The advantage of 'near': Which accessibilities matter to whom?

European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research

Volumn 11, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 368-388

  Haugen, Katarina ^a  

^a UMEÅ UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Accessibility; Mobility; Proximity; Residential preferences; Residential satisfaction

Indexed keywords

CARRIER MOBILITY; LOCATION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

ACCESSIBILITY; LEVEL OF SATISFACTION; PROXIMITY; RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT; RESIDENTIAL LOCATIONS; RESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE; RESIDENTIAL SATISFACTION; SOCIAL ACTIVITIES;

HOUSES;

EID: 80053144798     PISSN: None     EISSN: 15677141     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.18757/ejtir.2011.11.4.2941     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. Ben-Akiva, M. and Bowman, J.L. (1998). Integration of an Activity-Based Model System and a Residential Location Model. Urban Studies Vol. 35, No. 7, pp. 1131-1153.
2. Boucher, J. and Osgood, C.E. (1969). The Pollyanna hypothesis. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior Vol. 8, No.1, pp. 1-8.
3. Brusman, M. (2004). Kvinnor och män som resenärer in Friberg, T. (Ed.) Persontransporternas vita fläckar. Centrum för kommunstrategiska studier, Linköpings universitet (In Swedish).
4. Cook, C.; Heath, F. and Thompson, R.L. (2000). A meta-analysis of response rates in web-or internet-based surveys. Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 60, No. 6, pp. 821-836.
5. Couper, M.P. (2000). Web surveys-a review of issues and approaches. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 64, No. 4, pp. 464-494.
6. Croson, R. and Gneezy, U. (2009). Gender differences in preferences. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 47, No. 2, pp. 448-474.
7. Devisch, O.J.T., Timmermans, H.J.P., Arentze, T.A. and Borgers, A.W.J. (2009). An agent-based model of residential choice dynamics in nonstationary housing markets. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 41, No. 8, pp. 1997-2013.
8. Diaz-Serrano, L. and Stoyanova, A.P. (2009). Mobility and housing satisfaction: an empirical analysis for 12 EU countries. Journal of Economic Geography (advance access September 2009, pp. 1-23).
9. Ellegård, K. and Wihlborg, E. (Eds). (2001). Fånga vardagen. Ett tvärvetenskapligt perspektiv. Studentlitteratur, Lund (In Swedish).
10. Ellegård, K. and Vilhelmson, B. (2004). Home as a Pocket of Local Order: Everyday Activities and The Friction of Distance. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, Vol. 86, No. 4, pp. 281-296.
11. Findlay, A. and Rogerson, R. (1993). Migration, places and quality of life: Voting with their feet? in Champion, T. (Ed.) Population matters-The local dimension, Paul Chapman, London.
12. Fleury-Bahi, G., Félonneau, M.-L. and Marchand, D. (2008). Processes of place identification and residential satisfaction, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 40, No. 5, pp. 669-682.
13. Fransson, U., Rosenqvist, G. and Turner, B. (2001). Hushållens värdering av egenskaper i bostäder och bostadsområden. Research Report 2002:1, Institute for Housing and Urban Research, Uppsala University, Gävle (In Swedish).
14. Geurs, K. (2006). Accessibility, land use and transport. Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport developments and policy strategies. Eburon, Delft.
15. Geurs, K.T. and van Wee, B. (2004). Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: Review and research directions. Journal of Transport Geography Vol. 12, No.2, pp. 127-140.
16. Handy, S. and Clifton, K.J. (2001). Evaluating neighborhood accessibility: Possibilities and practicalities, Journal of Transportation and Statistics, Vol. 4, no. 2/3, pp. 67-78.
17. Hjort, S. (2009). Socio-economic differentiation and selective migration in rural and urban Sweden. Umeå universitet, Umeå.
18. Holmberg., A.; Lorenc, B. and Werner, P. (2007). Lotta P2-Optimal kontaktstrategi vid blandad insamling papper och webb, Statistics Sweden (In Swedish).
19. Horner, M.W. (2004). Spatial dimensions of urban commuting: A review of major issues and their implications for further geographic research. The Professional Geographer, Vol. 56, No. 2, pp. 160-173.
20. Hur, M. and Morrow-Jones, H.(2008). Factors that influence residents satisfaction with neighborhoods. Environment and Behavior, Vol. 40, No. 5, pp. 619-635.
