This paper examines the relationships between the built environment—both ‘neighborhood’ design characteristics and relative location—and motor vehicle ownership and use in a rapidly motorising, developing city context, that of Santiago de Chile. A vehicle choice model suggests that income dominates the household vehicle ownership decision, but also detects a relationship between several built environment characteristics and a household’s likelihood of car ownership. A second model, directly linked to the ownership model to correct for selection bias and endogeneity, suggests a strong relationship with locational characteristics like distance to the central business district and Metro stations. Elasticities of vehicle kilometres travelled (VKT), calculated via the combined models, suggest that income plays the overall largest single role in determining VKT. In combination, however, a range of different design and relative location characteristics also display a relatively strong association with VKT.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ABAG (Association of Bay Area Governments) ( 1985) Jobs/housing balance for traffic mitigation: Interstate 680 and Interstate 580 corridor study. Center for Analysis and Information Services, Oakland, November.
2.
Ampt, E.S. and Ortúzar, J. de D. ( 2004) On best practices in continuous large-scale mobility surveys , Transport Reviews, 24(3), pp. 337-363.
3.
Anderson, W.P., Kanaroglou, P.S. and Miller, E.J. ( 1996) Urban form, energy and the enviornment: a review of issues, evidence and policy, Urban Studies, 33(1), pp. 7-35.
4.
Beesley, M. and Kain, J. ( 1964) Urban form, car ownership and public policy: an appraisal of traffic in towns, Urban Studies, 1(2), pp. 174-203.
5.
Ben-Akiva, M. and Lerman, S. ( 1985) Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Applications to Travel Demand. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
6.
Bento, A.M., Cropper, M.L., Mobarak, A.M. and Vinha, K. ( 2004) The impact of urban spatial structure on travel demand in the United States. Working Paper No. EB2004-0004, Research Program on Environment and Behavior, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado, January (www.colorado.edu/ibs/pubs/eb/eb2004-0004.pdf; accessed 30 July 2006).
7.
Bhat, C.R. and Pulugurta, V. ( 1998) A comparison of two alternative behavioral choice mechanisms for household auto ownership decisions, Transportation Research B, 32(1), pp. 61-75.
8.
Bierlaire, M. ( 2003) BIOGEME: a free package for the estimation of discrete choice models, Proceedings of the 3rd Swiss Transportation Research Conference, Ascona, Switzerland.
9.
Black, J., Paez, A. and Suthanaya, P.A. ( 2002) Sustainable urban transportation: performance indicators and some analytical approaches, Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 128(4), pp. 184-209.
10.
Boarnet, M. and Crane, R. ( 2001) Travel by Design: The Influence of Urban Form on Travel . New York: Oxford University Press .
11.
Brown, A.L., Khattak, A.J. and Rodriguez, D.A. ( 2008) Neighbourhood types, travel and body mass: a study of new urbanist and suburban neighbourhoods in the US, Urban Studies, 45(4), pp. 963-988.
12.
Cambridge Systematics (1997) Vehicle availability modeling: final report volume 1. Prepared for the US Federal Highway Administration, May.
13.
Cambridge Systematics (2002) Vehicle availability model: final report. Prepared for the San Francisco County Transportation Authority as part of the San Francisco Travel Demand Forecasting Model Development, October.
14.
Cameron, I., Kenworthy, J.R. and Lyons, T.J. ( 2003) Understanding and predicting private motorised mobility , Transportation Research Part D, 8(4), pp. 267-283.
15.
Carroll, J.D. ( 1952) The relation of homes to work places and the spatial pattern of cities, Social Forces, 30(3), pp. 271-282.
16.
Cervero, R. and Kockelman, K.M. ( 1997) Travel demand and the three Ds: density, diversity and design, Transportation Research Part D, 2, pp. 199-219.
17.
Cheslow, M. and Neels, J.K. ( 1980) Effect of urban development patterns on transportation energy use, Transportation Research Record, 764, pp. 70-78.
18.
