¿Por qué la gente no usa el Metro? Efectos del transporte en la Zona Metropolitana de la Ciudad de México1

Q3 Social Sciences
Masanori Murata , Javier Delgado Campos , Manuel Suárez Lastra
{"title":"¿Por qué la gente no usa el Metro? Efectos del transporte en la Zona Metropolitana de la Ciudad de México1","authors":"Masanori Murata ,&nbsp;Javier Delgado Campos ,&nbsp;Manuel Suárez Lastra","doi":"10.14350/rig.56661","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>According to available data (2007), the subway of Mexico City transports 13.5% of total passengers; less than any other means of transportation, such as collective taxis (44.9%) or private cars (22.1%) do. This tendency has not changed in 2015. To explain this low mobility, factors such as home-to-station walking distance, station location and density, socio-economic variables, (income, education, sex, age, motive, automobile property), transshipment ability and waiting time were examined.</p><p>The analysis revealed: i) that subway users are willing to travel a distance of up to 800 meters in order to arrive to a train station, ii) the resultant buffer of the subway stations is considered an area of influence but it covers only 16.6% of the metropolitan surface area, iii) area known as “walkable” was also considered iv) density of stations is one third of the one at Tokyo and nine times less than at the municipality of Paris. These characteristics are a serious problem for a costly system that still influences the urban structure of the city. Mexico city's subway system register daily: 4.1 million trips as round trips and 2.2 millions one-way trips related to work, school, shopping or entertainment. This next step was to analyze the daily trips from the periphery of the city toward the center that reach up to 1.5 million users, and cause the saturation to seven of the available final stations. In this condition, we have the second hypothesis that there are different logics of decision for the subway use between the “walkable” and periphery citizens.</p><p>In the first place, citizens normally choose the subway over other means of transportation aforementioned, (collective taxi, private car, suburban bus or taxi) after taking travel time budget into consideration. In the second place, the amount of passengers who can finish their trips at the station was compared to the amount of passengers who cannot. The analysis showed how the deficient coordination of transportation added to the poor urban planning concentrating only shopping and study areas around the stations affect the population. Therefore, some subway passengers can finish their trips at the stations, while others have to, not just add another means of transportations, but also the walking distance and the waiting time. These issues are associated to the transfer times, “walkable” environment, urban planning and station facilities, such as moving walkway and elevators. Therefore, the users have four options: a) take the subway at least one time in the course of their trips b) choose another means of transportation; c) finish their journeys at the subway stations or d) add another means of transportation after the subway use. Then the logistic regression is applied twice to test the probabilities.</p><p>Through the first regression, the obtained value of pseudo R square of Negelkerke (0.38) shows that -contrary to other cities-, passengers use the subway in order to get to work (1.03) less than to go shopping (1.2). The high value of the transshipment variable (41.0) shows the importance of taking this factor into account. The low-income residents (2001 to 8000 pesos per month) use the subway more than the medium-income residents (8001 to 12000 pesos per month). Furthermore, the second regression with pseudo R square of Negelkerke (0.3) reveals that passengers tend to use this modality more to go shopping (0.8) or to their place of study (0.17) than to get to work (-0.2) because the main universities and the traditional market places (mercado) are located around the stations. It is possible to assume that a longer waiting time and a higher number of transshipment may discourage people to travel by subway. Once the odds ratio of walking a distance between 400m and 800m decreases from 8.3 to 5.1, it is possible to assume that a walking distance between 0m and 400m may be the strategic areas to increase its use.</p><p>Concluding, it is possible to increase the use of the subway system by improving the functionality at current stations as well as urban areas around them. Finally, some urban planning guidelines are suggested to achieve a more efficient system operation.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":39866,"journal":{"name":"Investigaciones Geograficas","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.14350/rig.56661","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Investigaciones Geograficas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0188461117300560","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

According to available data (2007), the subway of Mexico City transports 13.5% of total passengers; less than any other means of transportation, such as collective taxis (44.9%) or private cars (22.1%) do. This tendency has not changed in 2015. To explain this low mobility, factors such as home-to-station walking distance, station location and density, socio-economic variables, (income, education, sex, age, motive, automobile property), transshipment ability and waiting time were examined.

The analysis revealed: i) that subway users are willing to travel a distance of up to 800 meters in order to arrive to a train station, ii) the resultant buffer of the subway stations is considered an area of influence but it covers only 16.6% of the metropolitan surface area, iii) area known as “walkable” was also considered iv) density of stations is one third of the one at Tokyo and nine times less than at the municipality of Paris. These characteristics are a serious problem for a costly system that still influences the urban structure of the city. Mexico city's subway system register daily: 4.1 million trips as round trips and 2.2 millions one-way trips related to work, school, shopping or entertainment. This next step was to analyze the daily trips from the periphery of the city toward the center that reach up to 1.5 million users, and cause the saturation to seven of the available final stations. In this condition, we have the second hypothesis that there are different logics of decision for the subway use between the “walkable” and periphery citizens.

