Firm Location in the MEPLAN Model of Sacramento

Abstract

MEPLAN land use and transportation-interaction models traditionally include models of business-location choice. The mechanisms in the model that allow for realistic aggregate assignment of firms to zones, and the resulting impact that firm location has on the entire modeling system, are described. The models use a form of logit function to allocate production activities to zones. Interdependencies in the Social Accounting Matrix, together with trip- and land-cost data and usage rates, generate a utility function for the attractiveness of purchasing a given sector’s output from a given zone. The alternative specific constants and the dispersion parameter are estimated in calibration, based primarily on cost data, trip-length distributions, and arrangement of activity in a calibration year. Results from a model of Sacramento show the various features and strengths of the model, while pointing out some weaknesses and potential pitfalls. The strengths include the realistic representation of current and continuing patterns, the close linkages between different industry and household types, and the market-based nature of the model. The weaknesses include the aggregate nature of the model and the possibility of difficulties in establishing realistic, alternative, specific constants.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Hunt

J. D.

, and Echenique

M. H.

Experiences in the Application of the MEPLAN Framework for Land Use and Transport Interaction Modeling. Proc., 4th National Conference on the Application of Transportation Planning Methods, Daytona Beach, Fla., May 1993, pp. 723–754.

Pyatt

, and Thorbecke

Planning Techniques for a Better Future. International Labour Office, Geneva, Switzerland, 1976.

Leontief

The Structure of the American Economy 1919-1939. Oxford University Press, New York, 1941.

McFadden

Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior. In Frontiers in Econometrics ( Zarembka

, ed.), Academic Press, New York, pp. 105–142.

Williams

H. C. W. L.

On the Formation of Travel-Demand Models and Economic-Evaluation Measures of User Benefit. Environment and Planning, Vol. 9A, No. 3, 1977, pp. 285–344.

Meyer

M. D.

, and Miller

E. J.

. Urban Transportation Planning: A Decision-Oriented Approach. McGraw-Hill, New York, N.Y., 1984.

Lowry

I. S.

A Model of Metropolis. Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif., 1964.

Hunt

J. D.

Calibrating the Naples Land Use and Transport Model. Environment and Planning, Vol. 21B, pp. 569–590.

M. Echenique & Partners, Ltd. MEPLAN User Reference Manual. Cambridge, England, 1994.

10.

Hunt

J. D.

, and Simmonds

D. C.

. Theory and Application of an Integrated Land Use and Transport Modelling Framework. Environment and Planning, Vol. 20B, 1993, pp. 221–244.

11.

Abraham

J. E.

, and Hunt

J. D.

. Calibrating the MEPLAN Model of Sacramento. Presented at 77th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1998.

12.

1996 Metropolitan Transportation Plan Working Paper 3: Analysis of the Options. Sacramento Area Council of Governments, Sacramento, Calif., 1996.

13.

Hunt

J. D.

, McMillan

J. D. P.

, and Abraham

J. E.

. Stated Preference Investigation of Influences on Attractiveness of Residential Locations. In Transportation Research Record 1466, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1994, pp. 79–87.

14.

Hunt

J. D.

Stated Preference Examination of the Location-Choice Behavior of Small Retail Firms. In Transportation Research Record 1606, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1997, pp. 25–32.

15.

Abraham

J. E.

A Review of the MEPLAN Modeling Framework from a Perspective of Urban Economics. Department of Civil Engineering Research Report No. CE98-2, University of Calgary, Canada, 1998. http://www.ucalgary.ca/-jabraham/MEPLAN_and_Urban_Economics.pdf.