The Impact of Bus Rapid Transit on Location Choice of Creative Industries and Employment Density in Seoul, Korea

Abstract

Bus rapid transit (BRT) has been a promising form of public transportation due to a higher burden of rail transit construction and operation. Many urban economists and planners argue that convenient public transit is one of the core urban strategies to attract and retain creative industries and increase employment density. Although many leaders of cities in the world pay attention to the new type of public transit, we have less understanding of the BRT impact on the location choice of creative industries and job density. Through multilevel modeling, this study tests whether BRT improvement in Seoul, Korea was appealing to the spatial patterns of creative industries and if it changed the spatial variation of employment density. This study confirms that the BRT system is the favorable component for the location of creative industries and service sectors within 500 meters of BRT-bus stops. In addition, the BRT operation increases the employment density within the same distance to the bus stops by 54%. The key findings suggest that enhancing the public transit system would be an effective strategy for higher competitiveness in the urban economy and compact urban shdure.

Bus rapid transit – a review

“…Vincent and Callaghan (2008) also examined TOD projects in York Region, Ontario, and El Monte, California, and Downloaded by [University of Western Ontario] at 09:14 12 April 2015 concluded that the type and level of investment occurring near BRT stations was comparable to that of TOD near the rail transit. Kang (2010) confirmed that BRT is associated with the location of creative industries and service sectors within 500 m of bus stops in Seoul, Korea. The BRT operation was shown to increase the employment density in the vicinity of stations by up to 54%.…”

National Study of BRT Development Outcomes

“…While, as described, existing studies show a relationship between economic development and BRT, we currently have a limited understanding of how BRT impacts the location choice of specific industries (Graham, 2007;Kang, 2010). Other studies that intersect transit and economic development often focus on rail transit (Bollinger and Ihlanfeldt, 1997;Graham, 2007;Nelson et al, 2013;Polzin, 1999).…”

“…Such physical features provide community members and developers with a sense of permanence, which the fixed-rail investment of an LRT typically signifies (Cervero and Dai, 2014;Davis et al, 2007;Polzin and Baltes, 2002;Polzin, 1999). BRT systems are easier to construct with gradual investment to include different routes and operational features (Cervero and Dai, 2014;Hook et al, 2013;Kang, 2010;Polzin and Baltes, 2002). Through case studies of six cities (Pittsburgh, Los Angeles, New York, etc.…”

“…We add to this previous work through the study of nine BRT corridors in eight U.S. counties, and through the lens of employment change in disaggregated, two-digit NAICS code sectors. This manuscript also uses a before-and-after analysis, which has also been called for in the literature (Kang, 2010).…”

“…Public transit systems are often promoted as offering a range of social, economic and environmental benefits to urban populations (Dunn, 2010;Kang, 2010;Polzin and Baltes, 2002). BRT systems are the latest trend in the fields of public transit and transportation planning.…”