The reported research treats interactions between households and generated feedback dynamics in the adoption of various transportation mode alternatives. We consider a model in which an agent's choice is directly influenced by the percentages of the agent's neighbors and socioeconomic peers that make each choice. The model also accounts for shared unobserved attributes of the choice alternatives in the error structure. We address nonglobal interactions explicitly within different social and spatial network structures, combining advanced econometric estimation with computational techniques from multiagent-based simulation, and we present an empirical application of the model using pseudo-panel microdata collected by the Amsterdam Agency for Traffic, Transport and Infrastructure. Additional heterogeneity is introduced in the model through different mechanisms, such as individual-specific sociodemographic characteristics of the agents, individual-specific attributes of the choice alternatives, and the availability of alternatives. We conclude by highlighting limitations of our present study and recommendations for future work.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AokiM, 1995, “Economic fluctuations with interactive agents: Dynamic and stochastic externalities”Japanese Economic Review46148–165
2.
Ben-AkivaM, 1973Structure of Passenger Travel Demand Models PhD dissertation, Department of Civil Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
3.
Ben-AkivaMLermanS R, 1985Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
4.
Ben-AkivaMMcFaddenDGärlingTGopinathDWalkerJBolducDBörsch-SupanADelquiéPLarichevOMorikawaTPolydoropoulouARaoV, 1999, “Extended framework for modeling choice behavior”Marketing Letters10187–202
5.
Ben-AkivaMMcFaddenDTrainKWalkerJBhatCBierlaireMBolducDBörsch-SupanABrownstoneDBunchD SDalyAde PalmaAGopinathDKarlstromAMunizagaM A, 2002, “Hybrid choice models: Progress and challenges”Marketing Letters13163–175
6.
BlumeLDurlaufS, 2002, “Equilibrium concepts for social interaction models”, SSRI working papers, Social systems Research Institute, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI
7.
BrockWDurlaufS, 2001, “Discrete choice with social interactions”Review of Economic Studies68235–260
8.
BrockWDurlaufS, 2002, “A multinomial choice model of neighborhood effects”American Economic Review92298–303
9.
DeffuantGAmblardFWeisbuchGFaureT, 2002, “How can extremism prevail? A study based on the relative agreement interaction model”Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation5(4), http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/5/4/1.html
DugundjiE R, 2003, “Discrete choice on networks: Nested logit”, paper presented at the Graduate Workshop on Computations Economics, Santa Fe, NM, http://zia.hss.cmu.edu/econ/projects03.html
DugundjiE R, 2007, “Socio-dynamic discrete choice on networks: Social influence in consumers' choice of transportation mode”, paper presented at Frontiers in Transportation: Social Interactions, Amsterdam, http://www2.fmg.uva.nl/frontiers/2007/abstracts/dugundji.html
14.
DugundjiE RGulyásL, 2003a, “Empirical estimation and multi-agent based simulation of a discrete choice model with network interaction effects”, paper presented at the 8th International Conference on Computers in Urban Planning and Urban Management, Sendai; available from the authors
15.
DugundjiE RGulyásL, 2003b, “An exploration of the role of global versus local and social versus spatial networks in transportation mode choice behavior in the Netherlands”, paper presented at AGENT 2003: Challenges in Social Simulation, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL; available from the authors
16.
DugundjiE RGulyásL, 2005, “Socio-dynamic discrete choice in an empirical example on intercity travel demand: An agent-based approach, analytical benchmark and some issues in estimation”, paper presented at MUSD 2005: Workshop on Modeling Urban Social Dynamics, University of Surrey, Guildford; available from the authors
17.
DugundjiE RWalkerJ L, 2005, “Discrete choice with social and spatial network interdependencies: An empirical example using mixed GEV models with field and ‘panel’ effects”Transportation Research Recordnumber 1921, 70–78
18.
DugundjiE RKapoenL Lle ClercqFArentzeT ATimmermansH J PVeldhuisenK J, 2001, “The long-term effects on multi-modal transportation networks: The residential choice behavior of households”, paper presented at the 9th World Conference on Transportation Research, Seoul; available from the authors
19.
FlacheAHegselmannR, 2001, “Do irregular grids make a difference? Relaxing the spatial regularity assumption in cellular models of social dynamics”Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation4(4), http://www.soc.surrey.ac.uk/JASSS/4/4/6.html
20.
HedstromP, 2004, “Social mechanisms and social dynamics”, in Proceedings of AGENT 2004: Social Dynamics: Interaction, Reflexivity and EmergenceUniversity of Chicago, Chicago, IL, http://agent2007.anl.gov/proceedings/index.html
21.
HensherD ATonT, 2001, “TRESIS: A transportation, land use and environmental strategy impact simulator for urban areas”, in Proceedings of the 9th World Conference on Transportation ResearchSeoul, http://www.wctrs.org
22.
HooimeijerPvan HamM, 2000, “Leefbaarheid en buurtkwaliteit” [Livability and neighborhood quality], in Perspectief op Wonen: Raportage van het WoningBehoefte Onderzoek 1998 Ed. RelouW (Netherlands Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, The Hague) pp 153–173
23.
JohC H, 2004Measuring and Predicting Adaptation in Multidimensional Activity-travel Patterns PhD dissertation, Department of Architecture, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven
24.
KrygsmanS, 2004Activity and Travel Choice(s) in Multimodal Public Transport Systems PhD dissertation, Department of Geography, University of Utrecht, Utrecht
25.
MaatCTimmermansH J PMolinE, 2004, “A model of spatial structure, activity participation and travel behavior”, in Proceedings of the 10th World Conference on Transportation ResearchIstanbul, http://www.wctrs.org
26.
ManskiC F, 1995Identification Problems in the Social Sciences (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
27.
MartinezFAguilaF, 2004, “An optimal urban planning tool: Subsidies and regulations”, in Proceedings of the 10th World Conference on Transportation ResearchIstanbul, http://www.wctrs.org
28.
RahmandadHStermanJ, 2004, “Heterogeneity and network structure in the dynamics of diffusion: Comparing agent-based and differential equation models”, Sloan WP 4512, MIT, Cambridge, MA
29.
RolfeM, 2004, “Social networks and simulations”, in Proceedings of AGENT2004: Social Dynamics: Interaction, Reflexivity and EmergenceUniversity of Chicago, Chicago, IL, http://agent2007.anl.gov/proceedings/index.html
StaufferDSousaAChulzeC, 2004, “Discretized opinion dynamics of the Deffuant model on scale-free networks”Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation7(3), http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/7/3/7.html
32.
TimmermansH J PBorgersA W Jvan DijkJOppewalH, 1992, “Residential choice behaviour of dual earner households: A decompositional joint choice model”Environment and Planning A24517–533
33.
TimmermansH J PArentzeT ADijstMDugundjiE RJohC HKapoenL LKrygsmanSMaatCVeldhuisenK J, 2002, “AMADEUS: Framework for developing a dynamic multiagent, multiperiod activity-based micro-simulation model of travel demand”, paper in Proceedings of the 81st Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research BoardTransportation Research Board, Washington, DC
34.
UrbigD, 2003, “Attitude dynamics with limited verbalisation capabilities”Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation6(1), http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/6/1/2.html
35.
WaddellP, 2002, “UrbanSim: Modeling urban development for land use, transportation and environmental planning”Journal of the American Planning Association68297–314
36.
WegenerM, 1996, “Reduction of CO2 emissions of transport by reorganisation of urban activities”, in Land Use, Transport and the Environment Eds HayashiYRoyJ (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht) pp 103–124