In the first place, citizens normally choose the subway over other means of transportation aforementioned, (collective taxi, private car, suburban bus or taxi) after taking travel time budget into consideration. In the second place, the amount of passengers who can finish their trips at the station was compared to the amount of passengers who cannot. The analysis showed how the deficient coordination of transportation added to the poor urban planning concentrating only shopping and study areas around the stations affect the population. Therefore, some subway passengers can finish their trips at the stations, while others have to, not just add another means of transportations, but also the walking distance and the waiting time. These issues are associated to the transfer times, “walkable” environment, urban planning and station facilities, such as moving walkway and elevators. Therefore, the users have four options: a) take the subway at least one time in the course of their trips b) choose another means of transportation; c) finish their journeys at the subway stations or d) add another means of transportation after the subway use. Then the logistic regression is applied twice to test the probabilities.

Through the first regression, the obtained value of pseudo R square of Negelkerke (0.38) shows that -contrary to other cities-, passengers use the subway in order to get to work (1.03) less than to go shopping (1.2). The high value of the transshipment variable (41.0) shows the importance of taking this factor into account. The low-income residents (2001 to 8000 pesos per month) use the subway more than the medium-income residents (8001 to 12000 pesos per month). Furthermore, the second regression with pseudo R square of Negelkerke (0.3) reveals that passengers tend to use this modality more to go shopping (0.8) or to their place of study (0.17) than to get to work (-0.2) because the main universities and the traditional market places (mercado) are located around the stations. It is possible to assume that a longer waiting time and a higher number of transshipment may discourage people to travel by subway. Once the odds ratio of walking a distance between 400m and 800m decreases from 8.3 to 5.1, it is possible to assume that a walking distance between 0m and 400m may be the strategic areas to increase its use.

Concluding, it is possible to increase the use of the subway system by improving the functionality at current stations as well as urban areas around them. Finally, some urban planning guidelines are suggested to achieve a more efficient system operation.

为什么人们不使用地铁?交通对墨西哥城大都会区的影响1
根据现有数据(2007年),墨西哥城的地铁运送了总乘客的13.5%;少于其他交通工具,例如集体的士(44.9%)或私家车(22.1%)。这一趋势在2015年没有改变。为了解释这种低流动性,研究人员考察了家庭到车站的步行距离、车站位置和密度、社会经济变量(收入、教育、性别、年龄、动机、汽车属性)、转运能力和等待时间等因素。分析显示:i)地铁用户愿意为了到达火车站而走800米的距离,ii)由此产生的地铁站缓冲区被认为是一个有影响的区域,但它只覆盖了大都市表面积的16.6%,iii)被称为“可步行”的区域也被认为是iv)车站密度是东京的三分之一,比巴黎少九倍。这些特征对于一个仍然影响城市结构的昂贵系统来说是一个严重的问题。墨西哥城的地铁系统每天记录:往返410万次,与工作、上学、购物或娱乐有关的单程220万次。下一步是分析从城市外围到市中心的每日行程,这些行程达到150万用户,并导致七个可用的最终站点饱和。在这种情况下,我们有第二个假设,即在“可步行”和周边居民之间存在不同的地铁使用决策逻辑。首先,公民在考虑出行时间预算后,通常会选择地铁而不是上述其他交通工具(集体出租车、私家车、郊区公交或出租车)。其次,将能够在车站完成行程的乘客数量与不能在车站完成行程的乘客数量进行比较。分析表明,交通协调性不足,加上城市规划不善,只集中在车站周围的购物和学习区,对人口产生了怎样的影响。因此,一些地铁乘客可以在车站完成行程,而另一些人则不得不这样做,不仅增加了另一种交通工具,而且增加了步行距离和等待时间。这些问题与换乘时间、“步行”环境、城市规划和车站设施(如自动人行道和电梯)有关。因此,用户有四种选择:a)在出行过程中至少乘坐一次地铁;b)选择其他交通工具;C)在地铁站结束他们的旅程或d)在使用地铁后增加另一种交通工具。然后应用逻辑回归两次来检验概率。通过第一次回归,得到的Negelkerke伪R平方值(0.38)表明,与其他城市相反,乘客乘坐地铁的目的是上班(1.03),而不是购物(1.2)。转运变量的高值(41.0)表明考虑这一因素的重要性。低收入居民(2001 - 8000比索/月)比中等收入居民(8001 - 12000比索/月)使用地铁更多。此外,Negelkerke伪R平方(0.3)的第二次回归表明,由于主要的大学和传统的市场(mercado)都位于车站周围,乘客更倾向于使用这种方式去购物(0.8)或去学习(0.17)而不是去上班(-0.2)。可以假设,较长的等待时间和较多的转运次数可能会使人们不愿乘坐地铁。一旦400米至800米步行的比值比从8.3下降到5.1,就可以假设0米至400米之间的步行距离可能是增加其使用的战略区域。综上所述,可以通过改善现有车站及其周围城市地区的功能来增加地铁系统的使用。最后,提出了一些城市规划指南,以实现更有效的系统运行。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Investigaciones Geograficas
Investigaciones Geograficas Social Sciences-Geography, Planning and Development
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
53
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: Investigaciones Geográficas, es una revista arbitrada y de circulación internacional, en donde se publican contribuciones de especialistas en geografía y disciplinas afines, con trabajos originales de investigación, ya sean avances teóricos, nuevas tecnologías o estudios de caso sobre la realidad geográfica mexicana y mundial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信