Cover Image

Not for Sale



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 59


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 58
46 I N N O VAT I O N S I N T R AV E L D E M A N D M O D E L I N G , V O L U M E 1 The research used the ATUS, which is conducted The survey results indicate that 42% of weekday by the Census Bureau under contract with the Bureau of travel episodes and 62% of weekend travel episodes are Labor Statistics. The sample is drawn from a subset of with other people. Some 60% of all joint travel is under- households responding to the Current Population Survey taken with only household members. Travel with non- interviews. One individual, age 15 years or older, is household members is more likely to occur on weekends selected from each household. A 1-day time-of-use sur- than on weekdays. vey is collected from these individuals. An elaborate A review of the survey results indicates some gen- three-tier activity classification scheme is used. Data are eral trends. Joint activity-travel participation levels are also collected for weekdays and weekend days. The sam- significantly high on both weekdays and weekends. The ple for analysis is large. It includes 412,611 episodes levels of joint participation vary by activity type. For in- from 20,720 persons in the 2003 survey and 279,042 home episodes, nonhousehold members are more likely episodes from 13,973 persons in the 2004 survey. One companions during weekends than weekdays. For out- limitation with the use of ATUS for examining joint of-home travel episodes, nonhousehold members are activity participation is the lack of time use information more likely companions during weekdays than week- for the respondents' companions. While this limitation ends. Joint leisure activities are more likely to be pursued does not allow assessing the impacts of time constraints with nonhousehold members than joint maintenance of all individuals on the joint time investment decision, it activities. is possible to examine the impacts of individuals and The results also indicate that episodes of longer household socioeconomic characteristics and day of the duration are more likely to be jointly undertaken with week and seasonal factors. other persons. Weekday joint episodes are more likely to The ATUS includes classifications of companions involve only nonhousehold companions than weekend for household members and nonhousehold members. episodes. Caucasians are more likely to pursue joint Household members include a spouse, unmarried part- activities. Employed persons and students are likely to ner, children, grandchildren, and parents. Other house- pursue leisure activities with colleagues. Marital status hold members include siblings, other related people, and presence of children in the household negatively foster children, housemates or roommates, roomers or impact undertaking leisure with only nonhousehold boarders, and other nonrelatives. Nonhousehold mem- persons. bers include nonhousehold children, parents or parents- The study results suggest that the social aspect of in-law, and other nonhousehold family members. travel behavior is not currently suitably accommodated Additional nonhousehold members include friends, in travel forecasting, which could potentially lead to coworkers, colleagues, clients, neighbors or acquain- erroneous forecasts of responses to policy actions. The tances, other nonhousehold children, and other non- empirical analysis undertaken in this study using ATUS household adults. highlights the continued and critical need to explicitly The total number of episodes of each activity type incorporate interpersonal interactions in travel model- in the sample and the percentage of joint activities by ing. Enhancements in travel surveys might include each type were examined for weekdays and weekend activity-type classification schemes and querying of days. During weekdays, 32% of all in-house episodes are activity and travel companions for both household and joint activities, while 35% of all weekend days in-home nonhousehold members. episodes are joint activities. Some activities, such as care- giving and socializing, are by their nature always joint activities. Other activities, such as personal care, sleep- AN INNOVATIVE METHODOLOGICAL ing, work, and school, are defined as solo activities. Eat- FRAMEWORK TO ANALYZE THE IMPACT OF ing and drinking and watching television and listening to BUILT ENVIRONMENT CHARACTERISTICS ON music are the most frequently reported joint in-home ACTIVITY-TRAVEL CHOICES activities. These activities include both household and nonhousehold members. Jessica Guo and Chandra Bhat The survey results indicate that out-of-home activ- ity episodes are more likely to be joint activities than in- Jessica Guo described a methodological framework to home episodes. Some 47 percent of all weekday episodes analyze the impact of the built environment on activity. and 71 percent of all weekend activities are joint She provided an overview of land use and travel demand episodes. Socializing and serve-passenger are considered interactions and discussed some of the issues associated to be joint activities, while work and school are consid- with understanding the relationship between land use ered solo activities. Eating and drinking, leisure, and reli- and travel demand. She presented a proposed methodol- gious, civic, and volunteer episodes are most likely to be ogy for analyzing the impacts of the built environment pursued with household and nonhousehold individuals. on activity and described the results of an empirical