Opportunities for Transport Mode Change: An Exploration of a Disaggregated Approach

Research into the effects of spatial configuration on the use of transport modes has to date dominantly been based on analyses of actual travel behaviour or prediction of future transport mode choices. However, in this research it is not made clear what choice opportunities were available for travel behaviour of the various population categories, given their desired activities and time–space opportunities. The authors describe a time–space theoretical and methodological framework based on the concept of action spaces, within which the choice opportunities of different types of households of various areas can be analysed. On the basis of a pilot study among the residents of a suburban neighbourhood in a Netherlands new town, the time–space opportunities they have to use alternative transport modes other than the car are brought into the frame. It is shown that residents have more time–space opportunities to make use of existing environmentally friendly, transport modes than had been expected. The possibilities differ between types of action spaces and types of households. Some implications for policymaking are discussed. The authors state that policymakers should be more sensitive to interpersonal differences in accessibility.

[1]  M. Jenks,et al.  Centrists, Decentrists and Compromisers: Views on the Future of Urban Form , 2003 .

[2]  S. Hanson THE DETERMINANTS OF DAILY TRAVEL-ACTIVITY PATTERNS: RELATIVE LOCATION AND SOCIODEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS , 1982 .

[3]  P. Gordon,et al.  Are Compact Cities a Desirable Planning Goal , 1997 .

[4]  S. Doherty,et al.  A conceptual model and empirical analysis of children's acquisition of spatial knowledge , 1985 .

[5]  R. Ewing Is Los Angeles-Style Sprawl Desirable? , 1997 .

[6]  J. Strathman,et al.  Effects of household structure and selected travel characteristics on trip chaining , 1994 .

[7]  Jeffrey Kenworthy,et al.  Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence , 1999 .

[8]  Torsten Hägerstraand WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE IN REGIONAL SCIENCE , 1970 .

[9]  R. Kitamura,et al.  Accessibility in a Metropolis: Toward a Better Understanding of Land Use and Travel , 2001 .

[10]  S. Hanson The importance of the multi-purpose journey to work in urban travel behavior , 1980 .

[11]  Michael Wegener,et al.  Applied Models of Urban Land Use, Transport and Environment: State of the Art and Future Developments , 1998 .

[12]  T. Spit,et al.  Planning the compact city: The randstad Holland experience , 1999 .

[13]  Jeffrey Kenworthy,et al.  Gasoline Consumption and Cities: A Comparison of U.S. Cities with a Global Survey , 1989 .

[14]  Maria Manta Conroy,et al.  Accessibility Measures and the Social Evaluation of Urban Structure , 1977 .

[15]  R. Kitamura,et al.  A micro-analysis of land use and travel in five neighborhoods in the San Francisco Bay Area , 1997 .

[16]  Thomas F. Golob,et al.  Travel Probability Fields and Urban Spatial Structure: 1. Theory , 1983 .

[17]  Helmut Holzapfel Trip relationships in urban areas , 1986 .

[18]  David Banister,et al.  Sustainable Cities: Transport, Energy, and Urban Form , 1997 .

[19]  F. E. Horton,et al.  Effects of Urban Spatial Structure on Individual Behavior , 1971 .

[20]  L. A. Brown,et al.  The Intra-Urban Migration Process: a Perspective , 1970 .

[21]  Ta Theo Arentze,et al.  Experiences with developing ALBATROSS: a learning-based transportation oriented simulation system , 1998 .

[22]  J. Prashker,et al.  The Effect of Temporal Constraints on Household Travel Behavior , 1981 .

[23]  Gordon Pirie,et al.  Measuring Accessibility: A Review and Proposal , 1979 .

[24]  M. Kwan Gender and Individual Access to Urban Opportunities: A Study Using Space–Time Measures , 1999 .

[25]  M Dijst,et al.  INDIVIDUAL ACTION SPACE IN THE CITY. , 1997 .

[26]  Martin Dijst,et al.  Two-earner families and their action spaces: A case study of two dutch communities , 1999 .

[27]  Harvey J. Miller,et al.  Modelling accessibility using space-time prism concepts within geographical information systems , 1991, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[28]  M. Dijst,et al.  Travel time ratio: the key factor of spatial reach , 2000 .

[29]  Susan L Handy,et al.  METHODOLOGIES FOR EXPLORING THE LINK BETWEEN URBAN FORM AND TRAVEL BEHAVIOR , 1996 .

[30]  M. Dijst,et al.  Travel-time ratios for visits to the workplace: the relationship between commuting time and work duration , 2002 .

[31]  I. Cullen,et al.  Urban Networks: The Structure of Activity Patterns , 1975 .

[32]  R. Cervero The Planned City: Coping With Decentralization: an American Perspective , 1998 .

[33]  Anne Buttimer BUTTIMER, ANNE, Social Space and the Planning of Residential Areas , 1972 .

[34]  Paul D. Smith,et al.  Urban activity spaces: Illustrations and application of a conceptual model for integrating the time and space dimensions , 1998 .

[35]  S. Hanson,et al.  Accessibility and Intraurban Travel , 1987 .

[36]  Reid Ewing,et al.  Travel and the Built Environment: A Synthesis , 2001 .

[37]  Martin Dijst,et al.  Action space as planning concept in spatial planning , 1999 .

[38]  M. Jun,et al.  THE COMMUTING PARADOX: EVIDENCE FROM THE TOP TWENTY , 1991 .