Direct and indirect influences on employed adults' travel in the UK: New insights from the National Travel Survey data 2002-2010

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice

Volumn 80, Issue , 2015, Pages 288-306

  Jahanshahi, Kaveh ^a   Jin, Ying ^a   Williams, Ian ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Accessibility; Car ownership; Mobility; Structural equation modelling; Trip frequency; UK National Travel Survey

Indexed keywords

CARRIER MOBILITY; LAND USE; MOTOR TRANSPORTATION; PUBLIC POLICY; SURVEYS; URBAN PLANNING;

ACCESSIBILITY; CAR OWNERSHIP; NATIONAL TRAVEL SURVEYS; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELLING; TRIP FREQUENCY;

URANIUM METALLOGRAPHY;

ACCESSIBILITY; ADULT; CAR OWNERSHIP; LABOR MOBILITY; POLICY ANALYSIS; SURVEY; TRAVEL BEHAVIOR; TRAVEL DEMAND;

UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 84940975869     PISSN: 09658564     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2015.08.007     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Aditjandra P.T., Cao X.J., Mulley C. Understanding neighbourhood design impact on travel behaviour: an application of structural equations model to a British metropolitan data. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Pract. 2012, 46:22-32.
2. Albright, J.J., Park, H.M., 2009. Confirmatory Factor Analysis Using Amos, LISREL, Mplus, and SAS/STAT CALIS, vol. 1. The Trustees of Indiana University, pp. 1-85.
3. Boarnet, M.G., 2004. The Built Environment and Physical Activity: Empirical Methods and Data Resource. Transport Research Board.
4. Bohte W., Maat K., van Wee B. Measuring attitudes in research on residential self-selection and travel behaviour: a review of theories and empirical research. Transp. Rev. 2009, 29:325-357.
5. Cameron A.C., Miller D.L. A practitioner's guide to cluster-robust inference. J. Hum. Resour. 2015, 50:317-372.
6. Cao X., Mokhtarian P.L., Handy S.L. Cross-sectional and quasi-panel explorations of the connection between the built environment and auto ownership. Environ. Plann. A 2007, 39:830-847.
7. Cao X., Mokhtarian P.L., Handy S.L. Do changes in neighborhood characteristics lead to changes in travel behavior? A structural equations modeling approach. Transportation 2007, 34:535-556.
8. Cao X., Mokhtarian P.L., Handy S.L. The relationship between the built environment and nonwork travel: a case study of Northern California. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Pract. 2009, 43:548-559.
9. Carl, E., Heald, K., Hood, A., 2014. The Changing Face of Retirement: Future Patterns of Work, Health, Care and Income among the Older Population. Institute for Fiscal Studies.
10. Cervero R., Duncan M. Which reduces vehicle travel more: jobs-housing balance or retail-housing mixing?. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 2006, 72:475-490.
11. Cervero R., Kockelman K. Travel demand and the 3Ds: density, diversity, and design. Transport. Res. Part D: Transp. Environ. 1997, 2:199-219.
12. Cervero R., Murakami J. Effects of built environments on vehicle miles traveled: evidence from 370 US urbanized areas. Environ. Plann. A 2010, 42:400-418.
13. Cervero R., Wu K. Polycentrism, commuting, and residential location in the San Francisco Bay area. Environ. Plann. A 1997, 29:865-886.
14. Chatterjee K. Modelling the dynamics of bus use in a changing travel environment using panel data. Transportation 2011, 38:487-509.
15. Church A., Frost M., Sullivan K. Transport and social exclusion in London. Transp. Policy 2000, 7:195-205.
16. Dargay J. The effect of prices and income on car travel in the UK. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Pract. 2007, 41:949-960.
17. Dargay, J., Hanly, M., 2004. Land use and mobility. In: World Conference on Transport Research.
18. Gao S., Mokhtarian P.L., Johnston R.A. Exploring the connections among job accessibility, employment, income, and auto ownership using structural equation modeling. Ann. Reg. Sci. 2008, 42:341-356.
19. Giuliano G., Dargay J. Car ownership, travel and land use: a comparison of the US and Great Britain. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Pract. 2006, 40:106-124.
20. Giuliano G., Small K.A. Is the journey to work explained by urban structure?. Urban Stud. 1993, 30:1485-1500.
21. Golob T.F. Structural equation modeling for travel behavior research. Transport. Res. Part B - Meth. 2003, 37:1-25.
22. Handel, M.J., 2012. Trends in Job Skill Demands in OECD Countries. OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 143.
23. Handy S., Cao X.Y., Mokhtarian P. Correlation or causality between the built environment and travel behavior? Evidence from Northern California. Transport. Res. Part D - Transp. Environ. 2005, 10:427-444.
24. Handy S., Cao X.Y., Mokhtarian P.L. Self-selection in the relationship between the built environment and walking - empirical evidence from northern California. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 2006, 72:55-74.
25. Hayllar, O., McDonnell, P., Mottau, C., Salathiel, D., 2005. National Travel Survey 2003 & 2004 Technical Report. UK Department for Transport.
