Cover Image

Not for Sale



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 80


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 79
68 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 2 average equilibrium unit prices near employment sites Chang, J., and R. Mackett. 2005. A Bi-Level Model of the rose, and the average equilibrium unit prices far away Relationship Between Transport and Residential Location. from employment sites declined. This tendency was more Transportation Research B, Vol. 40, pp. 123146. significant for sites with single-employment centers (i.e., Clark, W. A. V., Y. Huang, and S. Withers. 2003. Does Com- monocentric job) scenarios than for the corresponding muting Distance Matter? Commuting Tolerance and Resi- scenarios with multiple employment sites. Moreover, for dential Change. Regional Science and Urban Economics, the six scenarios, Moran's I-statistics [calculated on the Vol. 33, pp. 199221. basis of an inverse Euclidean-distance matrix (e.g., Lee de la Barra, T. 1989. Integrated Land Use and Transport Mod- and Wong 2000)] indicated that average equilibrium unit elling: Decision Chains and Hierarchies. Cambridge Uni- prices for residentially developed parcels had positive spa- versity Press, New York. tial autocorrelation over the entire region, confirming the Herbert, J., and B. Stevens. 1960. A Model of the Distribution visual information conveyed by the plots. By using of Residential Activity in Urban Areas. Journal of Regional Moran's statistics, a clustering of households of similar Science, Vol. 2, pp. 2136. income was observed, as expected. Irwin, E., and N. Bockstael. 2004. Land Use Externalities, Open Space Preservation, and Urban Sprawl. Regional Sci- ence and Urban Economics, Vol. 34, pp. 705725. CONCLUSIONS Lee, J., and D. Wong. 2000. Statistical Analysis with Arcview GIS. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York. This paper developed a model for distributing new house- Rouwendal, J., and E. Meijer. 2001. Preferences for Housing, holds and tracking home price fluctuations on the basis Jobs, and Commuting: A Mixed Logit Analysis. Journal of of microeconomic theories and microsimulation. Disag- Regional Science, Vol. 41, pp. 475505. gregate spatial data facilitated model calibration and Senior, M., and A. Wilson. 1974. Explorations and Syntheses of application for Austin, Texas, a medium-sized urban Linear Programming and Spatial Interation Models of Resi- region. The results were reasonable and tangible. Perhaps dential Location. Geographical Analysis, Vol. 6, pp. most importantly, they suggested that microsimulation of 209238. an entire region's land market was viable. The model used Tillema, T., D. Ettema, and B. van Wee. 2006. Road Pricing here can be improved through more realistic developer and (Re)Location Decisions of Households. Presented at tendencies of parcels (rather than, for example, a single- 85th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research valued FAR or solely single-family residential parcels) Board, Washington, D.C. and consideration of additional policy tools (such as Van Ommeren, J., P. Rietveld, and P. Nijkamp. 1999. Job Mov- roadway pricing and land regulation effects). Such ing, Residential Moving, and Commuting: A Search Perspec- approaches herald a new wave of land use modeling tive. Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 46, pp. 230253. opportunities. Von Thnen, J. H. 1826. Der Isolierte Staat in Beziehung auf Landwirtschaft und Nationalekonomie. Hamburg, Germany. Wingo, L. 1961. Transportation and Urban Land Use. Johns REFERENCES Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Md. Zhou, B., and K. Kockelman. 2005. Neighborhood Impacts Alonso, W. 1964. Location and Land Use. Harvard University on Land Use Change: A Multinomial Logit Model of Spa- Press, Cambridge, Mass. tial Relationships. Presented at 52nd Annual North Amer- Anas, A., and R. Xu. 1999. Congestion, Land Use, and Job ican Meeting of Regional Science Association Inter- Dispersion: A General Equilibrium Model. Journal of national, Las Vegas, Nev. Urban Economics, Vol. 45, pp. 451473. Aptech Systems. 2003. GAUSS Mathematical and Statistical System 6.0. Aptech Systems, Inc., Maple Valley, Wash. ADDITIONAL RESOURCE Bina, M., and K. Kockelman. 2006. Location Choice vis--vis Transportation: The Case of Recent Home buyers. Pre- Berechman, J., and K. Small. 1988. Modeling Land Use and sented at 11th Conference of the International Association Transportation: An Interpretive Review for Growth Areas. of Travel Behavior Research, Kyoto, Japan. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 20, pp. 12851309.