How do built-environment factors affect travel behavior? A spatial analysis at different geographic scales

Transportation

Volumn 41, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 419-440

  Hong, Jinhyun ^a   Shen, Qing ^a   Zhang, Lei ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Bayesian hierarchical model; Built environment; Self selection; Spatial autocorrelation; Travel behavior

Indexed keywords

AUTOCORRELATION; ENERGY UTILIZATION; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEMS; RANDOM PROCESSES;

BAYESIAN HIERARCHICAL MODEL; BUILT ENVIRONMENT; SELF-SELECTION; SPATIAL AUTOCORRELATIONS; TRAVEL BEHAVIORS;

LAND USE;

AUTOCORRELATION; BAYESIAN ANALYSIS; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEM; LAND USE; METROPOLITAN AREA; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; TRANSPORTATION; TRAVEL BEHAVIOR;

SEATTLE; UNITED STATES; WASHINGTON [UNITED STATES];

EID: 84899949528     PISSN: 00494488     EISSN: 15729435     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11116-013-9462-9     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Antipova, A., Wang, F., Wilmot, C.: Urban land uses, socio-demographic attributes and commuting: a multilevel modeling approach. Appl. Geogr. 31(3), 1010-1018 (2011).
2. Bhat, C. R.: A multi-level cross-classified model for discrete response variables. Transp. Res. Part B 34(7), 567-582 (2000).
3. Bhat, C. R., Guo, J. Y.: A comprehensive analysis of built environment characteristics on household residential choice and auto ownership level. Transp. Res. Part B 41(5), 506-526 (2007).
4. Bhat, C. R., Zhao, H.: The spatial analysis of activity stop generation. Transp. Res. Part B 36(6), 557-575 (2002).
5. Boarnet, M. G., Crane, R.: The influence of land use on travel behavior: specification and estimation strategies. Transp. Res. Part A 35(9), 823-845 (2001).
6. Boarnet, M. G., Sarmiento, S.: Can land-use policy really affect travel behavior? A study of the link between non-work travel and land-use characteristics. Urban Stud. 35(7), 1155-1169 (1998).
7. Bottai, M., Salvati, N., Orsini, N.: Multilevel models for analyzing people's daily movement behavior. J. Geogr. Syst. 8(1), 97-108 (2006).
8. Brownstone, D.: Key relationships Between the Built Environment and VMT. Univeristy of California, Irvine (2008).
9. Brownstone, D., Golob, T. F.: The impact of residential density on vehicle usage and energy consumption. J. Urban Econ. 65, 91-98 (2009).
10. Cao, X., Mokhtarian, P. L., Handy, S. L.: Neighborhood design and vehicle type choice: evidence from Northern California. Transp. Res. Part D 11(2), 133-145 (2006).
11. Cao, X., Xu, Z., Fan, Y.: Exploring the connections among residential location, self-selection, and driving: propensity score matching with multiple treatments. Transp. Res. Part A 44(10), 797-805 (2010).
12. Cervero, R.: Land-use mixing and suburban mobility. Transport. Q. 42(3), 429-446 (1988).
13. Cervero, R.: Land uses and travel at suburban activity centers. Transp. Q. 45(4), 479-491 (1991).
14. Cervero, R.: Mixed land-uses and commuting: evidence from the American Housing Survey. Transp. Res. Part A 30(5), 361-377 (1996).
15. Cervero, R., Kockelman, K.: Travel demand and the three Ds: density, diversity, and design. Transp. Res. Part D 2(3), 199-219 (1997).
16. Chaix, B., Merlo, J., Subramanian, S. V., Lynch, J., Chauvin, P.: Comparison of a spatial perspective with the multilevel analytical approach in neighborhood studies: the case of mental and behavioral disorders due to psychoactive substance use in Malmo, Sweden, 2001. Am. J. Epidemiol. 162(2), 171-182 (2005).
17. Chen, C., Gong, H., Paaswell, R.: Role of the built environment on mode choice decisions: additional evidence on the impact of density. Transportation 35(3), 285-299 (2008).
18. Crane, R.: The influence of urban form on travel: an interpretive review. J. Plan. Lit. 15(1), 3-23 (2000).
19. de Abreu e Silva, J., Golob, T. F., Goulias, K. G.: Effects of land use characteristics on residence and employment location and travel behavior of urban adult workers. Transp. Res. Rec. 1977, 121-131 (2006).
20. Duncan, C., Jones, K.: Using multilevel models to model heterogeneity: potential and pitfalls. Geogr. Anal. 32(4), 279-305 (2000).
21. EPA: Greenhouse gas emissions from the U. S. transportation sector, 1990-2003. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC (2006).
22. Ewing, R., Cervero, R.: Travel and the built environment: a synthesis. Transp. Res. Rec. 1780, 87-114 (2001).
23. Ewing, R., Bartholomew, K., Winkelman, S., Walters, J., Chen, D.: Growing Cooler: The Evidence on Urban Development and Climate Change. ULI-The Urban Land Institute, Washington, DC (2008).
24. Fotheringham, A. S., Wong, D. W. S.: The modifiable areal unit problem in multivariate statistical analysis. Environ Plan A 23(7), 1025-1044 (1991).
