Alternative approaches to trip distribution modelling: A retrospective review and suggestions for combining different approaches

Various alternative approaches are available in the literature for modelling trip distribution. The objective of this paper is to provide a review of this literature with the view of summarising the general nature of the current state of practise and what is now available for practical modelling work. Both aggregate and disaggregate destination choice models are considered, a classification of them will be proposed and suggestions for further research will be given as well. One outcome of this review is that significant contributions are emerging from mixed models (e.g., gravity-opportunity, random utility, intervening opportunities models, etc). In particular, the review will highlight the benefit of integrating different approaches like the introduction of intervening opportunities factors within random utility models. Copyright (c) 2007 the author(s). Journal compilation (c) 2007 RSAI.

[1]  Craig R. Rindt,et al.  The Activity-Based Approach , 2008 .

[2]  A S Fotheringham,et al.  A New Set of Spatial-Interaction Models: The Theory of Competing Destinations † , 1983 .

[3]  J. Thill,et al.  Spatial interaction modelling , 2003 .

[4]  R. Kitamura.  An evaluation of activity-based travel analysis , 1988 .

[5]  H. Timmermans,et al.  Choice model specification, substitution and spatial structure effects: A simulation experiment , 1987 .

[6]  John R. Roy.  Comment on “The Development of a New Gravity—Opportunity Model for Trip Distribution” , 1993 .

[7]  A. Fotheringham.  Note---Consumer Store Choice and Choice Set Definition , 1988 .

[8]  C. Manski.  The structure of random utility models , 1977 .

[9]  S. Stouffer.  Intervening opportunities: a theory relating mobility and distance , 1940 .

[10]  James A. Pooler,et al.  The development of an intervening opportunities model with spatial dominance effects , 2001, J. Geogr. Syst..

[11]  A. Fotheringham,et al.  Spatial Competition and Agglomeration in Urban Modelling , 1985 .

[12]  S. P. Evans.  A relationship between the gravity model for trip distribution and the transportation problem in linear programming , 1973 .

[13]  Kenneth E. Train,et al.  Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation , 2016 .

[14]  Hugh F. Gunn,et al.  DISAGGREGATE TRIP DISTRIBUTION MODELS , 1984 .

[15]  Robert J. Meyer,et al.  Context-Induced Parameter Instability in a Disaggregate-Stochastic Model of Store Choice , 1982 .

[16]  John Douglas Hunt,et al.  The MEPLAN models of Bilbao, Leeds and Dortmund , 1990 .

[17]  John Preston,et al.  An Analysis of Residential Location Choice Behaviour in Oxfordshire, Uk: A Combined Stated Preference Approach , 2003 .

[18]  J. Douglas Carrol.  SPATIAL INTERACTION AND THE URBAN-METROPOLITAN REGIONAL DESCRIPTION , 2005 .

[19]  Moshe Ben-Akiva,et al.  PII: S0965-8564(99)00043-9 , 2000 .

[20]  Andrea Papola,et al.  Random utility models with implicit availability/perception of choice alternatives for the simulation of travel demand , 2001 .

[21]  David L. Huff,et al.  Defining and Estimating a Trading Area , 1964 .

[22]  David A. Hensher,et al.  The Mixed Logit Model: the State of Practice and Warnings for the Unwary , 2001 .

[23]  M. B. Gonçalves,et al.  The Development of a New Gravity—Opportunity Model for Trip Distribution , 1993 .

[24]  S. Atkins,et al.  THE CRISIS FOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNING MODELLING , 1987 .

[25]  Alan Wilson,et al.  A statistical theory of spatial distribution models , 1967 .

[26]  Yacov Y. Haimes,et al.  Decision Making with Multiple Objectives , 1985 .

[27]  Richard Stone.  A COMPARISON OF THE ECONOMIC STRUCTURE OF REGIONS BASED ON THE CONCEPT OF DISTANCE. , 1960 .

[28]  Mirian Buss Gonçalves,et al.  A Methodology to Incorporate Behavioral Aspects in Trip-Distribution Models with an Application to Estimate Student Flow , 2001 .

[29]  G. Barber,et al.  Modelling Internal Migration in Kenya: An Econometric Analysis with Limited Data , 1988, Environment & planning A.

[30]  K. Axhausen,et al.  Activity‐based approaches to travel analysis: conceptual frameworks, models, and research problems , 1992 .

[31]  M. J. Wills,et al.  A flexible gravity-opportunities model for trip distribution , 1986 .

[32]  A Papola,et al.  Dominance among alternatives in choice set modeling: general theory and application to the destination choice , 2000 .

[33]  M. Oppermann,et al.  Predicting destination choice — A discussion of destination loyalty , 1999 .

[34]  A. Fotheringham,et al.  Modelling Hierarchical Destination Choice , 1986 .

[35]  Jean-Michel Guldmann,et al.  Competing destinations and intervening opportunities interaction models of inter-city telecommunication flows , 1998 .

[36]  Earl R. Ruiter,et al.  Toward a better understanding of the intervening opportunities model , 1967 .

[37]  Andrea Papola,et al.  DOMINANCE AMONG ALTERNATIVES IN RANDOM UTILITY MODELS: A GENERAL FRAMEWORK AND AN APPLICATION TO DESTINATION CHOICE , 2005 .

[38]  Jean-Claude Thill,et al.  Choice set formation for destination choice modelling , 1992 .

[39]  H. Williams,et al.  Behavioural theories of dispersion and the mis-specification of travel demand models☆ , 1982 .