21. Hägerstrand, T. (1970). What about people in regional science?, in Carlestam, G. and Sollbe, B. (Eds.). Om tidens vidd och tingens ordning-texter av Torsten Hägerstrand, Byggforskningsrådet, Stockholm.
22. Hörnsten, L. (2000). Outdoor recreation in Swedish forests-Implications for society and forestry, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala.
23. Jain, J. and Lyons, G. (2008). The Gift of Travel Time. Journal of Transport Geography Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 81-89.
24. Kaplowitz, M.D.; Hadlock, T.D. and Levine, R. (2004). A comparison of web and mail survey response rates. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 68, No. 1, pp. 94-101.
25. Knowles, R. (2006). Transport shaping space: differential collapse in time-space. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 14, No.6, pp. 407-425.
26. Kim, J.H., Pagliara, F. and Preston, J. (2005a). The intention to move and residential location choice behaviour, Urban Studies, Vol.42, No. 9, pp. 1621-1636.
27. Kim, T.-K., Horner, M.W. and Marans, R.W.(2005b). Life cycle and environmental factors in selecting residential and job locations, Housing Studies, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 457-473.
28. Krantz, L.-G. (1997). Mäns och kvinnors rörlighet i Sverige. Utvecklingen mellan 1978 och 1995-ökar eller minskar skillnaderna. Occasional Papers 1997:3, Department of Human and Economic Geography, School of Business, Economics and Law, University of Gothenburg (In Swedish).
29. Krizek, K.J. and Waddell, P. (2002). Analysis of Lifestyle Choices: Neighborhood Type, Travel Patterns, and Activity Participation. Transportation Research Record, Vol. 1807, pp. 119-128.
30. Kwan, M.-P. and Weber, J. (2003). Individual accessibility revisited: Implications for geographical analysis in the twenty-first century, Geographical Analysis Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 341-353.
31. Lenntorp, B. (2004). Path, prism, project, pocket and population: an introduction. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography Vol. 86, No. 4, pp. 223-226.
32. Lind, J.-E. and Bergenstråhle, S. (2004). Boendets betydelser och boendes värderingar. Department of Sociology, Gothenburg University (In Swedish).
33. Lovejoy, K. (2006). Do suburban-and traditional-neighbourhood residents want different things? Evidence on neighborhood satisfaction and travel behaviour. Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, David.
34. Lovejoy, K., Handy, S., and Mokhtarian, P. (2010). Neighborhood satisfaction in suburban versus traditional environments: an evaluation of contributing characteristics in eight California neighborhoods. Landscape and Urban Planning Vol. 97, No. 1, pp. 37-48.
35. Lundholm, E. (2007). New motives for migration? On interregional mobility in the Nordic context. Umeå university, Umeå.
36. Lynch, K. (1981). A theory of good city form, The Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA.
37. Martellato, D. and Nijkamp, P. (1998). The concept of accessibility revisited, in Reggiani, A. (Ed.) Accessibility, trade and locational behaviour. Ashgate, Aldershot, UK.
38. Mokhtarian, P. L. and I. Salomon (2001). How derived is the demand for travel? Some conceptual and measurement considerations. Transportation Research Part A Vol. 35, No. 8, pp. 695-719.
39. Molin, E. and Timmermans, H. (2002). Accessibility Considerations in Residential Choice Decisions: Accumulated Evidence from the Benelux. Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting 2003, Washington D.C.
40. National Rural Development Agency (2008). Yearbook 2008, National Rural Development Agency (In Swedish).
41. Neutens, T., Schwanen, T., Witlox, F. and De Maeyer, P. (2008). My space or your space? Towards a measure of joint accessibility, Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, Vol. 32, No. 5, pp. 331-342.
42. Niedomysl, T. (2008). Residential preferences for interregional migration in Sweden: demographic, socioeconomic and geographical determinants, Environment and Planning A Vol. 40, No. 5, pp. 1109-1131.
43. Nutley, S. (1998). Rural areas: the accessibility problem, in Hoyle, B. and Knowles, R. (Eds.). Modern transport geography, Wiley, Chichester, UK.
44. Næss, P. (2005). Residential location affects travel behavior-but how and why? The case of Copenhagen metropolitan area, Progress in Planning Vol. 63, No. 2, pp. 162-257.
