Abstract
The increasing interest in sustainable development has underlined the importance of accessibility as a key indicator to assess transport investments, urban policy, and urban form. From both the environmental and the equity component of sustainability, a comparison of accessibility by car versus public transport is of utmost importance. However, most studies in this direction have used rather rough estimates of travel time, especially by public transport. In this paper, we present Urban.Access, an ArcGIS extension for estimating car-based and transit-based accessibility to employment and other land uses. Urban.Access enables a detailed representation of travel times by transit and car and thus makes it possible to adequately compare accessibility levels by transport mode. The application of Urban.Access to the Tel Aviv metropolitan area shows that the gaps between car-based and transit-based accessibility are larger than those found in other studies. We argue that this is not the result of a poorer transit system, but rather of a more detailed description of travel by transit in the Urban.Access application. The larger gaps point to a greater need for adequate policy responses, both for reducing car dependence as well as for creating a more equitable transport system. Hence, we uphold that an adequate representation of transit travel times is more than a scientific matter—it is a matter of great social importance.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Blumenberg EA, Ong P (2001) Cars, buses, and jobs: welfare participants and employment access in Los Angeles. Transp Res Record J Transp Res Board 1756: 22–31
Bristow G, Farrington J et al (2009) Developing an evaluation framework for crosscutting policy goals: the Accessibility Policy Assessment Tool. Environ Plan A 41(1): 48–62
Bruinsma FR, Nijkamp P et al (1990) Infrastructure and metropolitan development in an international perspective: survey and methodological exploration. Faculteit der Economische Wetenschappen en Econometrie/Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam
de Dios Ortuzar J, Willumsen LG (2001) Modelling transport. Wiley, Chichester
Doi K, Kii M et al (2008) An integrated evaluation method of accessibility, quality of life, and social interaction. Environ Plan B Plan Des 35(6): 1098–1116
Dong X, Ben-Akiva ME et al (2006) Moving from trip-based to activity-based measures of accessibility. Transp Res A Policy Pract 40(2): 163–180
Farrington J, Farrington C (2005) Rural accessibility, social inclusion and social justice: towards conceptualisation. J Transp Geogr SPEC ISS 13(1): 1–12
Feitelson E (2002) Introducing environmental equity dimensions into the sustainable transport discourse: issues and pitfalls. Transp Res D Trans Environ 7(2): 99–118
Garb Y, Levine J (2002) Congestion pricing’s conditional promise: promotion of accessibility or mobility?. Transp Policy 9(3): 179–188
Geurs KT, Ritsema van Eck JR (2001) Accessibility measures: review and applications. Evaluation of accessibility impacts of land-use transport scenario’s, and related social and economic impacts. RIVM, National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (NL), Bilthoven
Geurs KT, van Wee B (2004) Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: review and research directions. J Transp Geogr 12(2): 127–140
Handy SL, Niemeier DA (1997) Measuring accessibility: an exploration of issues and alternatives. Environ Plan A 29(7): 1175–1194
Helling A (1998) Changing intra-metropolitan accessibility in the U.S.: evidence from Atlanta. Prog Plan 49(2): 55–107
Hess DB (2005) Access to employment for adults in poverty in the Buffalo–Niagara region. Urban Stud 42(7): 1177–1200
Kawabata M (2003) Job access and employment among low-skilled autoless workers in US metropolitan areas. Environ Plan A 35: 1651–1668
Kawabata M (2009) Spatiotemporal dimensions of modal accessibility disparity in Boston and San Francisco. Environ Plan A 41(1): 183–198
Kawabata M, Shen Q (2006) Job accessibility as an indicator of auto-oriented urban structure: a comparison of Boston and Los Angeles with Tokyo. Environ Plan B Plan Des 33(1): 115–130
Kwok RCW, Yeh AGO (2004) The use of modal accessibility gap as an indicator for sustainable transport development. Environ Plan A 36(5): 921–936
Lao Y, Liu L (2009) Performance evaluation of bus lines with data envelopment analysis and geographic information systems. Comput Environ Urban Syst 33(4): 247–255
Martens K (2009) Justice in Transport: applying Walzer’s ‘Spheres of Justice’ to the transport sector. Paper presented at the 88th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 11–15 January 2009, Washington DC, USA
Shen Q (1998) Location characteristics of inner-city neighborhoods and employment accessibility of low-wage workers. Environ Plan B Plan Des 25(3): 345–365
Wu BM, Hine JP (2003) A PTAL approach to measuring changes in bus service accessibility. Transp Policy 10(4): 307–320
Wu CS, Murray AT (2005) Optimizing public transit quality and system access: the multiple-route, maximal covering/shortest-path problem. Environ Plan B Plan Des 32(2): 163–178
Open Access
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
About this article
Cite this article
Benenson, I., Martens, K., Rofé, Y. et al. Public transport versus private car GIS-based estimation of accessibility applied to the Tel Aviv metropolitan area. Ann Reg Sci 47, 499–515 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-010-0392-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-010-0392-6