Does Residential Dissonance Affect Residential Mobility?

Abstract

This research identifies the impacts of residential dissonance on residential mobility behavior in transit-oriented developments (TODs) versus non-TODs in Brisbane, Australia. On the basis of the characteristics of living environments (density, diversity, connectivity, and accessibility) and the travel preferences of 4,545 individuals, respondents in 2009 were classified into one of four categories: TOD consonants, TOD dissonants, non-TOD dissonants, and non-TOD consonants. Binary logistic regression analyses were employed to identify residential mobility behavior of groups between 2009 and 2011 while controlling for time-varying covariates. The findings show that both TOD dissonants and TOD consonants move residences at an equal rate. However, TOD dissonants are more likely to move residences to their preferred non-TOD areas. In contrast, non-TOD dissonants not only move residences at a lower rate, but their rate of mobility to their preferred TOD neighborhood is also significantly lower because of costs and other associated factors. The findings suggest that development of policies for discrete land use is required to integrate non-TOD dissonant and TOD dissonant behaviors to support TOD development in Brisbane.

Determinants of residential dissonance: Implications for transit-oriented development in Brisbane

“…Empirical evidence does not strongly support these hypotheses. Kamruzzaman et al (2013b) found that the overall rate of residential mobility is almost similar for both dissonants and consonants living in TOD areas in Brisbane. This means that dissonant residents do not necessarily relocate to adjust their living preferences.…”

“…TODs can take a variety of forms (De Vos et al, 2014;Kamruzzaman et al, 2014a); and the development of different types of TODs can lead to different types of residential dissonance. For example, for a new TOD on a greenfield site, dissonance might develop amongst these relocated residents in two ways (Kamruzzaman et al, 2013b):…”

Built environment impacts on walking for transport in Brisbane, Australia

“…A 1 km buffer has also been used to define a neighbourhood in Brisbane (Kamruzzaman et al 2013b). Residential density was measured using the number of dwelling units located within a unit area of residential zoned land of the buffer (dwellings/hectare) .…”

“…A cautious argument put forward in these studies is that the self-selection effects are controlled because data are collected from the same person over two different time periods, and thus any behavioural changes are due to changes in urban form. However, a problem with this longitudinal approach is that ''the relocating households are themselves a self-selected group'' (Bhat and Guo 2007, p. 511), and evidence shows that households might move due to dissonance in the pre-move neighbourhood (Kamruzzaman et al 2013b). In addition, research aimed at validating the causality between urban form and travel behaviour originates largely from the USA; with a few examples from Europe (e.g.…”

The influence of residential dissonance on physical activity and walking: evidence from the Montgomery County, MD, and Twin Cities, MN, areas

“…A handful of studies have examined the relative influence of neighborhood mismatch and neighborhood locations on travel behaviors Mokhtarian, 2005a, 2005b;Levine, 2005;Frank et al, 2007;Naess, 2009;De Vos et al, 2012;Kamruzzaman et al, 2013). Using data from the San Francisco Bay Area, Schwanen and Mokhtarian (2005a, b) conducted two studies of neighborhood-type dissonance in which they introduced the concept of residential match and mismatch.…”