Measuring Space‐Time Accessibility Benefits within Transportation Networks: Basic Theory and Computational Procedures

Accessibility is a fundamental but often neglected concept in transportation analysis and planning. Three complementary views of accessibility have evolved in the literature. The first is the constraints-oriented approach, best implemented by Hagerstrand's space-time prisms. The second perspective follows a spatial interaction framework and derives "attraction-accessibility measures" that compare destinations' attractiveness with the travel costs required. A third approach measures the benefit provided to individuals by the transportation/land-use system. This paper reconciles the three complementary approaches by deriving space-time accessibility and benefit measures that are consistent with the rigorous Weibull axiomatic framework for accessibility measures. This research also develops computational procedures for calculating these measures within network structures. This provides realistic accessibility measures that reflect the locations, distances and travel velocities allowed by an urban transportation network. Since their computational burdens are reasonable, they can be applied at the urban-scale using a GIS.

[1]  A. Wilson.  Retailers' profits and consumers' welfare in a spatial interaction shopping model , 1975 .

[2]  J. Weibull,et al.  On the Numerical Measurement of Accessibility , 1980 .

[3]  Stan C. M. Geertman,et al.  GIS and Models of Accessibility Potential: An Application in Planning , 1995, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[4]  T. Friesz,et al.  MEASURING THE BENEFITS DERIVED FROM A TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENT. IN: URBAN TRANSPORT , 1982 .

[5]  D. McFadden.  MEASURING WILLINGNESS-TO-PAY FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS. , 1998 .

[6]  W. G. Hansen.  How Accessibility Shapes Land Use , 1959 .

[7]  A. Anas.  Discrete choice theory, information theory and the multinomial logit and gravity models , 1983 .

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

[9]  H Neuburger,et al.  USER BENEFIT IN THE EVALUATION OF TRANSPORT AND LAND USE PLANS , 1971 .

[10]  Harvey J. Miller,et al.  Modeling strategies for the spatial search problem , 1993 .

[11]  B. Lenntorp.  Paths in space-time environments : a time-geographic study of movement possibilities of individuals , 1976 .

[12]  N. F. Stewart,et al.  INTERACTIVITY, ACCESSIBILITY AND COST IN TRIP DISTRIBUTION , 1978 .

[13]  Gunther Maier.  Modeling search processes in space , 1991 .

[14]  Randolph W. Hall,et al.  TRAVEL OUTCOME AND PERFORMANCE: THE EFFECT OF UNCERTAINTY ON ACCESSIBILITY , 1983 .

[15]  S. Erlander.  ACCESSIBILITY, ENTROPY AND THE DISRUPTION AND ASSIGNMENT OF TRAFFIC , 1977 .

[16]  Alfred V. Aho,et al.  The Design and Analysis of Computer Algorithms , 1974 .

[17]  J. Prashker,et al.  EVALUATION OF ACTIVITY CONSTRAINED CHOICE SETS TO SHOPPING DESTINATION CHOICE MODELLING , 1982 .

[18]  Jean-Claude Thill,et al.  Modelling Non-Work Destination Choices with Choice Sets Defined by Travel-Time Constraints: Advances in Spatial Science , 1997 .

[19]  J. Weibull.  An axiomatic approach to the measurement of accessibility , 1976 .

[20]  S. Glaister.  GENERALISED CONSUMER SURPLUS AND PUBLIC TRANSPORT PRICING , 1974 .

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

[22]  Sergio R. Jara-Díaz,et al.  VALUATION OF USERS' BENEFITS IN TRANSPORT SYSTEMS , 1988 .

[23]  Alan Wilson,et al.  The optimum location and size of shopping centres , 1976 .

[24]  J. Pooler,et al.  Measuring geographical accessibility: a review of current approaches and problems in the use of population potentials. , 1987, Geoforum; journal of physical, human, and regional geosciences.

[25]  M. Dalvi,et al.  The measurement of accessibility: Some preliminary results , 1976 .

[26]  Alan Wilson,et al.  A Family of Spatial Interaction Models, and Associated Developments , 1971 .

[27]  K. Small,et al.  Applied Welfare Economics with Discrete Choice Models , 1981 .

[28]  Mei-Po Kwan,et al.  Network-based constraints-oriented choice set formation using GIS , 1998 .

[29]  Philip E. Gill,et al.  Practical optimization , 1981 .

[30]  Robert Sedgewick,et al.  Algorithms in C , 1990 .

[31]  Thomas F. Golob,et al.  Travel Probability Fields and Urban Spatial Structure: 2. Empirical Tests , 1983 .

[32]  H. Williams.  On the Formation of Travel Demand Models and Economic Evaluation Measures of User Benefit , 1977 .

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

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

[35]  A. Pred.  'THE CHOREOGRAPHY OF EXISTENCE: COMMENTS ON HAGERSTRAND'S TIME-GEOGRAPHY AND ITS USEFULNESS , 1977 .

[36]  H. Hotelling.  THE GENERAL WELFARE IN RELATION TO PROBLEMS OF TAXATION AND OF RAILWAY AND UTILITY RATES. IN: RAILWAYS , 1938 .

[37]  Moshe Ben-Akiva,et al.  Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand , 1985 .

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

[39]  L. Burns.  Transportation, temporal, and spatial components of accessibility , 1979 .

[40]  H. Williams,et al.  TRAVEL DEMAND MODELS, DUALITY RELATIONS AND USER BENEFIT ANALYSIS* , 1976 .

[41]  Daniel McFadden,et al.  Computing Willingness-to-Pay in Random Utility Models , 1996 .

[42]  J. M. Morris,et al.  Accessibility indicators for transport planning , 1979 .

[43]  Morton E. O'Kelly,et al.  Spatial Interaction Models:Formulations and Applications , 1988 .