: Evidence from the San Francisco Bay Area. Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 43, No. 1, 1998, pp. 79-111.
33. Allard, S., and S. Danziger. Proximity and Opportunity: How Residence and Race Affect the Employment of Welfare Recipients. Housing Policy Debate, Vol. 13, No. 4, 2003, pp. 675-700.
34. Kawabata, M. Job Access and Employment Among Low-Skilled Autoless Workers in U.S. Metropolitan Areas. Environment and Planning Part A, Vol. 35, No. 9, 2003, pp. 1651-1668.
35. Sanchez, T. W., Q. Shen, and Z. Peng. Transit Mobility, Job Access and Low-Income Labor Participation in U.S. Metropolitan Areas. Urban Studies, Vol. 41, No. 7, 2004, pp. 1313-1331.
36. Shen, Q. A Spatial Analysis of Job Openings and Access in a U.S. Metropolitan Area. Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 67, No. 1, 2001, pp. 53-68.
37. Horowitz, A. J. Appendix A, Default Parameters. In Reference Manual, Quick Response System II for Windows Version 4. AJH Associates, Milwaukee, Wis., 1995.
38. Analyzing Transit Options for Small Urban Communities-Analysis Methods. Urban Mass Transportation Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 1979.