Built environment and car driving distance in a small city context
Fitwi Wolday
Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Norwegian University of Life Sciences
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2018.1176
Keywords: Built environment, Travel behavior, City center structure, Regional context
Abstract
This article focuses on the effect of built-environment factors on travel behavior in the context of small cities. Urban size and spatial context are central to travel behavior analysis because of the spatiotemporal nature of transportation. Different urban structural attributes exert travel behavioral influences at different spatial scales (local vs. regional) and urban sizes. Due to this inherent geographic dimension in travel studies, findings from larger urban areas may not be transferable to small cities. Despite this, however, small cities remain scantily represented in the literature. Using multivariate analysis on survey data from three small cities in Norway, this paper finds that the built-environment effects on travel behavior are highly influenced by regional characteristics and the city’s center structure (poly-centered vs. single centered). Residential proximity to the city center leads to reduced car driving distance through its distance-minimizing effect to concentrations of facilities for local travel. At the regional scale, proximity to the city center influences car driving distance via the higher likelihood among centrally located commuters of choosing transit as their commute mode.Author Biography
Fitwi Wolday, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Norwegian University of Life Sciences
PhD fellow at The Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Norwegian University of Life Sciences. Visiting scholar at the Humphrey School of Public Affairs, University of Minesota (2016/17).References
Aguilera, A., & Mignot, D. (2004). Urban sprawl, polycentrism and commuting. A comparison of seven French urban areas. Urban Public Economics Review, 1, 93–113.
Amundsen, B., & Lie, E. (2013). Do surveys still give an accurate picture? Fewer willing to participate in surveys. Retrieved from: https://www.forskningsradet.no/en/Newsarticle/Fewer_willing_to_participate_in_surveys/1253986812629
Bhat, C. R., & Guo, J. Y. (2007). A comprehensive analysis of built environment characteristics on household residential choice and auto ownership levels. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 41(5), 506–526. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2005.12.005
Boarnet, M., & Crane, R. (2001a). The influence of land use on travel behavior: Specification and estimation strategies. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 35(9), 823–845. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0965-8564(00)00019-7
Boarnet, M., & Crane, R. (2001b). Travel by design: The influence of urban form on travel. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Boarnet, M., Nesamani, K., & Smith, S. (2003). Comparing the influence of land use on nonwork trip generation and vehicle distance traveled: An analysis using travel diary data. Irvine, CA: University of California Irvine, Center for Activity Systems Analysis.
Cao, J., & Cao, X. (2014). The Impacts of LRT, neighborhood characteristics, and self-selection on auto ownership: Evidence from Minneapolis-St. Paul. Urban Studies, 51(10), 2068–2087. doi:10.1177/0042098013505887
Cao, X. (2008). Is alternative development undersupplied? Examination of residential preferences and choices of Northern California movers. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2077, 97–105. doi:10.3141/2077-13
Cao, X., & Chatman, D. (2016). How will smart growth land-use policies affect travel? A theoretical discussion on the importance of residential sorting. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 43(1), 58–73. doi:10.1177/0265813515600060
Cao, X., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Handy, S. L. (2009). Examining the impacts of residential self‐selection on travel Behavior: A focus on empirical findings. Transport Reviews, 29(3), 359–395. doi:10.1080/01441640802539195
Cao, X., Næss, P., & Wolday, F. (2017). Urban containment and inner-city densification reduce auto ownership. Paper presented at the WSTLUR symposium, July 3–6, 2017, Brisbane, Australia.
Cervero, R., & Kockelman, K. (1997). Travel demand and the 3Ds: Density, diversity, and design. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2(3), 199–219. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1361-9209(97)00009-6
Chatman, D. G. (2009). Residential choice, the built environment, and nonwork travel: Evidence using new data and methods. Environment and Planning A, 41(5), 1072–1089. doi:10.1068/a4114
Chatman, D. G. (2014). Estimating the effect of land use and transportation planning on travel patterns: Three problems in controlling for residential self-selection. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 7(3), 47–56.
Cho, G.-H., & Rodríguez, D. A. (2014). The influence of residential dissonance on physical activity and walking: Evidence from the Montgomery County, MD, and Twin Cities, MN, areas. Journal of Transport Geography, 41, 259–267. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2014.06.007
Christaller, W. (1966). Central places in southern Germany. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Circella, G., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Handy, S. L. (2008). Land use, attitudes, and travel behavior relationships: A cross-sectional structural equations model for Northern California. Paper presented at the Transportation Research Board 87th Annual Meeting, Washington, DC.