45. Næss, P. (2006). Accessibility, activity participation and location of activities: Exploring the links between residential location and travel behaviour, Urban Studies Vol. 43, No. 3, pp. 627-652.
46. Oderth, R. (2002). An introduction to the study of human migration-An interdisciplinary perspective. iUniverse.
47. Oldenburg, R. (1999). The great good place-cafés, coffee shops, bookstores, bars, hair salons and other hangouts at the heart of a community. Da Capo Press, Cambridge, USA.
48. Phillips, D. (2006). Quality of life-concept, policy and practice, Routledge, Oxon.
49. Porter, S.R. and Whitcomb, M.E. (2003). The impact of contact type on web survey response rates, Public Opinion Quarterly Vol. 67, No. 4, pp. 579-588.
50. Praschker, J., Shiftan, J. and Herschkovitch-Sarusi, P. (2008). Residential choice location, gender and the commute trip to work in Tel Aviv, Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 16, No. 5, pp. 332-341.
51. Reneland, M. (2000). I den hållbara staden går och cyklar man-Sammanfattning av GIS-projektet tillgänglighet i svenska städer 1980 och 1995. STATCH Report 2000:2, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden (In Swedish).
52. Renkow, M. and Hoover, D. (2000). Commuting, migration, and rural-urban population dynamics. Journal of Regional Science, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 261-287.
53. Salomon, I. and Mokhtarian P.L., (1998). What happens when mobility-inclined market segments face accessibility-enhancing policies?. Transportation Research D Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 129-140.
54. Sandow, E. and Westin, K (2010). Peoples preferences for commuting in sparsely populated areas: the case of Sweden, Journal of Transport and Land Use, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 87-107.
55. Sax, L.J.; Gilmartin, S.K. and Bryant, A.N. (2003). Assessing response rates and nonresponse bias in web and paper surveys, Research in Higher Education Vol. 44, No. 4, pp. 409-432.
56. Schan, J. and Holzer, E. (1990). Studies of individual environmental concern: the role of knowledge, gender, and background variables, Environment and Behavior Vol. 22, No. 6, pp. 767-786.
57. Scheller, M. and Urry, J. (2006). The new mobilities paradigm, Environment and Planning A Vol. 38, No. 2, pp.207-226.
58. Schwanen, T. and Mokhtarian, P.L. (2004). The extent and determinants of dissonance between actual and preferred residential neighborhood type, Environment and Planning B Vol. 31, No. 5, pp. 759-784.
59. SIKA (2007). Digitala klyftor-insatser för att överbrygga dessa. Redovisning av ett regeringsuppdrag, SIKA Rapport 2007:6, Swedish Institute for Transport and Communications Analysis, Östersund, Sweden (In Swedish).
60. SIKA (2006). KOM-The national communications survey, SIKA Statistics 2006:32, Swedish Institute for Transport and Communications Analysis, Stockholm, Sweden.
61. Statistics Sweden (2009). Localities 1960-2005. Statistiska meddelanden, Statistics Sweden.
62. Stern, P.C.; Dietz, T. and Kalof, L. (1993). Value orientations, gender, and environmental concern, Environment and Behavior Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 322-384.
63. Sörlin, S. (1995). Nature, skiing and Swedish nationalism, International Journal of the History of Sport, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 147-163.
64. Urry, J. (2002). Mobility and proximity, Sociology Vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 255-274.
65. van der Klis, M. and Mulder, C. (2008). Beyond the trailing spouse: the commuter partnership as an alternative to family migration, Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 1-19.
66. Vehovar, V. M; Batagelj, Z.; Lozar Manfreda, K. and Zalutel, M. (2002). Nonresponse in web surveys, in Groves, R.M.; Dillman, D.A.; Eltinge, J.L. and Little, R.J.A. (Ed.) Survey nonresponse, Wiley, New York, USA.
67. Vera-Toscano, E. and Ateca-Amestoy, V. (2008). The relevance of social interactions on housing satisfaction, Social Indicators Research, Vol. 86, No. 2, pp. 257-274.
68. Weber, J. (2003). Individual accessibility and distance from major employment centers: An examination using space-time measures, Journal of Geographical Systems, Vol. 5, No.1, pp. 51-70.
69. Woods, M. (2005). Rural geography, Sage, London.
70. Yun, G.W. and Trumbo, C.W. (2000). Comparative response to a survey executed by post, e-mail and web form, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 6, No.1.