基于巡回的北京市居民出行时空间决策的社区分异
收稿日期: 2010-01-24
修回日期: 2010-04-12
网络出版日期: 2010-10-20
基金资助
国家自然科学基金项目资助(40671058)
The residential differentiation of tour-based spatio-temporal decision-making of travel behavior in Beijing City
Received date: 2010-01-24
Revised date: 2010-04-12
Online published: 2010-10-20
国内以往关于城市空间结构与居民出行行为之间关系的研究主要建立在出行角度的分析之上,以巡回作为基本单元,从出行决策视角探讨居民出行时空间决策社区分异的研究尚少见报导。利用2007年北京市居民活动日志调查获取的第一手数据,构建基于巡回的出行时空间决策概念模型,并采用嵌套Logit对北京市居民工作日出行时空间决策的社区分异进行探讨。结果表明:居民巡回类型决策的社区分异较为显著,但会随出行目的变化而发生较大变化;巡回中主要活动起始时间决策的社区分异并不显著,但起始时间与活动类型存在较强的内在联系;出行距离及交通方式决策的社区分异较为显著,对单位社区及政策性住房社区应给予更多的研究和关注。
柴彦威, 马静, 张文佳 . 基于巡回的北京市居民出行时空间决策的社区分异[J]. 地理研究, 2010 , 29(10) : 1725 -1734 . DOI: 10.11821/yj2010100001
The relationship between built environment and travel behavior has long been studied in geography, transportation and city planning. There has been a large body of such researches in western countries from macro and micro perspectives, using different methods such as simulation, description and modeling. Relatively, in China most such researches have centered on trip-based analysis, no matter from aggregation level or individual level, paying little attention to tour-based analysis. In addition, the travel decision-making process of residents has rarely been considered either. This paper attempts to construct the concept model of tour-based spatio-temporal decision-making of travel behavior and explore its residential differentiation on workdays in Beijing city, by using nested logit model with the data of travel diary obtained in 2007. Moreover, it attempts to discuss the relationship between activity and mobility.The results first of all show that residential neighborhood has an effect on the tour type decision-making, but the effect varies with the change of travel purpose. For example, if it is a work tour, its residential differentiation will be significant; but if it is a non-work tour, it will be indistinct. This may be closely related with Chinese unique suburbanization. Secondly, the start time decision-making is mainly affected by the activity type, which implies that there is a strong tie between activity and mobility. But, anyhow, the residential differentiation of start time decision-making is not significant. Thirdly, the travel distance and mode choice is distinct in different neighborhoods, that is to say the residential differentiation of spatial decision-making is significant. On the whole, the travel distance of Danwei residents is comparatively short, and the mode choice is mainly non-motor vehicle. In contrast, the travel distance of residents in commercial housing community and policy-oriented housing community is much longer, and the mode choice is mainly motor vehicle, with car in the former and public transport in the latter. Therefore, the travel behavior of Danwei residents is to some extent low carbon while the travel of policy-oriented housing community residents is long and dependent on public transport. We should pay more attention to these unique neighborhoods in China.
[1] Crane R. The influence of urban form on travel: An interpretive review. Journal of Planning Literature, 2000, 15(1): 2~23.
[2] Boarnet M, Crane R. The influence of land use on travel behavior: Specification and estimation strategies. Transportation Research Part A, 2001, 35: 823~845.
[3] Cervero R. Built environments and mode choice:Toward a normative framework. Transportation Research Part D, 2002, 7: 265~284.
[4] Chen C, Gong H, Paaswell R. Role of the built environment on mode choice decisions:Additional evidence on the impact of density. Transportation, 2008, 35: 285~299.
[5] Boarnet M, Sarmiento S. Can land-use policy really affect travel behavior? A study of the link between non-work travel and land-use characteristics. Urban Studies, 1998, 35(7): 1155~1169.
[6] Cervero R. Traditional neighborhoods and commuting in the San Francisco Bay Area. Transportation, 1996, 23: 373~394.
[7] Frank L, Bradley M, Kavage S, et al. Urban form, travel time, and cost relationships with tour complexity and mode choice. Transportation, 2008, 35: 37~54.
[8] Krizek K. Neighborhood services, trip purpose, and tour-based travel. Transportation, 2003, 30: 387~410.
[9] Dieleman F, Dijst M, Burghouwt G.Urban form and travel behavior:Micro-level household attributes and residential context. Urban Studies, 2002, 39(3): 507~527.
[10] Schwanen T, Dijst M, Dieleman F. Policies for urban form and their impact on travel:The netherlands experience. Urban Studies, 2004, 41(3): 579~603.
[11] Cervero R, Kockelman K. Travel demand and the 3Ds: Density, diversity, and design. Transportation Research Part D, 1997, 2(3): 199~219.
[12] 吴缚龙. 转型与重构:中国城市发展多维透视. 南京:东南大学出版社, 2007. 1~285.
[13] 钱林波. 城市土地利用混合程度与居民出行空间分布——以南京主城为例. 城市研究, 2000, (3): 7~10.
[14] 林红, 李军. 出行空间分布与土地利用混合程度关系研究——以广州中心片区为例. 城市规划, 2008, 32(9): 53~56.
[15] 柴彦威, 刘志林, 李峥嵘,等. 中国城市的时空间结构. 北京: 北京大学出版社, 2002. 1~312.
[16] 张艳, 柴彦威. 基于居住区比较的北京城市通勤研究. 地理研究, 2009, 28(5): 1327~1340.
[17] 刘志林,张艳, 柴彦威. 中国大城市职住分离现象及其特征——以北京市为例. 城市发展研究, 2009, 16(9): 110~117.
[18] 马静,柴彦威,张文佳. 北京市居民购物出行影响因素的空间分异.经济地理,2009,29(12): 2006~2011.
[19] Wang D, Chai Y. The jobs-housing relationship and commuting in Beijing, China: The legacy of Danwei. Journal of Transport Geography, 2009, 17(1): 30~38.
[20] Pan H, Shen Q, Zhang M. Influence of urban form on travel behavior in four neighborhoods of shanghai.Urban Studies, 2009, 46(2): 275~294.
[21] Bowmen J L, Ben-Akiva M E. Activity-based disaggregate travel demand model system with activity schedules. Transportation Research Part A, 2000, 35: 1~28.
[22] 张文佳, 柴彦威. 时空制约下的城市居民活动—移动系统——活动分析法的理论和模型进展. 国际城市规划, 2009, 24(4): 60~68.
[23] Ben-Akiva M E, Bowman J L. Integration of an activity-based model system and a residential location model. Urban Studies, 1998, 35(7): 1131~1153.
[24] Train K E. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003.1~334.
[25] 张文佳, 柴彦威. 居住空间对家庭购物出行决策的影响. 地理科学进展, 2009, 28(3): 362~369.
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |