A workplace choice model accounting for spatial competition and agglomeration effects

Abstract

This paper develops a new model of workplace choice for the Sydney Greater Metropolitan Area (SGMA) and describes the way in which this model is integrated into a general modelling framework of MetroScan, an improved version of the Transportation and Environment Strategy Impact Simulator Transportation (TRESIS). The developed model accounts for spatial competition of alternative workplaces via accessibility variables measured to attractions of both the same and different types. The new model also has two new refinements. First, a much finer geographical level is used for modelling worker's choice of workplace given the location of firms and the distribution of jobs. Second, an employment agglomeration effect is incorporated by the inclusion of jobs in the industry class relevant to the worker and two accessibility measures. Modelling analysis on data collected from a survey conducted in Sydney in 2013 identifies highly significant spatial competition and employment agglomeration effects explaining workplace choice. The application of this model to analyse policy relating to the redistribution or growth of jobs within a general framework of MetroScan is discussed.

Development of railway station choice models to improve the representation of station catchments in rail demand models

“…However, it would be expected that a new station would, all else being equal, abstract more passengers from nearer stations than more distant ones. Although largely ignored in prior station choice research, there are several potential solutions to account for this spatial correlation, such as the inclusion of an accessibility term (for example, see Ho and Hensher (2016)); a bespoke generalised extreme value (GEV) model, such as the Generalised Spatially Correlated Logit (GSCL) model developed by Sener, Pendyala, and Bhat (2011); or an alternative (error components) formulation of the mixed logit model to create correlations between alternatives that result in an appropriate substitution pattern. Further research is needed to assess the feasibility and suitability of these approaches.…”

Joint estimation of mode and time of day choice accounting for arrival time flexibility, travel time reliability and crowding on public transport

“…Also, it provides logsums into the work and non-work location choice models. The former can be found in Ho and Hensher (2016) while we hope to report the non-work location choice and residential location choice in the near future.…”

Railway station choice modelling: a review of methods and evidence

“…As the term includes information from other alternatives the IIA property no longer holds and the model is able to capture competition (or agglomeration) effects. Examples include the competing destinations model (CDM) proposed by Fotheringham (see Pellegrini & Fotheringham (2002) for a review), and recent work by Ho and Hensher (2016) who used accessibility terms to account for spatial competition in workplace choice models. Other researchers have created new GEV models using McFadden's generator function (Train, 2009).…”