Reducing car use: changing attitudes or relocating? The influence of residential dissonance on travel behavior

Abstract

Recent empirical studies have shown that attitudes and lifestyles are important determinants of travel behavior and modal choice. Less obvious and documented is that these 'soft variables' also influence other, non-travel related aspects such as residential choice. The result is that preferred residential neighborhoods not always match with the actual residential neighborhood. This residential dissonance (or mismatch) also has its influence on travel behavior since the preferred travel modes of dissonant residents may not be ideally available in their actual neighborhood. The main aim of this paper is to investigate the effect of residential dissonance on travel mode choice in Flanders, Belgium. Residential dissonance clearly affects the ability of people in realizing their preferred travel behavior, albeit in different ways for urban and rural residents.

The influence of land use and mobility policy on travel behavior: A comparative case study of Flanders and the Netherlands

“…Belgium clearly opted for an "anti-urban" policy, resulting in a cheap and spatially widespread public transportation network and limited spatial planning regulations. Hence, cities spread outward, generating sub-centers around transportation nodes such as train and tram stations, thus making it possible for employees to reside (far) away from the workplace (e.g., De Vos et al 2012;De Vos and Witlox 2013;Kesteloot, De Maesschalk 2001;Verhetsel et al 2010). It is, however, only after the Second World War that urban sprawl really took off.…”

“…Although public transportation is not used as frequently as in the Netherlands, the public transportation network is more widespread. As a result, most people living in the countryside are able to travel with public transportation (De Vos et al 2012). This can be explained by the Flemish mobility policy.…”

Do people live in urban neighbourhoods because they do not like to travel? Analysing an alternative residential self-selection hypothesis

“…In urban neighbourhoods, average travel distances are shorter due to a more compact and mixed-use pattern, stimulating active travel and making it easier to organise high-frequency public transport within walking distance of a substantial share of the neighbourhoods' residents. As a consequence, urban planners have − since the 1990s − tried to reduce negative effects of (long-distance) car use, such as congestion and greenhouse gas emissions, by encouraging the development of compact, mixed-use neighbourhoods (e.g., Cervero, 1996;De Vos et al, 2012;Schwanen and Mokhtarian, 2005a).…”

“…In urban neighbourhoods, average travel distances are shorter due to a more compact and mixed-use pattern, stimulating active travel and making it easier to organise high-frequency public transport within walking distance of a substantial share of the neighbourhoods' residents. As a consequence, urban planners have − since the 1990s − tried to reduce negative effects of (long-distance) car use, such as congestion and greenhouse gas emissions, by encouraging the development of compact, mixed-use neighbourhoods (e.g., Cervero, 1996;De Vos et al, 2012;Schwanen and Mokhtarian, 2005a).The built environment, however, is not the only important explanatory variable of peoples' travel behaviour. Over the past years various studies have shown that (travel-related) attitudes are 2 important determinants of travel mode choice (e.g., Bagley and Mokhtarian, 2002;Kitamura et al, 1997;Van Acker et al, 2011).…”

“…A positive stance towards a certain mode of transport will result in a higher use of that mode, as long as the use of this mode is not restricted by elements such as the built environment. These attitudes can also affect mode choice indirectly; individuals with an affinity towards a certain kind of travel will often choose a residential location that enables them to use their preferred travel mode for the most of their trips (e.g., Cao et al, 2007;De Vos et al, 2012;Kamruzzaman et al, 2015; Mokhtarian, 2005a, 2005b;Handy et al, 2005;van Wee, 2009;van Wee et al, 2002). Since most low-density suburbs were designed to be well accessible by car, car-loving persons will try to self-select themselves in these neighbourhoods, while short average distances in urban-type neighbourhoods might attract people who prefer to walk or cycle to their destination.…”