No abstract

Some have assumed that teleshopping will become a functional substitute for traditional retail shopping and thereby reduce physical shopping trips and vehicle miles traveled. More recent studies have painted a far more complex picture, in which a combination of lifestyle, shopping opportunities, and the costs of travel all play a role in a person's choice of shopping modes. In this study, data from an activity-diary survey collected by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, California, were analyzed to gain insights into the degree to which teleshopping substitutes for traditional out-of-home shopping trips, person miles traveled for shopping, and shopping-trip chains. A two-step linear regression model was used to estimate the effects of home-based teleshopping. Results indicate that teleshopping households engage in more shopping trips and chain more of their shopping trips. It is hypothesized that teleshopping has a complementary effect on out-of-home shopping and leads to more shopping trip making and that the time for these additional trips and home teleshopping activities is enabled through efficiencies gained from increased trip chaining. Time saved through increased trip chaining and teleshopping may provide the additional time needed to shop more—both from within the home and outside the home.

No abstract

“Livability” has become a popular term in planning, design, and engineering circles, yet there continues to be a lack of clear consensus about what livability actually means, let alone how to measure it and how to achieve it. In response, this article draws deeply on the literature to develop a comprehensive understanding of this complex concept. The presented analysis suggests that livability is best understood as an individual's ability to access opportunities to improve his or her quality of life. However, one person's pursuit of quality of life can actually detract from the livability of another. This concept is particularly true in transportation, as one person's travel inherently touches the lives of others along the pathway. As wealth and social status often play a key role in determining whose pursuit of quality of life wins, a moral and ethical framework must be at the heart of the achievement of livability. Therefore, livability in a just society requires that all individuals be ensured equal access to such opportunities. Rather than one monolithic definition of livability, a need exists for a theoretical moral basis to measure, understand, and judge activities toward livability achievement through a set of clear, concise, and easily applicable livability ethics. Toward this goal, this paper first presents a comprehensive examination of the literature and then provides guidance to professionals on the application of livability concepts in practice by articulating (a) an overarching definition of livability and a set of supporting metaprinciples, (b) a set of ethical livability principles, and (c) a set of livability process principles.

It is understood that the threats posed by possible criminal activity in a neighborhood can play a major role in the decision to drive, take transit, walk, or ride a bicycle, but little empirical evidence has yet been gathered to support this notion, let alone guide public infrastructure investments, land use planning, or the allocation of police services. This study found that high-crime neighborhoods tend to discourage residents from walking or riding a bicycle. When a high-crime neighborhood is compared with a lower-crime neighborhood, the odds of choosing walking over driving decrease by 17% for work trips and 61% for nonwork trips. However, transit trips appear to respond to neighborhood crime in a way similar to auto trips; that is, high-crime neighborhoods appear to encourage transit use. The odds of choosing transit over the auto increase by 17% for work trips and 164% for nonwork trips. The study found that transit access trips (walking, bicycling, or driving to a transit station) are sensitive to neighborhood crimes in keeping with theoretical expectations: high-crime neighborhoods discourage walking and bicycling and encourage driving to transit stations. Specifically, for transit access to work trips, the odds of choosing to walk or bike to a transit station instead of driving decrease by 48%.