Commute travel and its effect on housing tenure choice of males and females living in the urban and rural areas of Bangalore city in India

Journal of Transport Geography

Volumn 45, Issue , 2015, Pages 62-69

  Manoj, M ^a   Verma, Ashish ^a   Navyatha, M ^b  

^a INDIAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE   (India)

^b NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (India)

Author keywords

Commute travel; Developing country; Gender; Housing tenure; India; Location

Indexed keywords

COMMUTING; DEVELOPING WORLD; HOUSEHOLD SURVEY; SOCIAL HOUSING; TENURE SYSTEM; TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT; TRANSPORTATION POLICY; TRAVEL BEHAVIOR; TRAVEL DEMAND;

BANGALORE; INDIA; KARNATAKA;

EID: 84928898868     PISSN: 09666923     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.05.001     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Alkay, E., 2011. In depth analysis of the home to work travel pattern in the istanbul metropolitan area. In: ERSA Conference Papers (No. ersa11p371). European Regional Science Association.
2. Arthurson K. Mixed tenure communities and the effects on neighbourhood reputation and stigma: residents' experiences from within. Cities 2013, 35:432-438.
3. Banerjee, A., 2006. Understanding Activity Engagement and Time use Patterns in a Developing Country Context. Doctoral dissertation, University of South Florida.
4. Bangalore Metropolitan Region Development Authority, 2010. Comprehensive Traffic and Transport Plan for Bangalore. Final Report.
5. Ben-Akiva M., Bowman J.L., Gopinath D. Travel demand model system for the information era. Transportation 1996, 23(3):241-266.
6. Bhat, C.R., Srinivasan, S., Guo, J.Y., 2002. Activity-Based Travel-Demand Analysis for Metropolitan Areas in Texas: Data Sources, Sample Formation, and Estimation Results (No. FHWA/TX-03/4080-3).
7. Census of India, 2011. HLO Indicators. Available at: (accessed 26.02.15). http://censusindia.gov.in/2011census/hlo/Data_sheet/India/HLO_Indicators.pdf.
8. Chen C., McKnight C.E. Does the built environment make a difference? Additional evidence from the daily activity and travel behaviour of homemakers living in New York City and suburbs. J. Transp. Geogr. 2007, 15(5):380-395.
9. Chen R.B., Gehrke S.R., Jang Y., Liu J.H., Clifton K.J. Exploring residential tenure and housing type decisions and household activity engagement. Transp. Res. Rec. 2013, 2344:68-78.
10. Crane R. Is there a quiet revolution in women's travel? Revisiting the gender gap in commuting. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 2007, 73(3):298-316.
11. Elder H.W., Zumpano L.V. Tenure choice, housing demand and residential location. J. Real Estate Res. 1991, 6(3):341-356.
12. Guo J.Y., Bhat C.R. Operationalising the concept of neighbourhood: application to residential location choice analysis. J. Transp. Geogr. 2007, 15(1):31-45.
13. Kim, S., 1994. Gender Differences in Commuting: an Empirical Study of the Greater Los Angeles Metropolitan Area. University of California Transportation Centre.
14. Levin I., Arthurson K., Ziersch A. Social mix and the role of design: competing interests in the carlton public housing estate redevelopment, Melbourne. Cities 2014, 40:23-31.
15. Mills E.S. Housing tenure choice. J. Real Estate Finance Econ. 1990, 3(4):323-331.
16. Paleti R., Bhat C.R., Pendyala R.M. An integrated model of residential location, work location, vehicle ownership, and commute tour characteristics. Transp. Res. Rec. 2013, 2382:162-172.
17. Plaut P.O. The intra-household choices regarding commuting and housing. Transp. Res. Part A: Policy Practice 2006, 40(7):561-571.
18. Prashker J., Shiftan Y., Hershkovitch-Sarusi P. Residential choice location, gender and the commute trip to work in Tel Aviv. J. Transp. Geogr. 2008, 16(5):332-341.
19. Revised City Development Plan Bangalore, 2009. Urban Infrastructure and Governance. Volume-1.
20. Sanit P., Nakamura F., Tanaka S., Wang R. Location and mode choice decision mechanism analysis of multi-worker household in Bangkok, Thailand. J. Eastern Asia Soc. Transp. Stud. 2013, 10:1243-1257.
21. Sastry G.S. Emerging Development Issues of Greater Bangalore 2008, Institute for Social and Economic Change.
22. Sermons M.W., Koppelman F.S. Representing the differences between female and male commute behaviour in residential location choice models. J. Transp. Geogr. 2001, 9(2):101-110.
23. Waddell, P., 1996. Accessibility and residential location: the interaction of workplace, residential mobility, tenure, and location of choices. In: Proceedings of the Lincoln Land Institute TRED Conference.
24. White M.J. Sex differences in urban commuting patterns. Am. Econ. Rev. 1986, 76(2):368-372.