Built Environment, Causality and Travel

Transport Reviews

Volumn 35, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 275-291

  Næss, Petter ^a  

^a NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF LIFE SCIENCES   (Norway)

Author keywords

built environment; causality; correlations; tendencies; travel behaviour

Indexed keywords

CORRELATION; LIFESTYLE; PUBLIC ATTITUDE; RESEARCH METHOD; THEORETICAL STUDY; TRAVEL BEHAVIOR;

EID: 84928583887     PISSN: 01441647     EISSN: 14645327     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01441647.2015.1017751     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Archer, M. S. (2000). Being human. The problem of agency. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
2. Bagley, M. N., & Mokhtarian, P. L. (2002). The impact of residential neighbourhood type on travel behavior: A structural equations modeling approach. The Annals of Regional Science, 36, 279–297. doi: 10.1007/s001680200083
3. Benton, T. (2001). Why are sociologists naturephobes? In J. Lopez & G. Potter (Eds.), After postmodernism: An introduction to critical realism (pp. 132–145). London: Athlone Press.
4. Bhaskar, R. (1993). Dialectic – The pulse of freedom. London: Routledge.
5. Bhaskar, R. (1998). The possibility of naturalism: A philosophical critique of the contemporary human sciences (3rd ed.). London: Routledge. (First published 1979.)
6. Bhaskar, R. (2008). A realist theory of science – With a new introduction. London: Routledge. (First published 1975.)
7. Boarnet, M., & Crane, R. (2001). Travel by design. The influence of urban form on travel. New York, NY: Oxford university Press.
8. Calhoun, C. (Ed.). (2002). Dictionary of the social sciences (online version). Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acref/9780195123715.001.0001
9. Cao, X., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Handy, S. (2009). Examining the impacts of residential self-selection on travel behaviour: A focus on empirical findings. Transport Reviews, 29, 359–395. doi: 10.1080/01441640802539195
10. Cervero, R. (2003). The built environment and travel: Evidence from the United States. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research, 3(2), 119–137.
11. Clifton, K. J., & Handy, S. L. (2003). Qualitative methods in travel behaviour research. In P. Stopher & P. Jones (Eds.), Transport survey quality and innovation (pp. 283–302). Oxford: Elsevier Science, Pergamon.
12. Collins English Dictionary. (2014). Possibllism. London: HarperCollins.
13. Coevering, P., Maat, K., & Van Wee, B. (in press). Multi-period research designs for causal inference between the built environment and travel behaviour. Transport Reviews, doi:10.1080/01441647.2015.1025455
14. Crane, R. (1996). On form versus function: Will the new urbanism reduce traffic, or increase it? Journal of Planning Education and Research, 15(2), 117–126. doi: 10.1177/0739456X9601500204
15. Danermark, B., Ekström, M., Jacobsen, L., & Karlsson, J. C. (2001). Explaining society: Critical realism in the social sciences. London: Routledge.
16. Ewing, R., & Cervero, R. (2010). Travel and the built environment. Journal of the American Planning Association, 76, 265–294. doi: 10.1080/01944361003766766
17. Fairclough, N., Jessop, R., & Sayer, A. (2002). Critical realism and semiosis. Journal of Critical Realism, 1, 2–10.
18. Fellman, J. D. (2000). Human geography: Landscapes of human activity. Blacklick, OH: McGraw Hill.
19. Gibson, J. (1977). The theory of affordances. In R. Shaw & J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving, acting, and knowing: Toward an ecological psychology (pp. 67–82). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
20. Giuliano, G., & Narayan, D. (2003). Another look at travel patterns and urban form: The US and great Britain. Urban Studies, 40, 2295–2312. doi: 10.1080/0042098032000123303
21. Handy, S., Cao, X., & Mokhtarian, P. L. (2005). Correlation or causality between the built environment and travel behavior? Evidence from Northern California. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 10, 427–444. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2005.05.002
22. Hjorthol, R. J. (1998). Reurbanisation and its potential for the reduction of car use: An analysis of preferences of residence, activity — and travel pattern in the Oslo area. Scandinavian Housing & Planning Research, 15(4), 211–226. doi: 10.1080/02815739808730458
23. Karlsson, J. C. (2011). People can not only open closed systems, they can also close open systems. Journal of Critical Realism, 10, 145–162. doi: 10.1558/jcr.v10i2.145
24. Kitamura, R., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Laidet, L. (1997). A micro-analysis of land use and travel in five neighbourhoods in the San Francisco Bay area. Transportation, 24, 125–158. doi: 10.1023/A:1017959825565
25. Krizek, K. J. (2003). Residential relocation and changes in urban travel: Does neighborhood-scale urban form matter? Journal of American Planning Association, 69(3), 265–281. doi: 10.1080/01944360308978019
26. Lawson, J. (2006). Critical realism and housing research. Critical realism: Interventions series. London: Routledge.
27. Lewis-Beck, M. (1980). Applied regression. An introduction. Series: Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, No. 07–022. Newbury Park: Sage.
28. Mogridge, M. H. J. (1997). The self-defeating nature of urban road capacity policy: A review of theories, disputes and available evidence. Transport Policy, 4(1), 5–23. doi: 10.1016/S0967-070X(96)00030-3
29. Mokhtarian, P. L., & Cao, X. (2008). Examining the impacts of residential self-selection on travel behaviour: A focus on methodologies. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 42(3), 204–228. doi: 10.1016/j.trb.2007.07.006
