Moving from trip-based to activity-based measures of accessibility

Dong, Xisong; Ben‐Akiva, Moshe; Bowman, John L.; Walker, Joan L.

doi:10.1016/j.tra.2005.05.002

Cited by 162 publications

(135 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

125

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A diverse literature has examined the potential relationships between transport and social equity, social exclusion, and wider issues such as social capital and well-being, including the barriers to access experienced by different groups (such as Church, Frost, & Sullivan, 2000;Currie et al, 2009;Currie & Stanley, 2008;Delbosc & Currie, 2011;Lucas, 2004Lucas, , 2012Preston & Rajé, 2007;Social Exclusion Unit, 2003;Stanley, Hensher, Stanley, & Vella-Brodrick, 2011). Accessibility analysis and planning have been usefully applied in practice, particularly in Global North contexts, to examine the impacts of transport strategies and projects (Ashiru, Polak, & Noland, 2003;Dong, Ben-Akiva, Bowman, & Walker, 2006;Geurs, Boon, & Van Wee, 2009;Geurs, Zondag, De Jong, & De Bok, 2010;Hansen, 1959).…”

Section: The Capabilities Approach and Travelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding Capabilities, Functionings and Travel in High and Low Income Neighbourhoods in Manila

Hickman

Cao

Lira

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transport plays an important role in helping people to access activities and participate in life. The availability of transport networks, the modes available, new infrastructure proposals, and the type of urban development can all impact on and change activity participation, and hence contribute to social equity in the city. This article uses surveys in low and high income neighbourhoods in Manila, the Philippines, to assess the social equity implications of differential access to transport. The analysis demonstrates how the theoretical framework of the Capability Approach (Nussbaum, 2003;Sen, 1985Sen, , 1999Sen, , 2009) can be used to assess what individuals might be able to access (capabilities) versus their actual travel (functionings). The spatial patterns of travel and access to activities are assessed, demonstrating significant differences by gender, age, income and neighbourhood, in terms of travel mode and cost of travel; health, physical and mental integrity; senses, imagination and thoughts; reasoning and planning; social interaction; natural environment; sustainable modes; and information. This approach to assessing the transport dimensions of social equity offers much potential, based not only on access to resources or consumption of mobility, but also in the opportunities that people have in relation to their activity participation. The case study context is also informative, with Manila providing an example of an Asian city with high levels of private car usage, high levels of congestion, and large spatial and income differentials in travel and associated social equity.

show abstract

Section: The Capabilities Approach and Travelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding Capabilities, Functionings and Travel in High and Low Income Neighbourhoods in Manila

Hickman

Cao

Lira

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Infrastructure-based measures are hardly relevant, as they focus on the quality of the transport network, but do not provide insight into accessibility levels experienced between different areas or groups of households within an area. Both person-based and utility-based measures, in turn, are highly dependent on data input and therefore difficult to apply at the level of a metropolitan area (but see Dong and Ben-Akiva et al 2006).…”

Section: Accessibility Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public transport versus private car GIS-based estimation of accessibility applied to the Tel Aviv metropolitan area

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increasing interest in sustainable development has underlined the importance of accessibility as a key indicator to assess transport investments, urban policy, and urban form. From both the environmental and the equity component of sustainability, a comparison of accessibility by car versus public transport is of utmost importance. However, most studies in this direction have used rather rough estimates of travel time, especially by public transport. In this paper, we present Urban.Access, an ArcGIS extension for estimating car-based and transit-based accessibility to employment and other land uses. Urban.Access enables a detailed representation of travel times by transit and car and thus makes it possible to adequately compare accessibility levels by transport mode. The application of Urban.Access to the Tel Aviv metropolitan area shows that the gaps between car-based and transit-based accessibility are larger than those found in other studies. We argue that this is not the result of a poorer transit system, but rather of a more detailed description of travel by transit in the Urban.Access application. The larger gaps point to a greater need for adequate policy responses, both for reducing car dependence as well as for creating a more equitable

show abstract

“…Measuring the manner in which the transportation system performs at most geographic levels relates to the measurement of traffic; mobility and accessibility (Litman, 2003). Traffic counts were traditionally used to estimate the extent to which transport infrastructure should be expanded, but since there is large consensus of the induced effects of this (Douglas et al, 1999;Noland, 2001), there is a shift toward accessibility measures as closer representations of travel because they account for the spatial nature of mobility services (Dong et al, 2005;Krygsman, 2004;Krygsman et al, 2007). Between trafficcounts and accessibility, measures of travel behaviour are related to estimating the extent to which mode choices are results of planned behaviour and, or habit formation (Guillen et al, 2013;Ajzen, 1991;Aarts et al, 1997;Behrens & Del Mistro, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%