In this paper we investigate the functional form of distance decay for commuting flows between municipalities in Denmark. Our inference is based on a single equation that includes variables to capture the effect of spatial structure. Special attention is given to a proper estimation method: we estimate the distance-decay parameters by nonlinear weighted least-squares with balancing factors. It appears that neither an exponential nor a power distance-decay function fits the data well. Using a spline regression we find a cost elasticity of – 4 for distances around 20 km and a much smaller value for shorter and longer distances. It appears that the logarithm of distance decay can be described adequately as a (downward) logistic function of log cost.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlonsoW, 1978, “A theory of movements”, in Human Settlement Systems: International Perspectives on Structure, Change and Public Policy Ed. HansenN M (Ballinger, Cambridge, MA) pp 197–211.
2.
AndersenA K, 1999aLocation and Commuting PhD thesis, Institute of Economics, University of Copenhagen.
3.
AndersenA K, 1999b, “Modelling commuting and residential location–spatial interaction models”, in Location and Commuting PhD thesis, Institute of Economics, University of Copenhagen.
4.
BattenD FBoyceD E, 1986, “Spatial interaction, transportation, and interregional commodity flow models”, in Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics Ed. NijkampP (North-Holland, Amsterdam) pp 357–406.
5.
BattyMSikdarP K, 1982, “Spatial aggregation in gravity models. 1. An information-theoretic framework”Environment and Planning A14377–405.
6.
BikkerJ A, 1987, “An international trade flow model with substitution: An extension of the gravity model”Kyklos40315–337.
7.
BikkerJ Ade VosA F, 1992, “A regional supply and demand model for inpatient hospital care”Environment and Planning A241097–1116.
8.
BoxG E PCoxD R, 1964, “An analysis of transformations”Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Methodological)26211–252.
9.
CareyH C, 1858Principles of Social Science (Lippincott, Philadelphia, PA).
10.
CesarioF J, 1974, “The interpretation and calculation of gravity model zone-to-zone adjustment factors”Environment and Planning A6247–257.
11.
ChoukrounJ-M, 1975, “A general framework for the development of gravity-type trip distribution models”Regional Science and Urban Economics5177–202.
12.
CochraneR A, 1975, “A possible economic basis for the gravity model”Journal of Transport Economics and Policy934–49.
13.
de VriesJ JNijkampPRietveldP, 2001, “Alonso's theory of movements: Developments in spatial interaction modeling”Journal of Geographical Systems3233–256.
14.
de VriesJ JNijkampPRietveldP, 2002, “Estimation of Alonso's theory of movements by means of instrumental variables”Networks and Spatial Economics2(2) 107–126.
15.
DoornikJ A, 1998Ox, An Object-oriented Matrix Programming LanguageTimberlake Consultants, London.
16.
FikT JMulliganG F, 1998, “Functional form and spatial interaction models”Environment and Planning A301497–1507.
17.
FotheringhamA S, 1983, “A new set of spatial-interaction models: The theory of competing destinations”Environment and Planning A1515–36.
18.
FotheringhamA S, 1984, “Spatial flows and spatial patterns”Environment and Planning A16529–543.
19.
FotheringhamA SO'KellyM E, 1989Spatial Interaction Models: Formulations and Applications (Kluwer, Dordrecht).
20.
GeursK Tvan EckRitsema J R, 2003, “Evaluation of accessibility impacts of land-use scenarios: The implications of job competition, land-use, and infrastructure developments for the Netherlands”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design3069–87.
21.
HamerslagR, 1980, “Spatial development, developments in traffic and transportation, and changes in the transportation system”, in Changes in the Field of Transport Studies Eds PolakJ Bvan der KampJ B (Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague) pp 60–80.
22.
HilbersH DVerroenE J, 1993, “Het beoordelen van de bereikbaarheid van lokaties” [The evaluation of the accessibility of locations], report INRO-VVG 1993–09, TNO, Delft.
23.
JohanssonBKlaessonJOlssonM, 2002, “Time distances and labor market integration”Papers in Regional Science81305–327.
24.
JohanssonBKlaessonJOlssonM, 2003, “Commuters' non-linear response to time distances”Journal of Geographical Systems5315–329.
25.
LedentJ, 1980, “Calibrating Alonso's general theory of movement: The case of interprovincial migration flows in Canada”Sistemi Urbani2327–358.
26.
MadsenBJensen-ButlerC, 2004, “Theoretical and operational issues in sub-regional economic modelling, illustrated through the development and application of the LINE model”Economic Modelling21471–508.
27.
MazurkiewiczL, 1982, “A spatial interaction model with the distance decay function based on a random variable distribution”Environment and Planning A14789–793.
28.
NijkampPReggianiA, 1992Interaction, Evolution and Chaos in Space (Springer, Berlin).
29.
NijkampPRouwendalJ (Eds), 2004, “Special issue on advances in commuting studies”Growth and Change35(3).
30.
PellegriniP AFotheringhamA S, 1999, “Intermetropolitan migration and hierarchical destination choice: A disaggregate analysis from the US Public Use Microdata Samples”Environment and Planning A311093–1118.
31.
PootJ, 1986, “A system approach to modelling the inter-urban exchange of workers in New Zealand”Scottish Journal of Political Economy33249–274.
32.
RouwendalJNijkampP, 2004, “Living in two worlds: A review of home-to-work decisions”Growth and Change35287–303.
33.
SenASmithT E, 1995Gravity Models of Spatial Interaction Behavior (Springer, Berlin).
34.
SenASootS, 1981, “Selected procedures for calibrating the generalized gravity model”Papers of the Regional Science Association48165–176.
35.
StewartJ Q, 1941, “An inverse distance variation for certain social influences”Science9389–90.
36.
StoerJBulirschR, 1980Introduction to Numerical Analysis (Springer, New York).
ThorsenIUboeJNaevdalG, 1999, “A network approach to commuting”Journal of Regional Science3973–101.
39.
TiefelsdorfM, 2003, “Misspecifications in interaction model distance decay relations: A spatial structure effect”Journal of Geographical Systems5(1) 25–50.
40.
WilligersJ, 2006Impact of High-speed Railway Accessibility on the Location Choices of Office Establishments PhD thesis, Faculty of Geosciences, Universiteit Utrecht.
41.
WilsonA G, 1971, “A family of spatial interaction models, and associated developments”Environment and Planning31–32.
