Testing the decentralization effects of rail systems: Empirical findings from Israel

The Effects of Commuter Rail on Population Deconcentration and Commuting: A Salt Lake City Case Study

“…However, only highway infrastructure has been emphasized in research regarding commuting and developing human settlement patterns. Considering investments in rail infrastructure have increased in recent decades (Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 2007;Israel & Cohen-Blankshtain, 2010), it is important for planners and researchers to understand how these rail systems influence land use, metropolitan development patterns, and population migration in the 21st century.…”

“…In Chapter 3, we study the effect of commuter rail implementation on migration and commuting. Population migration has been evaluated through various theoretical perspectives which anticipate different redistribution tendencies (Berry, 1976;Carlino, 2000;Coffey & Shearmur, 2002;Dean et al, 1984;Frey, 1987;Israel & Cohen-Blankshtain, 2010;Kahsai & Schaeffer, 2010;Pfister et al, 2000;Renkow & Hoover, 2000;Stanback, 1991). We follow in the theoretical footsteps of Renkow and Hoover (2000), Ganning and McCall (2012), and Rupasingha, Liu and Partridge (2015), among others, by applying a modified population deconcentration model to observe if the provision of commuter rail significantly increases out-commuting, which signals success in attracting migrants requiring commuting infrastructure.…”

“…While some studies consider rail, they do not specify the type, they combine forms of rail (light rail and heavy rail) into one sample, or they combine rail with other forms of transit (Cervero & Duncan, 2002Chatman, 2009;Handy et al, 2005;Kitamura et al, 1997;Schwanen & Mokhtarian, 2005a, 2005bBoarnet & Sarmiento, 1998;Khattak & Rodriguez, 2005;Greenwald, 2003;Bagley & Mokhtarian, 2002;Cervero, 2001;Pinjari et al, 2007;Scheiner & Holz-Rau, 2007;Krizek, 2000;Meurs & Haaijer, 2001). The only exception is the work conducted by Israel and Cohen-Blankshtain (2010), in which they used a ridership survey and a stated preference model specifically on a commuter rail that had just undergone improvements. They find that households who previously lived and worked at the metropolitan core perceived rail transit as an important amenity when making the decision to move from the metropolitan core to its fringe.…”

“…Population migration has been evaluated through various theoretical perspectives which anticipate different redistribution tendencies (Berry, 1976;Carlino, 2000;Coffey & Shearmur, 2002;Dean et al, 1984;Frey, 1987;Israel & Cohen-Blankshtain, 2010;Kahsai & Schaeffer, 2010;Pfister et al, 2000;Renkow & Hoover, 2000;Stanback, 1991). One theory, the deconcentration theory, predicts that outward land consumption in a metropolitan area occurs first through the dispersal of households from central cities to the peripheries of these cities, which are then followed by employers.…”

“…Abstract All transportation systems have the ability to transform human settlement patterns, which can affect a range of social, economic and environmental issues. Considering investments in rail infrastructure have increased in recent decades (Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 2007;Israel & Cohen-Blankshtain, 2010), it is important for planners and researchers to understand how these rail systems influence land use, metropolitan development patterns, and population migration. The following paragraphs summarize the studies and their findings.…”