A flexible doubly-constrained trip distribution model

Dacey, M P; Norcliffe, A.

doi:10.1016/0041-1647(77)90020-x

Cited by 14 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result, the origin and destinadon terms are constrained to lie within a range of permissible values rather than to match exactly the given totals. Such formulations are discussed by a number of researchers (Dacey and Norcliffe 1977;Jefferson and Scott 1979;Hallefjord and Jornsten 198.5;Weber 1987;Fotheringham and O'Kelly 1989).…”

Section: Relaxed Spatial Interaction Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The approach taken here to the derivation of the structural interaction model follows that of the models known as relaxed spatial interaction models (Dacey and Norcliffe 1977;Jefferson and Scott 1979;Hallefjord and Jomsten 1985;Weber 1987;Fotheringham and O'Kelly 1989). To date the interest in these models has been only with the relaxation of origin and destination constraints.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Structural Spatial Interaction∗

Pooler

1993

The Professional Geographer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper identities a concept of structural spatial interaction. Although it is defined differently from its counterpart of structural unemployment in economics, it attempts to define a s i d a r idea. In economics, the focus is on equilibrium in the supply and demand of labor. In this paper structural interaction is that which minimizes aggregate distance travelled, subject to constraints on origins and destinations. The structural interaction model produces an equilibrium, therefore, in the supply and demand of movers, while identifymg a spatially efticient trip distribution. It is portrayed as a type of relaxed interaction model and is illustrated using an example of structural migration with Canadian interprovincial migration data. Key Words: spatial interaction model, structural interaction, relaxed interaction models, population migration, structural migration. 'The support of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada research grant #410-87-1373 is acknowledged gratefully, as are the helpful comments of the referees.

show abstract

Section: Relaxed Spatial Interaction Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structural Spatial Interaction∗

Pooler

1993

The Professional Geographer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These constraints could, if they were sufficiently strong, dominate completely, and allow no room in the strategic plan for any maneuver. In practice , although few new facilities will ever be added to well-established systems and although all the factors described are important to differing degrees, surprisingly large reallocations (for example, -30% to + 16% in zones in Southeast England between 1975 and1977) take place through mechanisms such as the updating or enlargement of existing faciliti es, the closure or reduction in size of old facilities, or a redistribution of more mobile resources such as manpower. The problem , hence, is to include these constraints in a way that will direct the system towards its prime objectives, but with due regard to the operating environment.…”

Section: Systems Constraintsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has become customary in recent years to embed gravity models, such as the one described in section 3 , in types of benefit functions that are derived from concepts of consumer surplus (Wilson and Kirwan, 1969 ;Neuburger, 1971;Cochrane, 1975;Williams, 1977 ;Coelho and Williams, 1978 ;Leonardi, 1978 ;l 980a;Coelho, 1980), entropy (Cohen , 1961 ;Wilson, 1967 ;Dacey and Norcliffe , 1977;Jefferson and Scott , 1979), random utility (Domencich and McFadden, 1975 ;Ben-Akiva and Lerman , 1978;Leonardi, 1981), or simple utility theory (Mayhew, 1981). These provide the models with a consistent theoretical basis , linked to welfare or other considerations.…”

Section: The Model : a Formal Derivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Equity, Efficiency, and Accessibility in Urban and Regional Health-Care Systems

Mayhew

Leonardi

1982

Environ Plan A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

FOREWORDThe principal aim o f health care research at IIASA has been to develop a family of submodels of national health care systems to be used by health service planners. The modeling work has involved the construction of linked submodels dealing with population, disease prevalence, resource need, resource allocation, and resource supply.This article considers four resource allocation criteria for assessing the long-term health resource requirements of different areas in a region. The spatial interaction model used here provides a simple method for selecting between different configurations, when population size and structure and resource availability are changing over time and space. The allocation criteria, based on objectives about which there is broad agreement among planners and other actors in the system, are concerned with improving the equity or the efficiency of the system, or the accessibility of the population to the supply of health services. Environment and Planning A, 1982, volume 14, pages 1479-1507 Equity, efficiency, and accessibility in urban and regional health-care systems Abstract. This paper explores four different criteria of health-care resource allocation at the urban and regional level. The criteria are linked by a common spatial-interaction model. This model is based on the hypothesis that the number of hospital patients generated in a residential zone i is proportional to the relative morbidity of i, and to the availability of resources in treatment zone i , but is in inverse proportion to the accessibility costs of getting from i to j . The resource-allocation criteria are based on objectives on which there is broad agreement among planners and other actors in a health-care system. These objectives are concerned with allocations that conform to notions of equity, efficiency, and two definitions of accessibility. The allocation criteria give mainly aggregatelevel information, and are designed with the long-term regional planning of health-care services in mind. The paper starts by defining the criteria, and describes how they are intended to be employed in a planning context. The allocation rules are then formally derived and Jinked together mathematically. They are then applied to a region, London, England, which is known to have very complex health-care planning problems. As a result of this application, two of the criteria-equity. and efficiency -are selected for further analysis. A new model is built and applied that specifically enables the user to trade off one of these criteria against the other. ANDREI ROGERS Chairman Human Settlements and Services Area IntroductionThis paper describes the theory and application of a set of possible methods to assist in the regional planning of health-care services. These methods are concerned with finding a set of resource allocations in different parts of a region when the morbidity, demographic structure, and resource availability are changing over time and space. They were designed with applications in the strategic planning of health se...

show abstract

“…introduction ~~ n traditional spatial interaction models de-I rived from constrained optimization methods (Haynes and Fotheringham 1984;Fotheringham and O'Kelly 1989;Roy and Flood 1992;Pooler 1994), constraints are placed typically on the marginal totals of the predicted interaction matrix to ensure that the predicted number of trips Tq leaving origins Oi and entering destinations Dj matches exactly the observed number. Several researchers have discussed an alternative approach to model specification, wherein the marginal totals are constrained instead to lie within an a priori specified range of values (Dacey and Norcliffe 1977;Jefferson and Scott 1979;Hamerslag 1980;Hallefjord and Jornsten 1985;Weber 1987;Fotheringham and OKelly 1989). The models are referred to as relaxed spatial interaction models and are considered to have some empirical and/or theoretical advantages over traditional ones in particular modelling contexts.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%