Crane, R., & Guo, Z. (2012). Toward a second generation of land-use/travel models: Theoretical and empirical frontiers. In N. Brooks, K. Donaghy, & G. Knaap (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of urban economics and planning (pp. 522-544). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellegård, K., & Vilhelmson, B. (2004). Home as a pocket of local order: Everyday activities and the friction of distance. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 86(4), 281–296. doi:10.1111/j.0435-3684.2004.00168.x
Ettema, D., & Nieuwenhuis, R. (2017). Residential self-selection and travel behavior: What are the effects of attitudes, reasons for location choice and the built environment? Journal of Transport Geography, 59, 146–155. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2017.01.009
Ewing, R., & Cervero, R. (2010). Travel and the built environment: A meta-analysis. Journal of the American Planning Association, 76(3), 265–294. doi:10.1080/01944361003766766
Ewing, R., Tian, G., Goates, J. P., Zhang, M., Greenwald, M. J., Joyce, A., … & Greene, W. (2014). Varying influences of the built environment on household travel in 15 diverse regions of the United States. Urban Studies, 52(13), 2330–2348. doi:10.1177/0042098014560991
Filion, P., Bunting, T., & Warriner, K. (1999). The entrenchment of urban dispersion: Residential preferences and location patterns in the dispersed city. Urban Studies, 36(8), 1317–1347. doi:10.1080/0042098993015
Fotheringham, A. (1989). Scale-independent spatial analysis. In M. Goodchild & S. Gopa (Eds.), The accuracy of spatial databases (pp. 221-228). Abingdom, UK: Taylor & Francis.
Frank, L. D., Saelens, B. E., Powell, K. E., & Chapman, J. E. (2007). Stepping towards causation: Do built environments or neighborhood and travel preferences explain physical activity, driving, and obesity? Social Science & Medicine, 65(9), 1898–1914. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.05.053
Handy, S., Cao, X., & Mokhtarian, P. (2005). Correlation or causality between the built environment and travel behavior? Evidence from Northern California. Transportation Research Part D, 10(6), 427–444. doi:10.1016/j.trd.2005.05.002
Handy, S., Cao, X., & Mokhtarian, P. L. (2006). Self-selection in the relationship between the built environment and walking: Empirical evidence from Northern California. Journal of the American Planning Association, 72(1), 55–74. doi:10.1080/01944360608976724
Hjorthol, R. (2003). Gendered aspects of travel behavior development-are the differences disappearing? Paper presented at the European Transport Conference, October 8–10, Strasbourg, France.
Hjorthol, R. (2008). Daily mobility of men and women—a barometer of gender equality. In T. Cresswell & T. Uteng (Eds.) Gendered mobilities (pp. 193–210). London: Routledge.
Hjorthol, R., Engebretsen, Ø., & Uteng, T. P. (2014). The Norwegian Travel Survey 2013/14 – key results. Retrieved from https://www.toi.no/getfile.php?mmfileid=39511
Hong, J., Shen, Q., & Zhang, L. (2014). How do built-environment factors affect travel behavior? A spatial analysis at different geographic scales. Transportation, 41(3), 419–440. doi:10.1007/s11116-013-9462-9
Kendall, M. G., & Stuart, A. (1961). The advanced theory of statistics (Vol. 2). New York: Charles Griffin Publishers.
Kitamura, R., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Laidet, L. (1997). A micro-analysis of land use and travel in five neighborhoods in the San Francisco Bay Area. Transportation, 24(2), 125–158. doi:10.1023/a:1017959825565
Kockelman, K. (1997). Travel behavior as function of accessibility, land-use mixing, and land-use balance: Evidence from San Francisco Bay Area. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1607, 116–125. doi:10.3141/1607-16
Kwan, M.-P. (2012). The uncertain geographic context problem. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 102(5), 958–968. doi:10.1080/00045608.2012.687349
Kwan, M.-P., & Weber, J. (2008). Scale and accessibility: Implications for the analysis of land use–travel interaction. Applied Geography, 28(2), 110–123. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2007.07.002
Milakis, D., Cervero, R., & van Wee, B. (2015). Stay local or go regional? Urban form effects on vehicle use at different spatial scales: A theoretical concept and its application to the San Francisco Bay Area. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 8(2), 55–86. doi:10.5198/jtlu.2015.557
Næss, P. (2005). Residential location affects travel behavior—but how and why? The case of Copenhagen metropolitan area. Progress in Planning, 63(2), 167–257. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2004.07.004
Næss, P. (2006). Urban structure matters: Residential location, car dependence and travel behavior (Vol. 13). London: Routledge.
