Empirical research that examines the built environment and travel behaviour has frequently found inconsistent results, which can be attributed to the modifiable areal unit problem (MAUP) and to different treatments of travel purposes. This study considers these two important issues simultaneously in investigating the association between the built environment and travel behaviour in Beijing, China. Using tours as the analysis unit of travel, this study classifies three tour purposes: subsistence, maintenance and recreation, and identifies seven different spatial units to address the MAUP. Based on data from the 2010 Beijing Comprehensive Travel Survey, this study uses logistic regressions to estimate the primary tour mode and tour complexity. The results identify the ‘ideal’ unit at which the built environment has the greatest association with tours of specific purposes. Such results inform how urban planning and transportation policies can effectively influence travel.
ÅsD (1978) Studies of time-use: Problems and prospects. Acta Sociology21(2): 125–141.
2.
BerkeEMKoepsellTDMoudonAV, et al. (2007) Association of the built environment with physical activity and obesity in older persons. American Journal of Public Health97(3): 486–492.
3.
BhatCR (1999) Activity-based approaches to travel analysis. Transportation Research Part A33: 467–473.
4.
BhatCRGuoJY (2007) A comprehensive analysis of built environment characteristics on household residential choice and auto ownership levels. Transportation Research Part B41: 506–526.
5.
BhatCRSinghSK (2000) A comprehensive daily activity-travel generation model system for workers. Transportation Research Part A34: 1–22.
6.
BhatCRSrinivasanSAxhausenKW (2005) An analysis of multiple inter-episode durations using a unifying multivariate hazard model. Transportation Research Part B39(9): 797–823.
7.
BoarnetMGCraneR (2001) The influence of land use on travel behavior: Specification and estimation strategies. Transportation Research Part A35: 823–845.
8.
BowmanJLBen-AkivaME (2000) Activity-based disaggregate travel demand model system with activity schedules. Transportation Research Part A35: 1–28.
9.
CerveroR (1996) Mixed land-use and commuting: Evidence from the American Housing Survey. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice30(5): 361–377.
10.
ClarkAScottD (2014) Understanding the impact of the modifiable areal unit problem on the relationship between active travel and the built environment. Urban Studies51(2): 284–299.
11.
CraneR (2000) The influence of urban form on travel: An interpretive review. Journal of Planning Literature15(1): 3–23.
12.
CurrieGDelboscA (2011) Exploring the trip chaining behavior of public transport users in Melbourne. Transport Policy18: 204–210.
13.
DielemanFMDijstMBurghouwtG (2002) Urban form and travel behavior: Micro-level household attributes and residential context. Urban Studies39(3): 507–527.
14.
DingCLinYLiuC (2014) Exploring the influence of built environment on tour-based commuter mode choice: A cross-classified multilevel modeling approach. Transportation Research Part D32: 230–238.
15.
ElldérE (2014) Residential location and daily travel distances: The influence of trip purpose. Journal of Transport Geography34: 121–130.
16.
EwingRCerveroR (2001) Travel and built environment: A synthesis. Transportation Research Record1780: 87–113.
17.
EwingRCerveroR (2010) Travel and the built environment: A meta-analysis. Journal of the American Planning Association76: 265–295.
18.
FotheringhamASWongDWS (1991) The modifiable areal unit problem in multi-variate statistical analysis. Environment and Planning A23(7): 1025–1044.
19.
FoxM (1995) Transport planning and the human activity approach. Journal of Transport Geography3(2): 105–116.
20.
HensherDAReyesAJ (2000) Trip chaining as a barrier to the propensity to use public transport. Transportation27: 341–361.
21.
HoCMulleyC (2013) Tour-based mode choice of joint household travel patterns on weekend and weekday. Transportation40: 789–811.
22.
HongJShenQZhangL (2014) How do built-environment factors affect travel behavior? A spatial analysis at different geographic scales. Transportation41: 419–440.
23.
HoustonD (2014) Implications of the modifiable areal unit problem for assessing built environment correlates of moderate and vigorous physical activity. Applied Geography50: 40–47.
24.
JelinskiDEWuJ (1996) The modifiable areal unit problem and implication for landscape ecology. Landscape Ecology11(3): 129–140.
25.
KrygsmanSArentzeTTimmermansH (2007) Capturing tour mode and activity choice interdependencies: A co-evolutionary logit modeling approach. Transportation Research Part A41: 913–933.
26.
LeeYHickmanMWashingtonS (2007) Household type and structure, time use pattern, and trip-chaining behavior. Transportation Research Part A41: 1004–1020.
27.
LimanondTNiemeierDA (2004) Effect of land use on decisions of shopping tour generation: A case study of three traditional neighborhoods in WA. Transportation31: 153–181.
28.
MaJMitchellGHeppenstallA (2014) Daily travel behavior in Beijing, China: An analysis of workers’ trip chains, and the role of socio-demographics and urban form. Habitat International43: 263–273.
29.
MaatLTimmermansH (2006) Influence of land use on tour complexity: A Dutch case. Transportation Research Record1977: 234–241.
30.
MerlinL (2014) Measuring community completeness: Jobs–housing balance, accessibility, and convenient local access to non-work destinations. Environment & Planning B: Planning and Design41(4): 736–756.
31.
MitraRBuliungRN (2012) Built environment correlates of active school transportation: Neighborhood and the modifiable areal unit problem. Journal of Transport Geography20: 51–61.
32.
NorlandRBThomasJV (2007) Multivariate analysis of trip-chaining behavior. Environment and Planning B34: 953–970.
33.
OpenshawS (1984) The Modifiable Areal Unit Problem. Norwich: Geography Books.
34.
PanHShenQZhangM (2009) Influence of urban form on travel behavior in four neighborhoods of Shanghai. Urban Studies46: 275–294.
35.
PasEI (1984) The effect of selected sociodemographic characteristics on daily travel-activity behavior. Environment Planning A16(5): 571–581.
36.
QinBHanS (2013) Planning parameters and household carbon emission: Evidence from high- and low-carbon neighborhoods in Beijing. Habitat International37: 52–60.
37.
ShiftenY (1998) Practical Approach to Model Trip Chaining. Transportation Research Record 1645. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, pp. 17–23.
38.
SunBErmagunADanB (2017) Built environmental impacts on commuting mode choice and distance: Evidence from Shanghai. Transportation Research Part D52: 441–453.
39.
Van AckerVWitloxF (2011) Commuting trips within tours: How is commuting related to land use?Transportation38: 465–486.
40.
WallaceBManneringFRutherfordGS (1999) Evaluating effects of transportation demand management strategies on trip generation by using Poisson and negative binomial regression. Transportation Research Record1682: 70–77.
41.
WangDChaiYLiF (2011) Built environment diversities and activity-travel behavior variations in Beijing, China. Journal of Transport Geography19: 1173–1186.
42.
YangLShenQLiZ (2016) Comparing travel mode and trip chain choices between holidays and weekdays. Transportation Research Part A91: 273–285.
43.
YeXPendyalaRMGottardiG (2007) An exploration of the relationship between mode choice and complexity of trip chaining patterns. Transportation Research Part B41: 96–113.
44.
ZhangMKukadiaN (2005) Metrics of urban form and the Modifiable Areal Unit Problem. Transportation Research Record1902: 71–79.
45.
ZhaoP (2013) The impact of the built environment on individual workers’ commuting behavior in Beijing. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation7(5): 389–415.
