Based on the Census for Transportation Planning Package (CTPP) 1990, in this paper I will attempt to explain intraurban variations of commuting time and distance in Columbus, OH. Whereas commuting times are directly available from the CTPP, commuting distances are recovered by GIS network techniques as the shortest-time distances through the urban road network. Explanations of commuting are first attempted by measures of job proximity such as distances from employment centers and a gravity-based index accounting for job competition among workers. The influence of employment centers on commuting sheds new light on polycentric urban models. The variation of commuting distance is well explained by the gravity-based job proximity index. That is to say, how far people commute is explainable to a large extent by urban land use. However, how much time people spend on commuting is complicated by their socioeconomic status, which affects their choice of commuting modes. Finally the research demonstrates the promise of explaining commuting times by workers' characteristics such as percentage of black workers, female labor participation ratio, percentage of multiple-worker households, home-ownership status, educational attainment, and wage rate. In the analyses, spatially lagged dependent variables are introduced to control for the effect of spatial autocorrelation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlbaR DLoganJ R, 1992, “Analyzing locational attainments: constructing individual-level regression models using aggregate data”Sociological Methods and Research20367–397
2.
AnselinL, 1988Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Models (Kluwer, Dordrecht)
3.
BlumenO, 1994, “Gender differences in the journey to work”Urban Geography15223–245
4.
BTS, 19961990 Census Transportation Planning Package: Urban Element, Parts 1, 2, 3 BTS-CD- 15-09 on CD-ROM, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, US Department of Transportation, Washington, DC
5.
BTS, 1997Transportation Statistics Annual ReportBureau of Transportation Statistics, US Department of Transportation, Washington, DC
6.
Bureau of the Census, 1995TIGER/Line Files 1995 CD-TGR95-02 on CD-ROM, US Department of Commerce, Washington, DC
7.
CerveroR, 1989a, “Jobs – housing balance and regional mobility”Journal of the American Planning Association55136–150
8.
CerveroR, 1989bAmerica's Suburban Centers: The Land Use – Transportation Link (Unwin Hyman, Winchester, MA)
9.
CerveroRWuK L, 1998, “Sub-centering and commuting: evidence from the San Francisco Bay area, 1980–90”Urban Studies351059–1076
10.
ForstallR LGreeneR P, 1997, “Defining job concentrations: the Los Angeles case”Urban Geography18705–739
11.
GiulianoG, 1989, “New directions for understanding transportation and land use”Environment and Planning A21145–159
12.
GiuhanoGSmallK A, 1991, “Subcenters in the Los Angeles region”Regional Science and Urban Economics21163–182
13.
GiuhanoGSmallK A, 1993, “Is the journey to work explained by urban structure”Urban Studies301485–1500
14.
GordonPRichardsonHWongH, 1986, “The distribution of population and employment in a polycentric city: the case of Los Angeles”Environment and Planning A18161–173
15.
GordonPRichardsonHJunM, 1991, “The commuting paradox: evidence from the top twenty”Journal of American Planning Association57416–420
16.
GriffithD, 1981, “Modelling urban population density in a multi-centered city”Journal of Urban Economics9298–310
17.
HamiltonB W, 1982, “Wasteful commuting”Journal of Political Economy901035–1053
18.
HamiltonB W, 1989, “Wasteful commuting again”Journal of Political Economy971497–1504
19.
HansenW G, 1959, “How accessibility shapes land use”Journal of the American Institute of Planners2573–76
20.
HansonSPrattG, 1995Gender, Work, and Space (Routledge, London)
21.
HeikkilaE PGordonPKimJPeiserRRichardsonHDale-JohnsonD, 1989, “What happened to the CBD-distance gradient?: Land values in a polycentric city”Environment and Planning A21221–232
22.
IhlanfeldtK R, 1993, “Intra-urban job accessibility and Hispanic youth employment rates”Journal of Urban Economics33254–271
23.
IhlanfeldtK RSjoquistD L, 1991, “The effect of job access on black and white youth employment: a cross-sectional analysis”Urban Studies28255–265
24.
ImmergluckD, 1998, “Job proximity and the urban employment problem: do suitable nearby jobs improve neighborhood employment rates?”Urban Studies357–23
25.
KainJ, 1968, “Housing segregation, Negro employment, and metropolitan decentralization”Quarterly Journal of Economics82175–197
26.
KingG, 1997A Solution to the Ecological Inference Problem: Reconstructing Individual Behavior from Aggregate Data (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ)
27.
LaddH FWheatonW, 1991, “Causes and consequences of the changing urban form: introduction”Regional Science and Urban Economics21157–162
28.
McDonaldJ FPratherP, 1994, “Suburban employment centers: the case of Chicago”Urban Studies31201–218
29.
McLaffertySPrestonV, 1996, “Spatial mismatch and employment in a decade of restructuring”The Professional Geographer48420–431
30.
MerrimanDOhkawaraTSuzukiT, 1995, “Excess commuting in the Tokyo metropolitan area: measurement and policy simulations”Urban Studies3269–85
31.
MorrisJ MDumbleP LWiganM R, 1979, “Accessibility indicators for transportation planning”Transportation Research A1391–109
32.
OngPBlumenbergE, 1998, “Job access, commute and travel burden among welfare recipients”Urban Studies3577–93
33.
PengZ-R, 1997, “The jobs–housing balance and urban commuting”Urban Studies341215–1235
34.
PunpuingS, 1993, “Correlates of commuting patterns: a case-study of Bangkok, Thailand”Urban Studies30527–546
35.
RouwendalJRietveldP, 1994, “Changes in commuting distances of Dutch households”Urban Studies311545–1557
36.
ShenQ, 1994, “An application of GIS to the measurement of spatial autocorrelation”Computer, Environment and Urban Systems18167–191
37.
ShenQ, 1998, “Location characteristics of inner-city neighborhoods and employment accessibility of low-income workers”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design25345–365
38.
ShenQ, 2000, “Spatial and social dimensions of commuting”Journal of the American Planning Association6668–82
39.
SmallK ASongS, 1992, “‘Wasteful’ commuting: a resolution”Journal of Political Economy100888–898
40.
SmallK ASongS, 1994, “Population and employment densities: structure and change”Journal of Urban Economics36292–313
41.
TaylorBOngP, 1995, “Spatial mismatch or automobile mismatch? An examination of race, residence and commuting in US metropolitan areas”Urban Studies321454–1473
42.
WachsMTaylorB DLevineNOngP, 1993, “The changing commute: a case study of the jobs–housing relationship over time”Urban Studies301711–1729
43.
WangF, 2000, “Modeling commuting patterns in Chicago in a GIS environment: a job accessibility perspective”The Professional Geographer52120–133
44.
WhiteM J, 1988, “Urban commuting journeys are not ‘wasteful’”Journal of Political Economy961097–1110
