Abstract
This paper presents the results of a study examining the influence of residential location on travel behavior in the Hangzhou Metropolitan Area, China. The location of the dwelling relative to the center hierarchy of the metropolitan area is found to exert a considerable influence on the travel behavior of the respondents. On average, living close to the center of Hangzhou contributes to less overall travel, a higher proportion of trips by bicycle and on foot, and lower consumption of energy for transport. The location of the dwelling relative to the closest second-order and third-order center also influences travel, but not to the same extent as proximity to the city center. These geographical differences in travel behavior are independent of residential preferences and of attitudes toward transport and environmental issues, and therefore cannot be explained by residential self-selection.
Highlights
Previous studies in a number of European, American, and Australian cities have shown that residents living close to the city center travel less than their outer-area counterparts and carry out a higher proportion of their travel by bicycle or on foot (e.g. Fouchier 1998; Mogridge 1985; Newman and Kenworthy 1989, 1999; Næss 2006b; Næss and Jensen 2004; Næss et al 1995; Schwanen et al 2001; Stead and Marshall 2001; Zegras 2010). ese relationships between residential location and travel behavior make up an important part of the foundation for the policies of planning authorities in several European countries aiming to promote compact and concentrated urban development
6 Concluding Remarks e results of the Hangzhou Metropolitan Area study are well in accordance with the conclusions from studies in Paris (Fouchier 1998; Mogridge 1985), London (Mogridge 1985), New York and Melbourne (Newman and Kenworthy 1989), San Francisco (Schipper et al 1994), Oslo (Næss et al 1995), Dutch urban regions (Schwanen et al 2001), English cities (Stead and Marshall 2001), Danish provincial cities (Harto -Nielsen 2001; Nielsen 2002; Næss and Jensen 2004), the Copenhagen Metropolitan Area (Næss 2005, 2006a,b), and Santiago de Chile (Zegras 2010). e results seem to be of a high generality, indicating that the dominant mechanisms by which residential location in uences urban travel will be present across city sizes and despite considerable contextual differences
The majority of empirical studies concluding that urban structure has no signi cant in uence on travel behavior have investigated other aspects of travel and/or focused on urban structural conditions other than those which, according to our investigations, exert the strongest in uences on traveling distances and modal split
Summary
Previous studies in a number of European, American, and Australian cities have shown that residents living close to the city center travel less than their outer-area counterparts and carry out a higher proportion of their travel by bicycle or on foot (e.g. Fouchier 1998; Mogridge 1985; Newman and Kenworthy 1989, 1999; Næss 2006b; Næss and Jensen 2004; Næss et al 1995; Schwanen et al 2001; Stead and Marshall 2001; Zegras 2010). ese relationships between residential location and travel behavior make up an important part of the foundation for the policies of planning authorities in several European countries aiming to promote compact and concentrated urban development. If Chinese cities follow the path of urban development and transport policy that North American and many European cities followed during the second half of the twentieth century, a strong increase in urban motoring must be expected, with associated problems related to oil consumption, air pollution, health, traffic accidents, and reduced accessibility to facilities for people who do not possess a private car It is important, from a policy perspective, to identify urban development strategies that have the potential to reduce automobile dependency and provide a high level of access to workplaces, service facilities and other urban functions without necessitating a high level of individual motor vehicle use. Within the urban area, the transport system (road network, public transport provision, and parking conditions), and the urban “green” and “blue” structures (more or less natural areas within and close to the city, and lakes, rivers and creeks)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