25. Frank, L. D., Stone, B., Bachman, W.: Linking land use with household vehicle emissions in the central Puget Sound: methodological framework and findings. Transp. Res. Part D 5(3), 173-196 (2000).
26. Frank, L. D., Saelens, B. E., Powell, K. E., Chapman, J. E.: Stepping towards causation: do built environments or neighborhood and travel preferences explain physical activity, driving, and obesity? Soc. Sci. Med. 65, 1898-1914 (2007).
27. Frank, L. D., Bradley, M., Kavage, S., Chapman, J., Lawton, T. K.: Urban form, travel time, and cost relationships with tour complexity and mode choice. Transportation 35(1), 37-54 (2008).
28. Frumkin, H.: Urban sprawl and public health. Public Health Rep. 117, 201-217 (2002).
29. Gelman, A., Hill, J.: Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. Cambridge University Press, New York (2007).
30. Gelman, A., Pardoe, I.: Bayesian measures of explained variance and pooling in multilevel (hierarchical) models. Technometrics 48(2), 241-251 (2006).
31. Grazi, F., van den Bergh, J. C., van Ommeren, J.: An empirical analysis of urban form, transport, and global warming. Energy J. 29(4), 97-122 (2008).
32. Handy, S.: Smart growth and the transportation-land use connection: what does the research tell us? Int. Reg. Sci. Rev. 28(2), 146-167 (2005).
33. Handy, S. L., Boarnet, M. G., Ewing, R., Killingsworth, R. E.: How the built environment affects physical activity: views from urban Planning. Am. J. Prev. Med. 23(2S), 64-73 (2002).
34. Handy, S., Cao, X., Mokhtarian, P.: Correlation or causality between the built environment and travel behavior? Evidence from Northern California. Transp. Res. Part D 10, 427-444 (2005).
35. Hanson, S., Schwab, M.: Accessibility and intraurban travel. Environ. Plan. A 19(6), 735-748 (1987).
36. 2 emissions: are land-use changes enough for California to reduce VMT? Specification of a two-part model with instrumental variables. Transp. Res. Part B 45(1), 150-161 (2011).
37. Hickman R, Banister D (2007) Transport and reduced energy consumption: what role can urban planning play? Working paper, Oxford University, Oxford.
38. Horner, M. W., Murray, A. T.: Excess commuting and the modifiable areal unit problem. Urban Stud. 39(1), 131-139 (2002).
39. Jelinski, D. E., Wu, J.: The modifiable areal unit problem and implication for landscape ecology. Landsc. Ecol. 11(3), 129-140 (1996).
40. Kitamura, R., Mokhtarian, P. L., Laidet, L.: A micro-analysis of land use and travel in five neighborhoods in the San Francisco Bay Area. Transportation 24(2), 125-158 (1997).
41. Krizek, K. J.: Neighborhood services, trip purpose, and tour-based travel. Transportation 30(4), 387-410 (2003a).
42. Krizek, K. J.: Residential relocation and changes in urban travel: does neighborhood-scale urban form matter. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 69(3), 265-281 (2003b).
43. Kwan, M., Weber, J.: Scale and accessibility: implications for the analysis of land use-travel interaction. Appl. Geogr. 28(2), 110-123 (2008).
44. Lawson, A. B.: Bayesian Disease Mapping: Hierarchical Modeling in Spatial Epidemiology. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2008).
45. LeSage, J. P.: Regression analysis of spatial data. J. Reg. Anal. Policy 27(2), 83-94 (1997).
46. Mokhtarian, P. L., Cao, X.: Examining the impacts of residential self-selection on travel behavior: a focus on methodologies. Transp. Res. Part B 42(3), 204-228 (2008).
47. Neuman, M.: The compact city fallacy. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 25, 11-26 (2005).
48. Pas, E. I.: The effect of selected sociodemographic characteristics on daily travel-activity behavior. Environ. Plan. A 16(5), 571-581 (1984).
49. Reason Foundation: Does bus transit reduce greenhouse gas emissions? http://reason. org/news/show/does-bus-transit-reduce-greenhouse (2010).
50. Recker, W. W., Schuler, H. J.: An integrated analysis of complex travel behavior and urban form indicators. Urban Geogr. 3(2), 110-120 (1982).
51. Schwanen, T., Dieleman, F. M., Dijst, M.: Car use in Netherlands daily urban systems: does polycentrism result in lower commute times? Urban Geogr. 24(5), 410-430 (2003).
52. Shen, Q.: Spatial and social dimensions of commuting. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 66(1), 68-82 (2000).
53. Snellen, D., Borgers, A., Timmermans, H.: Urban form, road network type, and mode choice for frequently conducted activities: a multilevel analysis using quasi-experimental design data. Environ. Plan. A 34(7), 1207-1220 (2002).
54. van Acker, V. V., Witlox, F.: Commuting trips within tours: how is commuting related to land use? Transportation 38(3), 465-486 (2011).
55. Vance, C., Hedel, R.: The impact of urban form on automobile travel: disentangling causation from correlation. Transportation 34(5), 575-588 (2007).