26. Hine J., Grieco M. Scatters and clusters in time and space: implications for delivering integrated and inclusive transport. Transp. Policy 2003, 10:299-306.
27. Jahanshahi, K., Jin, Y., Williams, I.N., 2013. Analyzing Sources of Variability in Travel Time Use in a Combined Framework Using Extended Structural Equation Models and UK National Travel Survey Data. Transport Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC.
28. Jahanshahi, K., Williams, I., Hao, X., 2009. Understanding travel behaviour and factors affecting trip rates. In: European Transport Conference.
29. Jain J., Lyons G. The gift of travel time. J. Transp. Geogr. 2008, 16:81-89.
30. Jin, Y., Williams, I., Shahkarami, M., 2002. A New Land Use and Transport Interaction Model for London and Its Surrounding Regions. European Transport Forum, Cambridge.
31. Jolliffe, D., Lanjouw, P., Chen, S., Kraay, A., Meyer, C., Negre, M., Prydz, E., Vakis, R., Wethli, K., 2015. A Measured Approach to Ending Poverty and Boosting Shared Prosperity: Concepts, Data, and the Twin Goals. Development Research Group of the World Bank.
32. Jowett, A., Taylor, C., Hadie, M., Khan, Z., 2014. An International Perspective on the UK, Labour Market Performance. ONS Office of the Chief Economic Advisor.
33. Kamruzzaman M., Hine J., Gunay B., Blair N. Using GIS to visualise and evaluate student travel behaviour. J. Transp. Geogr. 2011, 19:13-32.
34. Lucas K. Providing transport for social inclusion within a framework for environmental justice in the UK. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Pract. 2006, 40:801-809.
35. Lucas K. Transport and social exclusion: where are we now?. Transp. Policy 2012, 20:105-113.
36. Martin G. Global motorization, social ecology and China. Area 2007, 39:66-73.
37. Mitchell R.B., Rapkin C. Urban Traffic: A Function of Land Use 1954, Columbia University Press, New York.
38. Mokhtarian P.L., Cao X. Examining the impacts of residential self-selection on travel behavior: a focus on methodologies. Transport. Res. Part B - Meth. 2008, 42:204-228.
39. Morris, S., Humphrey, A., Pickering, K., Tipping, S., Templeton, I., Hurn, J., 2014. National Travel Survey 2013 Technical Report. UK Department for Transport.
40. Muthen L.K., Muthen B.O. Mplus User's Guide 2007, Muthén & Muthén, Los Angeles, CA. fifth ed.
41. Muthén B., Asparouhov T. Growth mixture analysis: models with non-Gaussian random effects. Advances in Longitudinal Data Analysis 2007, Chapman & Hall/CRC Press. G. Fitzmaurice, M. Davidian, G. Verbeke, G. Molenberghs (Eds.).
42. Palmer, N., 2014. Trends in Self Employment. ONS Economic Forum.
43. Preston J., Rajé F. Accessibility, mobility and transport-related social exclusion. J. Transp. Geogr. 2007, 15:151-160.
44. Schwanen T., Lucas K., Akyelken N., Solsona D.C., Carrasco J.-A., Neutens T. Rethinking the links between social exclusion and transport disadvantage through the lens of social capital. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Pract. 2015, 74:123-135.
45. Silva J.d.A.e., Golob T.F., Goulias K.G. Effects of land use characteristics on residence and employment location and travel behavior of urban adult workers. Transport. Res. Rec.: J. Transport. Res. Board 2007, 1977:121-131.
46. Silva J.d.A.e., Morency C., Gouliasc K.G. Using structural equations modeling to unravel the influence of land use patterns on travel behavior of workers in Montreal. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Pract. 2012, 46:1252-1264.
47. Stead D. Relationships between land use, socioeconomic factors, and travel patterns in Britain. Environ. Plann. B - Plann. Des. 2001, 28:499-528.
48. Stead D., Marshall S. The relationships between urban form and travel patterns. An international review and evaluation. Eur. J. Transp. Infrastruct. Res. 2001, 1:113-141.
49. Susilo Y.O. The influence of parent's perceptions and residential self-selection to the children's travel modes at single parent households. Sustainable Urban Transport (Transport and Sustainability) 2015, vol. 7:43-64. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
50. Susilo Y.O., Kitamura R. Structural changes in commuters' daily travel: the case of auto and transit commuters in the Osaka metropolitan area of Japan, 1980-2000. Transport. Res. Part A - Policy Pract. 2008, 42:95-115.
51. Van Acker V., Mokhtarian P.L., Witlox F. Car availability explained by the structural relationships between lifestyles, residential location, and underlying residential and travel attitudes. Transp. Policy 2014, 35:88-99.
52. Van Acker V., Witlox F., Van Wee B. The effects of the land use system on travel behavior: a structural equation modeling approach. Transport. Plann. Technol. 2007, 30:331-353.
53. Wang J., Wang X. Structural Equation Modeling: Applications Using Mplus 2012, Wiley.
54. Weis C., Axhausen K.W. Induced travel demand: evidence from a pseudo panel data based structural equations model. Res. Transport. Econ. 2009, 25:8-18.
55. WSP, 2009. Research into Changing Trip Rates Over Time and Implications for the National Trip End Model: Final Report.