Reaction to the paper tempest in a teapot: The exaggerated problem of transport-related residential self-selection as a source of error in empirical studies

Journal of Transport and Land Use

Volumn 7, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 81-86

  van Wee, Bert ^a   Boarnet, Marlon G ^b  

^a DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84919383501     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19387849     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5198/jtlu.v7i3.491     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Bhat, C. R., and J. Y. Guo. 2007. A comprehensive analysis of built environment characteristics on household residential choice and auto wwnership levels. Transportation Research Part B 41(5): 506-26.
2. Bhat, C. R., R. Paleti, R. M. Pendyala, K. Lorenzini, and K. C. Konduri, forthcoming. Accommodating immigration status and self selection effects in a joint model of household auto ownership and residential location choice. Transportation Research Record.
3. Boarnet, M. G., C. Anderson, K. Day, T. McMillan and M. Alfonzo. 2005. Evaluation of the California Safe Routes to School legislation: Urban form changes and children’s active transportation to school. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 28(2 Suppl.): 134-40.
4. Boarnet, M. 2011. Longer view: A broader context for land use and travel behavior, and a research agenda. Journal of the American Planning Association 77(3): 197-213.
5. Boarnet, M. 2013. The declining role of the automobile and the re-emergence of place in urban transportation: The past will be prologue. Regional Science Policy and Practice 5(2): 237-253. doi: 10.1111/rsp3.12007.
6. Börjesson, M., J. Eliasson and M. Lundberg. 2012. Is CBA ranking of transport investments robust? Transport Economics and Policy 48(2): 189-204.
7. Brownstone, D., and T. Golob. 2009. The impact of residential density on vehicle usage and energy consumption. Journal of Urban Economics 65(1): 91-98.
8. Cao, X., and D. G. Chatman. Submitted for review. How will land use policies affect travel? A theoretical perspective on the importance of residential sorting.
9. Cao, X., and J. Schoner, forthcoming. The influence of light rail transit on transit uses: An exploration of station area residents along the Hiawatha line in Minneapolis. Transportation Research Part A.
10. Chatman, D.G., and N. Klein. 2009. Immigrants and travel demand in the United States: Implications for transportation policy and future research. Public Works Management and Policy 13(4): 312-327.
11. Crane, R., 1996. On form versus function: Will the New Urbanism reduce traffic, or increase it? Journal of Planning Education and Research 15(2): 117-26.
12. Handy, S., X. Cao, and P. Mokhtarian. 2006. Self-selection in the relationship between the built environment and walking: Empirical evidence from northern California. Journal of the American Planning Association 72(1): 55-74.
13. Krizek, K. J. 2003. Residential relocation and changes in urban travel: Does neighborhood scale urban form matter? Journal of the American Planning Association 69(3): 265-81.
14. Mokhtarian, P. L., and I. Salomon. 2001. How derived is the demand for travel? Some conceptual and measurement considerations. Transportation Research Part A 35(8): 695-719.
15. National Research Council (NRC). 2009. Driving and the Built Environment: The Effects of Compact Development on Motorized Travel, Energy Use, and CO2 Emissions. Committee on Relationships Among Development Patterns, Vehicle Miles Traveled, and Energy Consumption. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
16. Salon, D., M. Boarnet, S. Handy, S. Spears, and G. T. 2013. How do local actions affect VMT? A critical review of the empirical evidence. Transportation Research Part D 17(7): 495-508.
17. Van Wee, B. 2011. Evaluating the impact of land use on travel behaviour: the environment versus accessibility. Journal of Transport Geography 19(6): 1530-1533.