Næss, P. (2009). Residential self‐selection and appropriate control variables in land use: Travel studies. Transport Reviews, 29(3), 293–324. doi:10.1080/01441640802710812
Næss, P. (2011). ‘New urbanism’ or metropolitan-level centralization? A comparison of the influences of metropolitan-level and neighborhood-level urban form characteristics on travel behavior. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 4(1), 20. doi:10.5198/jtlu.v4i1.170
Næss, P. (2012). Urban form and travel behavior: Experience from a Nordic context. Journal of Transport and Land Use 5(2), 21–45. doi:10.5198/jtlu.v5i2.314
Næss, P. (2013). Residential location, transport rationales and daily-life travel behavior: The case of Hangzhou Metropolitan Area, China. Progress in Planning, 79(0), 1–50. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2012.05.001
Næss, P. (2014). Tempest in a teapot: The exaggerated problem of transport-related residential self-selection as a source of error in empirical studies. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 7(3), 23. doi:10.5198/jtlu.v7i3.491
Næss, P. (2015). Built environment, causality and travel. Transport Reviews, 35(3),1–17. doi:10.1080/01441647.2015.1017751
Næss, P. (2016). Urban planning: Residential location and compensatory behavior in three Scandinavian cities. In T. Santarius, H. J. Walnum, & C. Aall (Eds.), Rethinking climate and energy policies: New perspectives on the rebound phenomenon (pp. 181–207). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Næss, P., & Jensen, O. B. (2004). Urban structure matters, even in a small town. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 47(1), 35–57. doi:10.1080/0964056042000189790
Næss, P., Strand, A., Wolday, F., & Stefansdottir, H. (2017). Residential location, commuting and non-work travel in two urban areas of different size and with different center structures. Progress in Planning. (In press). doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2017.10.002
Norway's Government. (2014). Central government policy guidelines for coordinated land use and transport planning in 1993, amended in 2014. Retrieved from https://www.regjeringen.no/en/dokumenter/National-Policy-Guidelines-for-coordinated-land-use-and-transport-planning/id107851/
Pushkar, A. O., Hollingworth, B. J., & Miller, E. J. (2000). A multivariate regression model for estimating greenhouse gas emissions from alternative neighborhood designs. Paper presented at the 79th annual meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
Røe, P. G. (2000). Qualitative research on intra-urban travel: An alternative approach. Journal of Transport Geography, 8(2), 99106. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6923(99)00039-3
Statistics Norway. (2015a). Land use in urban settlements. Area and population of urban settlements, by densely populated area, contents and year. Statistikkbanken, Table: 04859. Retrieved from http://www.ssb.no
Statistics Norway. (2015b). Register based employment data, 4th quarter, 2015. Retrieved from https://www.ssb.no/en/arbeid-og-lonn/statistikker/regsys
Stevens, M. R. (2017). Does compact development make people drive less? Journal of the American Planning Association, 83(1), 7–18. doi:10.1080/01944363.2016.1240044
Sun, B., He, Z., Zhang, T., & Wang, R. (2016). Urban spatial structure and commute duration: An empirical study of China. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 10(7), 638–644. doi:10.1080/15568318.2015.1042175
Wolday, F. (2018). The effect of neighborhood and urban center structures on active travel in small cities. (Under review).
Wolday, F., Cao, J., & Næss, P. (2018). Examining factors that keep residents with high transit preference away from transit-rich zones and associated behavior outcomes. Journal of Transport Geography, 66(Supplement C), 224–234. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2017.12.009
Wooldridge, J. M. (2014). Introduction to econometrics. United Kingdom: Cengage Learning EMEA.
Zegras, C. (2010). The built environment and motor vehicle ownership and use: Evidence from Santiago de Chile. Urban Studies, 47(8), 1793–1817.
Zhang, L., Hong, J. H., Nasri, A., & Shen, Q. (2012). How built environment affects travel behavior: A comparative analysis of the connections between land use and vehicle miles traveled in US cities. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 5(3), 40–52.
Zhou, B., & Kockelman, K. (2008). Self-selection in home choice: Use of treatment effects in evaluating relationship between built environment and travel behavior. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (2077), 54–61.
