Predicting Commute Time of Non–Workers in the Context of Welfare Reform

Abstract

In the context of recent welfare reform efforts, researchers have examined strategies for attracting jobs to inner cities, dispersing inner-city residents to suburban jobgrowth areas, and creating transportation connections between inner cities and suburban job-growth areas. However, little has been done to estimate the extent of potential commute of non-workers who are expected to become active workers as a result of welfare reform. This study attempts to predict the extent of non-workers' commute by using modeling techniques employed in labor economics. Data from the 1995 Nationwide Transportation Survey are utilized. Conforming to theoretical premises and logical expectations, I estimate that mean commute time of non-workers is likely to be substantially lower than those currently working. Policy implications of the empirical findings are discussed.

Access to Employment for Adults in Poverty in the Buffalo-Niagara Region

“…The data describing low-wage jobs, which come from a directory of employment in both the private and public sectors provided by American Business Information (2000), 3 serve as a surrogate for the jobs that adults in poverty would seek (Blumenberg, 2004;Blumenberg and Ong, 2001). This approach is consistent with research examining the probability of employment by poor people (Deka, 2002;Sharpe and Abdel-Ghany, 1994).…”

“…20. Future research should investigate actual job vacancies and compare employment access for males and females, as previous research reveals that women make longer trips than men to reach low-wage jobs (Deka, 2002;Hanson and Pratt, 1995;McLean and Perry, 1994).…”

Beyond the Spatial Mismatch: Welfare Recipients and Transportation Policy

“…In response to these criticisms, mismatch research has grown from the rather crude method of simply measuring jobs per area (which fails to account for the number of prospective applicants for those jobs), to measuring jobs per worker, to evaluations of commute time, and finally to gravity-based models that try to combine all these factors. Mismatch scholars have also responded with increasing methodological sophistication to concerns regarding sample selection bias-the fact that samples typically exclude unemployed adults whose lack of a job may be, in part, because of their spatial isolation (Cooke and Ross 1999;Deka 2002;Shen 1998). Finally, researchers have attempted to address the endogeneity of residential location choices.…”

“…An emphasis on those who are employed necessarily results in a sample selection bias, excluding those who are unemployed because of difficulties traveling to available employment. However, Deka (2002) estimates that the mean commute time of the nonworking poor is likely to be substantially lower than that of those currently employed.…”

“…Over the years, however, the spatial mismatch hypothesis has been put to test by a host of skeptical scholars. Our purpose in this review is not to revisit yet again the voluminous mismatch literature; four reviews of the spatial mismatch research have been recently published and a number of recent studies have highlighted the thorny methodological issues associated with this body of scholarship (Cooke and Ross 1999;Deka 2002;DeRango 2001;Perle, Bauder, and Beckett 2002). While the literature reviews have been written by scholars sympathetic to the hypothesisand anyone reading them should bear in mind the potential biases of their authors-they nevertheless summarize and analyze the mismatch debate and leave no reason for us to do the same (Holzer 1991;Ihlanfeldt and Sjoquist 1998;Kain 1992;Preston and McLafferty 1999).…”