Accessibility and the choice of network investments in the London Underground
David M Levinson
University of Minnesota
David Giacomin
University of Minnesota
Antony Badsey-Ellis
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2015.797
Keywords: accessibility, network growth, network investment, Metro systems, London Underground, Connectivity
Abstract
In 1863, the Metropolitan Railway of what came to be known as the London Underground successfully opened as the world's first subway. Its high ridership spawned interest in additional links. Entrepreneurs secured funding and then proposed new lines to Parliament for approval, though only some were actually approved. While putative rail barons may have conducted some economic analysis, the final decision lay with Parliament, which did not have modern transportation, economic, or geographic analysis tools available. How good were the decisions that Parliament made in approving Underground lines? This paper explores the role accessibility played in the decision to approve or reject proposed early London Tube schemes. It finds that maximizing accessibility to population (highly correlated with revenue and ridership) per expenditure largely explains Parliamentary approvals and rejections.References
British Railways Board (1966) Annual Report and Accounts, H.M. Stationery Of- fice. p. 43.
Badsey-Ellis A (2005) London’s Lost Tube Schemes. Capital Transport.
El-Geneidy A, Levinson D (2006) Access to Destinations: Development of Accessi- bility Measures. Technical Report 2006-16, Minnesota Department of Transporta- tion.
Iacono M, Krizek K, El-Geneidy A (2008) Access to Destinations: How Close is Close Enough? Estimating accurate distance decay functions for multiple modes and different purposes. Technical Report 2008-11, Minnesota Department of Trans- portation.
Krizek K (2005) Perspectives on Accessibility and Travel. Access to Destinations : 109–130.
Levinson DM, Krizek KJ (2005) Access to Destinations. Elsevier.
Levinson DM (1998) Accessibility and the Journey to Work. Journal of Transport Geography 6: 11–21.
Guti ́errez J, Urbano P (1996) Accessibility in the European Union: the Impact of the Trans-European Road Network. Journal of Transport Geography 4: 15–25.
Guti ́errez J (2001) Location, Economic Potential and Daily Accessibility: An Anal- ysis of the Accessibility Impact of the High-Speed Line Madrid–Barcelona–French border. Journal of transport geography 9: 229–242.
Miller HJ (1999) Measuring Space-Time Accessibility Benefits within Transporta- tion Networks: Basic Theory and Computational Procedures. Geographical analysis 31: 1–26.
Hansen W (1959) How Accessibility Shapes Land Use. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 25: 73–76.
Kwan MP, Weber J (2008) Scale and Accessibility: Implications for the Analysis of Land Use–Travel Interaction. Applied Geography 28: 110–123.
Novak DC, Sullivan JL (2013) A Link-Focused Methodology for Evaluating Acces- sibility to Emergency Services. Decision Support Systems .
Ingram DR (1971) The Concept of Accessibility: A Search for an Operational Form. Regional studies 5: 101–107.
Pirie GH (1979) Measuring Accessibility: A Review and Proposal. Environment and Planning A 11: 299–312.
Kwan MP (2000) Human Extensibility and Individual Hybrid-Accessibility in Space-Time: A Multi-Scale Representation Using GIS. In: Information, Place, and Cyberspace, Springer. pp. 241–256.
Miller HJ, Wu YH (2000) GIS Software for Measuring Space-Time Accessibility in Transportation Planning and Analysis. GeoInformatica 4: 141–159.
Miller HJ (1991) Modelling Accessibility Using Space-Time Prism Concepts within Geographical Information Systems. International Journal of Geographical Informa- tion System 5: 287–301.
Liu S, Zhu X (2004) An Integrated GIS Approach to Accessibility Analysis. Trans- actions in GIS 8: 45–62.
Iacono M, Krizek KJ, El-Geneidy A (2010) Measuring Non-Motorized Accessibility: Issues, Alternatives, and Execution. Journal of Transport Geography 18: 133–140.
Huang A, Levinson D (2012) Accessibility, Network Structure, and Consumers’ Destination Choice: A GIS Analysis of GPS Travel Data and the CLUSTER Sim- ulation Module for Retail Location Choice .
Owen A, Anderson P, Levinson D (2012) Relative Accessibility and the Choice of Modes. Publication Pending .
Levinson D, Parthasarathi P (2012) Using Twin Cities Destinations and their Ac- cessibility as a Multimodal Planning Tool .