Chin, S.-M., Greene, D.L., Hopson, J. et al. (1999) Toward national indicators of vehicle travel and traffic congestion based on real-time traffic data, Transportation Research Record, 1660, pp. 132-139.
19.
CONAMA (Comisión Nacional del Medio Ambiente) ( 1997) Plan de prevencion y descontaminacion atmosferica de la Region Metroploitana. CONAMA, Santiago .
20.
Crane, R. ( 1996) On form versus function: will the new urbanism reduce traffic, or increase it?, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 15, pp. 117-126.
21.
Crane, R. ( 2000) The influence of urban form on travel: an interpretive review, Journal of Planning Literature, 15(1), pp. 3-23.
22.
Crane, R. and Crepeau, R. ( 1998) Does neighborhood design influence travel? A behavioral analysis of travel diary and GIS data, Transportation Research D, 3(4), pp. 225-238.
23.
Díaz, G. ( 2004) Acciones subsecretaría de transportes. Paper presented at the International Seminar, Opportunities for the Clean Development Mechanism in Transportation, International Institute for Sustainable Development, United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, Santiago, August.
24.
Dubin, J.A. and McFaddden, D.L. ( 1984) An econometric analysis of residential electric appliance holdings and consumption, Econometrica, 52(2), pp. 345-362.
25.
Ewing, R. and Cervero, R. ( 2001) Travel and the built environment: a synthesis, Transportation Research Record, 1780, pp. 87-113.
26.
Ewing, R., Bartholomew, K., Winkelman, S. et al. (2008) Growing Cooler: The Evidence on Urban Development and Climate Change. Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute.
27.
Gakenheimer, R. ( 1999) Urban mobility in the developing world, Transportation Research A, 33, pp. 671-689.
28.
Geurs, K.T. and Wee, B. van ( 2004) Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: review and research directions, Journal of Transport Geography , 12, pp. 127-140.
29.
Gilbert, G. and Dajani, J.S. ( 1974) Energy, urban form and transportation policy, Transportation Research, 8, pp. 267-276.
30.
Goodwin, P., Dargay, J. and Hanly, M. ( 2004) Elasticities of road traffic and fuel consumption with respect to price and income: a review, Transport Reviews, 24(3), pp. 275-292.
31.
Hamilton, B.W. ( 1982) Wasteful commuting, The Journal of Political Economy, 90(5), pp. 1035-1053.
32.
Hanson, S. ( 1982) Determinants of daily travel-activity patterns: relative location and socio-demographic factors, Urban Geography, 3(3), pp. 179-202.
33.
Hess, D.B. and Ong, P.M. ( 2002) Traditional neighborhoods and automobile ownership, Transportation Research Record, 1805, pp. 35-44.
34.
Hidalgo, R. ( 2004) De los pequeños condominios a la ciudad vallada: las urbanizaciones cerradas y la nueva geografía social en Santiago de Chile (1990-2000), EURE, 30(91), pp. 29-52.
35.
Holtzclaw, J., Clear, R., Dittmar, H. et al. (2002) Location efficiency: neighborhood and socio-economic characteristics determine auto ownership and use-studies in Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco, Transportation Planning and Technology, 25, pp. 1-27.
36.
Horner, M. and Murray, A. ( 2002) Excess commuting and the modifiable areal unit problem , Urban Studies, 39(1), pp. 131-139.
37.
Jamieson, G.B., Mackay, W.K., Latchford, J.C.R. ( 1967) Transportation and land use structures, Urban Studies, 4(3), pp. 201-217.
38.
Kenworthy, P. and Laube, F. (2001) Millennium cities database for sustainable transport. CD-ROM database, International Union of Public Transport, Brussels and Institute for Sustainability and Technology Policy, Perth.
39.
Kitamura, R., Akiyama, T., Yamamoto, T. and Golob, T. ( 2001) Accessibility in a metropolis: toward a better understanding of land use and travel, Transportation Research Record, 1780, pp. 64-75.
40.
Krizek, K.J. ( 2003) Residential relocation and changes in urban travel, Journal of the American Planning Association, 69(3), pp. 265-281.
41.
