2002
DOI: 10.1080/00420980220099113
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Excess Commuting and the Modifiable Areal Unit Problem

Abstract: Excess commuting has emerged during the past two decades as an important construct for evaluating the spatial relationships between employment and residential locations. During this time-period, there has been an on-going debate regarding how one should measure excess commuting in urban regions. This paper contributes to the debate by focusing on the spatial issues inherent in excess commuting evaluation. We demonstrate how scale and unit definition (the modifiable areal unit problem) are manifested in the ass… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
129
0
2

Year Published

2004
2004
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 176 publications
(134 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
3
129
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Depending on the decision, substantially different conclusions can be drawn. However, in an investigation of the scale dependence of three measures of commuting efficiency, Niedzielski, Horner, and Xiao (2013) found that measures of capacity used and commuting economy were relatively unaffected by the areal unit, though a measure of excess commuting was highly sensitive to modifiable areal unit problems, confirming earlier findings (Horner & Murray, 2002). The authors concluded, though, that "more aggregated data, such as LEHD data aggregated to census tracts for example, can be used safely in the knowledge that the metric results will hardly be different from those based on less aggregated data" (Niedzielski et al, 2013, p. 141).…”
Section: Geographic Scale and Metric Calculationsupporting
confidence: 59%
“…Depending on the decision, substantially different conclusions can be drawn. However, in an investigation of the scale dependence of three measures of commuting efficiency, Niedzielski, Horner, and Xiao (2013) found that measures of capacity used and commuting economy were relatively unaffected by the areal unit, though a measure of excess commuting was highly sensitive to modifiable areal unit problems, confirming earlier findings (Horner & Murray, 2002). The authors concluded, though, that "more aggregated data, such as LEHD data aggregated to census tracts for example, can be used safely in the knowledge that the metric results will hardly be different from those based on less aggregated data" (Niedzielski et al, 2013, p. 141).…”
Section: Geographic Scale and Metric Calculationsupporting
confidence: 59%
“…In every case where data is simulated or deemed uncertain, this must be taken into account when interpreting the results, a critical point in any situation where environmental policies are based on model data (Smil, 1993). In addition, because only one level of administrative zones is used in this study, the results could be susceptible to the modifiable areal unit problem (Openshaw, 1983;Horner and Murray, 2002), although the individuallevel metrics should be more robust to this effect than aggregate-level measures. Validation techniques and sensitivity analyses should be undertaken before policies based on the vulnerability metrics are implemented (Edwards and Clarke, 2009).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As such, geographic scale selection has reflected a subjective exercise of the researcher seeking to aggregate non-modifiable entities (Openshaw, 1983). Since the MAUP has been defined as a dilemma related to the selection of geographic scale and analytical unit, any evaluation of travel behavior must give careful consideration to these facets (Horner & Murray, 2002). However, disparity in the geographic scales previously used within the literature have complicated the debate of how best to operationalize land use mix for active travel research (Clark & Scott, 2014).…”
Section: Methodological Concernsmentioning
confidence: 99%