Batty M, Couclelis H, Getis A, Miller H, Wilson M (2000). Measuring and Repre- senting Accessibility in the Information Age.
Farber S, Neutens T, Miller HJ, Li X (2013) The Social Interaction Potential of Metropolitan Regions: A Time-Geographic Measurement Approach using Joint Accessibility. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 103: 483–504.
Levine J, Grengs J, Shen Q (2012) Does Accessibility Require Density or Speed? Journal of the American Planning Association 78: 157-172.
Miller HJ (2005) Place-Based versus People-Based Accessibility .
Wu YH, Miller HJ (2001) Computational Tools for Measuring Space-Time Acces- sibility within Dynamic Flow Transportation Networks. Journal of Transportation and Statistics 4: 1–14.
Vickerman R, Spiekermann K, Wegener M (1999) Accessibility and Economic De- velopment in Europe. Regional studies 33: 1–15.
Levinson DM (2012) Network Structure and City Size. PLoS ONE 7: e29721.
Roth C, Kang SM, Batty M, Barthelemy M (2012) A Long-Time Limit for World Subway Networks. Journal of The Royal Society Interface 9: 2540–2550.
Erath A, L ̈ochl M, Axhausen KW (2009) Graph-Theoretical Analysis of the Swiss Road and Railway Networks over time. Networks and Spatial Economics 9: 379– 400.
Xie F, Levinson DM (2011) Evolving Transportation Networks, volume 1. Springer.
Levinson D, Xie F, Oca NM (2012) Forecasting and Evaluating Network Growth. Networks and Spatial Economics 12: 239–262.
Bettencourt LM, Lobo J, Helbing D, Ku ̈hnert C, West GB (2007) Growth, Innova- tion, Scaling, and the Pace of Life in Cities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104: 7301–7306.
Bettencourt L, West G (2010) A Unified Theory of Urban Living. Nature 467: 912–913.
Southworth M, Ben-Joseph E (2003) Streets and the Shaping of Towns and Cities. Island Press.
Geurs KT, VAn Wee B (2004) Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: review and research directions. Journal of Transport geography 12: 127–140.
Ulmer J (2003) Evaluating the Accessibility of Residential Areas for Bicycling and Walking using GIS. Ph.D. thesis, University of Virginia.
Achuthan K, Titheridge H, Mackett R (2007) Measuring pedestrian accessibility. In: Proceedings of the Geographical Information Science Research UK (GISRUK) Conference, National Centre for Geocomputation, National University of Ireland. Citeseer, pp. 264–269.
Odlyzko A (2014) The early british railway system, the Casson counterfactual, and the effectiveness of central planning. Available at SSRN 2466811 .
Greater London Council, Office for National Statistics. Historic Census Population.
Public (2013). Open Street Map - United Kingdom. URL http://www.
openstreetmap.com/.
Borley HV (1982) Chronology of London Railways. Railway & Canal Historical
Society.
Brown J (2012) London Railway Atlas. 3rd edition.
Giacomin D (2014) Accessibility and the choice of network investments in the Lon- don Underground. Master’s thesis, University of Minnesota.
Flyvbjerg B, Holm MS, Buhl S (2004) What causes cost overrun in transport in- frastructure projects? Transport Reviews 24: 3–18.
The Institution of Civil Engineers (1885) The Metropolitan and Metropolitan Dis- trict Railways, volume 81.
Office for National Statistics (1860-1900). Price Indices and Infla- tion. URL http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/taxonomy/index.html?nscl=Price+ Indices+and+Inflation#tab-data-tables.
Pickrell DH (1989) Urban rail transit projects: forecast versus actual ridership and costs. final report. Technical report.
Antrim A, Barbeau SJ, et al. (2013) The many uses of GTFS data–opening the door to transit and multimodal applications. Location-Aware Information Systems Laboratory at the University of South Florida .
Nair R, Coffey C, Pinelli F, Calabrese F (2013) Large-scale transit schedule co- ordination based on journey planner requests. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2351: 65–75.
Levinson D, Kumar A (1995) Activity, travel, and the allocation of time. Journal of the American Planning Association 61: 458–470.
Levinson DM, Wu Y (2005) The rational locator reexamined: Are travel times still stable? Transportation 32: 187–202.
Levinson DM (1999) Space, money, life-stage, and the allocation of time. Trans- portation 26: 141–171.
Odlyzko A (2014) The forgotten discovery of gravity models and the inefficiency of early railway networks. Available at SSRN 2490241 .