Lee, C.-M. and Ahn, K.-H. ( 2003) Is Kentlands better than Radburn? The American garden city and new urbanist paradigms, Journal of the American Planning Association, 69(1), pp. 50-71.
42.
Levine, J. ( 1998) Rethinking accessibility and jobs-housing balance, Journal of the American Planning Association, 64(2), pp. 133-149.
43.
Maat, K., Wee, B. van and Stead, D. ( 2005) Land use and travel behaviour: expected effects from the perspective of utility theory and activity-based theories, Environment and Planning B, 32, pp. 33-46.
44.
Mannering, F. ( 1986) Selectivity bias in models of discrete and continuous choice: an empirical analysis, Transportation Research Record , 1085, pp. 58-62.
45.
Mannering, F. and Hensher, D.A. ( 1987) Discrete/ continuous econometric models and their application to transport analysis, Transport Reviews, 7(3), pp. 227-244.
46.
McCormack, E., Rutherford, G.S. and Wilkinson, M. ( 2001) Travel impacts of mixed land use neighborhoods in Seattle , Washington, Transportation Research Record, 1780, pp. 25-32.
47.
Metro S.A. ( 2001) Statistical Appendix 2001. Santiago , Chile: Metro de Santiago.
48.
Miller, E.J. and Ibrahim, A. ( 1998) Urban form and vehicular travel: some empirical findings , Transportation Research Record, 1617, pp. 18-27.
49.
MINSEGEP (Ministerio Secretaría General de la Presidencia de la República) (2006) Reformula y actualiza plan de prevención y descontaminación atmosférica para región metropolitana. Republic of Chile, Santiago (http://www.sinia.cl/1292/article-39262.html ).
50.
Mokhtarian, P. ( 2003) Telecommunications and travel: the case for complementarity , Journal of Industrial Ecology, 6(2), pp. 43-57.
51.
Mokhtarian, P. and Cao, X. ( 2008) Examining the impacts of residential self-selection on travel behavior: a focus on methodologies, Transportation Research B, 42, pp. 204-228.
52.
Morris, R.L. ( 1969) Transportation planning for new towns, Highway Research Record, 293, pp. 104-116.
53.
Rajamani, J., Bhat, C., Handy, S. et al. (2003) Assessing impact of urban form measures on nonwork trip mode choice after controlling for demographic and level-of-service effects, Transportation Research Record, 1831, pp. 158-165.
54.
Schäfer, A. ( 2000) Regularities in travel demand: an international perspective , Journal of Transportation and Statistics, 3(3), pp. 1-32.
55.
SECTRA (Secretaría de Planificación de Transporte) (1992a) Encuesta origen destino de viajes del Gran Santiago 1991. Comisión de Planificación de Inversiones en Infraestructura de Transporte, Santiago .
56.
Sectra (1992b) Greater Santiago origin- destination survey. Provided to the author by SECTRA in 2001.
57.
Sectra (2002) Greater Santiago origin-destination survey. Provided to the author by SECTRA in 2004.
58.
Sectra (2004) Mobility survey 2001: executive report. Santiago: Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile and Gobierno de Chile (http://www.sectra.cl/contenido/bases_datos_sig/encuestas_movilidad/encuestas_grastgo.htm ).
59.
Sectra (2005) Análisis y actualización del modelo ESTRAUS: informe ejecutivo. Ministerio de Planificación, Santiago, November.
60.
Train, K. ( 1986) Qualitative Choice Analysis: Theory, Econometrics, and an Application to Automobile Demand. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
61.
Yang, J. ( 2008) Policy implications of excess commuting: examining the impacts of changes in US metropolitan spatial structure, Urban Studies, 45(2), pp. 391-405.
62.
Yang, J. and Gakenheimer, R. ( 2007) Assessing the transportation consequences of land use transformation in urban China, Habitat International, 31, pp. 345-353.
63.
Zhang, M. and Kudadia, N. ( 2005) Metrics of urban form and the modifiable areal unit problem, Transportation Research Record, 1902, pp. 71-79.
