The theoretical minimum commute is a well-studied measure of the jobs–housing balance that summarizes the relative proximity of workers to workplaces for a given urban region. It is often used in a comparative context to determine changes in aggregate spatial structure and transport behavior over time and space. In the literature, a basic question remains: What are the measurement impacts of assuming worker inter-changeability and therefore ignoring socioeconomic status in computing theoretical minimum commutes? This paper presents an exploratory spatial data analysis of this disaggregation issue. A modeling framework that synthesizes disaggregate socioeconomic data for a metropolitan area is designed. These synthesized data are then analyzed to gain a sense of the error potential in the theoretical minimum commute calculation when worker class is ignored. The results show that ignoring worker class can substantially affect estimates of the jobs–housing balance.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
HornerM. W.“Optimal” Accessibility Landscapes? Development of a New Methodology for Simulating and Assessing Jobs–Housing Relationships in Urban Regions. Urban Studies, Vol. 45, No. 8, 2008, pp. 1583–1602.
2.
YangJ. W.Policy Implications of Excess Commuting: Examining the Impacts of Changes in US Metropolitan Spatial Structure. Urban Studies, Vol. 45, No. 2, 2008, pp. 391–405.
3.
CharronM.From Excess Commuting to Commuting Possibilities: More Extension to the Concept of Excess Commuting. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 39, No. 5, 2007, pp. 1238–1254.
4.
MaK. R., and BanisterD.Urban Spatial Change and Excess Commuting. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 39, No. 3, 2007, pp. 630–646.
5.
HornerM. W.A Multi-Scale Analysis of Urban Form and Commuting Change in a Small Metropolitan Area (1990-2000). Annals of Regional Science, Vol. 41, No. 1, 2007, pp. 315–322.
6.
FrostM., LinnekerB., and SpenceN.Excess or Wasteful Commuting in a Selection of British Cities. Transportation Research Part A, Policy and Practice, Vol. 32, No. 7, 1998, pp. 529–538.
7.
MaK. R., and BanisterD.Excess Commuting: A Critical Review. Transport Reviews, Vol. 26, No. 6, 2006, pp. 749–767.
8.
NiedzielskiM. A.A Spatially Disaggregated Approach to Commuting Efficiency. Urban Studies, Vol. 43, No. 13, 2006, pp. 2485–2502.
9.
GiulianoG., and SmallK. A.Is the Journey to Work Explained by Urban Structure?Urban Studies, Vol. 30, No. 9, 1993, pp. 1485–1500.
10.
HornerM. W.Extensions to the Concept of Excess Commuting. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 34, No. 3, 2002, pp. 543–566.
11.
YangJ. W., and FerreiraJ.Choices Versus Choice Sets: A Commuting Spectrum Method for Representing Job-Housing Possibilities. Environment and Planning B, Planning and Design, Vol. 35, No. 2, 2008, pp. 364–378.
12.
O'KellyM. E., and LeeW.Disaggregate Journey-to-Work Data: Implications for Excess Commuting and Jobs–Housing Balance. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 37, No. 12, 2005, pp. 2233–2252.
13.
ManningA.The Real Thin Theory: Monopsony in Modern Labour Markets. Labour Economics, Vol. 10, No. 2, 2003, p. 105.
14.
Murphy, E. Excess Commuting and Modal Choice.Transportation Research Part A, Policy and Practice, Vol. 43, No. 8, 2009, pp. 735–743.
15.
HornerM. W.Spatial Dimensions of Urban Commuting: A Review of Major Issues and Their Implications for Future Geographic Research. Professional Geographer, Vol. 56, No. 2, 2004, pp. 160–173.
16.
GordonP., and RichardsonH. W.Are Compact Cities a Desirable Planning Goal?Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 63, No. 1, 1997, pp. 95–106.
17.
BoarnetM., and CraneR.The Influence of Land Use on Travel Behavior: Specification and Estimation Strategies. Transportation Research Part A, Policy and Practice, Vol. 35, No. 9, 2001, pp. 823–845.
18.
BlackJ. A., PaezA., and SuthanayaP. A.Sustainable Urban Transportation: Performance Indicators and Some Analytical Approaches. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, Vol. 128, No. 4, 2002, pp. 184–209.
19.
RodríguezD. A.Spatial Choices and Excess Commuting: A Case Study of Bank Tellers in Bogotá, Colombia. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 12, No. 1, 2004, pp. 49–61.
20.
KrizekK., and LevinsonD.Teaching Integrated Land Use–Transportation Planning—Topics, Readings, and Strategies. Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol. 24, No. 3, 2005, pp. 304–316.
21.
HandyS.Smart Growth and the Transportation–Land Use Connection: What Does the Research Tell Us?International Regional Science Review, Vol. 28, No. 2, 2005, pp. 146–167.
22.
ScottD. M., and HornerM. W.Examining the Role of Urban Form in Shaping People's Accessibility to Opportunities: An Exploratory Analysis. Journal of Transportation and Land Use, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2008, pp. 89–119.
23.
SongY.Smart Growth and Urban Development Pattern: A Comparative Study. International Regional Science Review, Vol. 28, No. 2, 2005, pp. 239–265.
24.
LevineJ., InamA., and TorngG. W.A Choice-Based Rationale for Land Use and Transportation Alternatives—Evidence from Boston and Atlanta. Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol. 24, No. 3, 2005, pp. 317–330.
25.
HessD. B.Access to Employment for Adults in Poverty in the Buffalo–Niagara Region. Urban Studies, Vol. 42, No. 7, 2005, pp. 1177–1200.
26.
CerveroR., and DuncanM.Which Reduces Vehicle Travel More: Jobs–Housing Balance or Retail–Housing Mixing?Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 72, No. 4, 2006, pp. 475–490.
27.
HamiltonB. W.Wasteful Commuting. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 90, No. 5, 1982, pp. 1035–1053.
28.
WhiteM. J.Urban Commuting Journeys Are Not Wasteful. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 96, No. 5, 1988, pp. 1097–1110.
29.
SmallK. A., and SongS.Wasteful Commuting—A Resolution. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 100, No. 4, 1992, pp. 888–898.
30.
HornerM. W., and MeffordJ. N.Investigating Urban Spatial Mismatch Issues Using Jobs–Housing Indicators to Model Home–Work Separation. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 39, No. 6, 2007, pp. 1420–1440.
31.
ShenQ.Spatial and Social Dimensions of Commuting. Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 66, No. 1, 2000, pp. 68–82.
32.
HornerM. W.Exploring the Sensitivity of Jobs–Housing Statistics to Imperfect Travel Time Information. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Vol. 37, No. 2, 2010, pp. 367–375.
33.
HornerM. W., and MurrayA. T.Excess Commuting and the Modifiable Areal Unit Problem. Urban Studies, Vol. 39, No. 1, 2002, pp. 131–139.
34.
KimS.Excess Commuting for 2-Worker Households in the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area. Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 38, No. 2, 1995, pp. 166–182.