30. Morgan, J. (2007). Empiricism. In M. Hartwig (Ed.), Dictionary of critical realism (pp. 169–171). London: Routledge.
31. Mumford, S., & Anjum, R. L. (2012). Getting causes from powers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
32. Næss, P. (2004). Predictions, regressions and critical realism. Journal of Critical Realism, 3, 133–164. doi: 10.1558/jcr.v3i1.133
33. Næss, P. (2005). Residential location affects travel behavior — But how and why? The case of Copenhagen Metropolitan Area. Progress in Planning, 63(2), 167–257. doi: 10.1016/j.progress.2004.07.004
34. Næss, P. (2006). Urban structure matters: Residential location, car dependence and travel behaviour. London: Routledge.
35. Næss, P. (2009). Residential self-selection and appropriate control variables in land use–travel studies. Transport Reviews, 29(3), 293–324. doi: 10.1080/01441640802710812
36. Næss, P. (2013). Residential location, transport rationales and daily-life travel behavior: The case of Hangzhou Metropolitan Area, China. Progress in Planning, 79, 1–50. doi: 10.1016/j.progress.2012.05.001
37. Næss, P. (2014a). 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, 7(3), 57–79. doi: 10.5198/jtlu.v7i3.491
38. Næss, P. (2014b). Response to Van Wee and Boarnet. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 7(3), 87–92. doi: 10.5198/jtlu.v7i3.724
39. Næss, P. (in press). Critical realism, urban planning and urban research. Forthcoming in European Planning Studies. Published online version Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2014.994091
40. Næss, P., & Jensen, O. B. (2002). Urban land use, mobility and theory of science — Exploring the potential for critical realism in empirical research. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 4(2), 295–311. doi: 10.1002/jepp.114
41. Næss, P., & Jensen, O. B. (2005). Bilringene og cykelnavet. Boliglokalisering, bilafhængighed og transportadfærd i Hovedstadsområdet [The car tires and the bike hub. Residential location, car dependence and travel behavior in Copenhagen Metropolitan Area]. Aalborg: Aalborg University Press.
42. Næss, P., & Strand, A. (2012). What kinds of traffic forecasts are possible? Journal of Critical Realism, 11, 277–295. doi: 10.1558/jcr.v11i3.277
43. Østerberg, D. (1968). Materiell-begrepets plass i økonomisk teori [The place of the concept of the material in economic theory]. In D. Østerberg (Ed.), (1974). Notater til materiell-begrepet (pp. 26–30). Oslo: University of Oslo: Department of Sociology.
44. Østerberg, D. (1998). Arkitektur og sosiologi i Oslo: en sosiomateriell fortolkning [Architecture and sociology in Oslo: A socio-material interpretation]. Oslo: Pax.
45. Rajamani, J., Bhat, C., Handy, S., & Knaap, G. (2003). Assessing the impact of urban form measures in nonwork trip mode choice after controlling for demographic and level-of-service effects. Transportation Research Record, 1831, 158–165. doi: 10.3141/1831-18
46. Røe, P. G. (2000). Qualitative research on intra-urban travel: An alternative approach. Journal of Transport Geography, 8, 99–106. doi: 10.1016/S0966-6923(99)00039-3
47. Sartre, J. P. (1948). Being and nothingness. (H. E. Barnes, Trans.). New York, NY: Philosophical Library.
48. Sayer, A. (1992). Method in social science. A realist approach (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
49. Scheiner, J., & Holz-Rau, C. (2007). Travel mode choice: Affected by objective or subjective determinants? Transportation, 34, 487–511. doi: 10.1007/s11116-007-9112-1
50. Schwanen, T., Dieleman, F. M., & Dijst, M. (2001). Travel behaviour in Dutch monocentric and policentric urban systems. Journal of Transport Geography, 9, 173–186. doi: 10.1016/S0966-6923(01)00009-6
51. Singleton, R. A. Jr., & Straits, B. C. (2005). Approaches to social research (4th ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
52. Sørensen, C. H. (2001). Kan Trafikministeriet klare miljøet? Om integration af miljøhensyn i trafikpolitik og institutionelle potentialer og barrierer. [Can the Ministry of Transport manage the environment? On the integration of environmental concerns in transport policy and institutional potentials and barriers.] Copenhagen: Jurist- og Økonomforbundets Forlag.
53. Tonboe, J. (1993). Rummets sociologi [The sociology of space]. Copenhagen: Akademisk Forlag.
54. Van Acker, V., & Witlox, F. (2010). Car ownership as a mediating variable in car travel behavior research using a structural equation modelling approach to identify its dual relationship. Journal of Transport Geography, 18(1), 65–74. doi: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2009.05.006
55. Van Wee, B. (2009). Self-selection: A key to a better understanding of location choices, travel behaviour and transport externalities? Transport Reviews, 29(3), 279–292. doi: 10.1080/01441640902752961
56. Van Wee, B. (2013). Land use and transport. In B. van Wee, J. A. Annema, & D. Banister (Eds.), The transport system and transport policy. An introduction (pp. 78–100). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
57. Van Wee, B., & Boarnet, M. (2014). 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, 7(3), 81–86. doi: 10.5198/jtlu.v7i3.713
58. Wardner, P. (2014, January 19–22). Explaining mixed-use developments: A critical realist's perspective. Paper presented at the 20th Annual Pacific-Rim Real Estate Society Conference, Christchurch, New Zealand.
59. Zegras, C. (2010). The built environment and motor vehicle ownership and use: Evidence from Santiago de Chile. Urban Studies, 47, 1793–1817. doi: 10.1177/0042098009356125