为什么没有更多通勤者在上班途中考虑乘坐公交车?

IF 2 4区 社会学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Payel Roy, Karthik K. Srinivasan, Ganesh Ambi Ramakrishnan
{"title":"为什么没有更多通勤者在上班途中考虑乘坐公交车?","authors":"Payel Roy,&nbsp;Karthik K. Srinivasan,&nbsp;Ganesh Ambi Ramakrishnan","doi":"10.1007/s12061-024-09576-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Empirical data from several cities worldwide show that low consideration rates of bus transit constitute an important reason for declining transit mode share. This trend raises a critical question: why do not more commuters consider buses for travel? The aim of this paper is to investigate the key deterrents to bus transit consideration among commuters. Consideration refers to the decision of an individual to include a given mode in his/her choice set. Along this line, this study focuses on two important directions. The first is to gain an understanding of how the key factors and their influence on consideration propensity differ across market segments based on personal vehicle availability and accessibility. The second is to quantify the spatial heterogeneity in the influence of those key factors across geographical locations. A new geographically weighted segmented logistic regression (GWSLR) model is proposed to address these research issues. The model is developed using household survey data from a sample of work-commuters from Chennai city, India. The findings reveal that neglecting either segmentation or spatial heterogeneity cannot only result in inaccurate model predictions and inferences, but also lead to sub-optimal policy interventions. Results show that factors influencing consideration differ significantly across segments based on captivity and accessibility. Choice users within walking distance to bus stops can benefit from direct bus service, whereas those beyond walking distance prioritise first-mile connectivity. Results also highlight significant variations in the influence of different factors across locations. Improved walkability in central business districts (CBD) could increase consideration, while non-CBD areas should focus on first-mile connectivity. Finally, this study illustrates that customised policy interventions for specific segments and locations can be more effective in enhancing bus consideration than segment-agnostic or geographically uniform policies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46392,"journal":{"name":"Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy","volume":"17 3","pages":"1043 - 1079"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why Don’t More Commuters Consider Buses for Their Work Trip?—A Geographically Weighted Segmented Logistic Regression Modelling Approach\",\"authors\":\"Payel Roy,&nbsp;Karthik K. Srinivasan,&nbsp;Ganesh Ambi Ramakrishnan\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12061-024-09576-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Empirical data from several cities worldwide show that low consideration rates of bus transit constitute an important reason for declining transit mode share. This trend raises a critical question: why do not more commuters consider buses for travel? The aim of this paper is to investigate the key deterrents to bus transit consideration among commuters. Consideration refers to the decision of an individual to include a given mode in his/her choice set. Along this line, this study focuses on two important directions. The first is to gain an understanding of how the key factors and their influence on consideration propensity differ across market segments based on personal vehicle availability and accessibility. The second is to quantify the spatial heterogeneity in the influence of those key factors across geographical locations. A new geographically weighted segmented logistic regression (GWSLR) model is proposed to address these research issues. The model is developed using household survey data from a sample of work-commuters from Chennai city, India. The findings reveal that neglecting either segmentation or spatial heterogeneity cannot only result in inaccurate model predictions and inferences, but also lead to sub-optimal policy interventions. Results show that factors influencing consideration differ significantly across segments based on captivity and accessibility. Choice users within walking distance to bus stops can benefit from direct bus service, whereas those beyond walking distance prioritise first-mile connectivity. Results also highlight significant variations in the influence of different factors across locations. Improved walkability in central business districts (CBD) could increase consideration, while non-CBD areas should focus on first-mile connectivity. Finally, this study illustrates that customised policy interventions for specific segments and locations can be more effective in enhancing bus consideration than segment-agnostic or geographically uniform policies.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46392,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy\",\"volume\":\"17 3\",\"pages\":\"1043 - 1079\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12061-024-09576-9\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12061-024-09576-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

来自全球多个城市的经验数据显示,公交出行考虑率低是公交出行比例下降的一个重要原因。这一趋势提出了一个关键问题:为什么没有更多的乘客考虑乘坐公交车出行?本文旨在研究阻碍乘客考虑公交出行的主要因素。所谓考虑,是指个人决定将某种交通方式纳入其选择范围。按照这一思路,本研究侧重于两个重要方向。首先是了解不同细分市场中基于个人车辆可用性和可达性的关键因素及其对考虑倾向的影响有何不同。其次是量化这些关键因素对不同地理位置影响的空间异质性。为解决这些研究问题,我们提出了一个新的地理加权分段逻辑回归(GWSLR)模型。该模型是利用印度钦奈市上班族样本的家庭调查数据建立的。研究结果表明,忽视细分或空间异质性不仅会导致模型预测和推论不准确,还会导致政策干预措施达不到最佳效果。研究结果表明,影响考虑因素的因素在不同细分市场之间存在显著差异,这些因素基于俘虏性和可达性。在步行距离内选择公交站点的用户可以从直达公交服务中获益,而步行距离以外的用户则优先考虑第一英里的连通性。结果还凸显了不同因素对不同地点的影响存在显著差异。提高中央商务区(CBD)的步行便利性可以增加考虑,而非中央商务区地区则应将重点放在第一英里的连通性上。最后,本研究表明,针对特定人群和地点的定制化政策干预措施在提高公交车使用率方面可能比与人群无关或地域统一的政策更为有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Why Don’t More Commuters Consider Buses for Their Work Trip?—A Geographically Weighted Segmented Logistic Regression Modelling Approach

Why Don’t More Commuters Consider Buses for Their Work Trip?—A Geographically Weighted Segmented Logistic Regression Modelling Approach

Empirical data from several cities worldwide show that low consideration rates of bus transit constitute an important reason for declining transit mode share. This trend raises a critical question: why do not more commuters consider buses for travel? The aim of this paper is to investigate the key deterrents to bus transit consideration among commuters. Consideration refers to the decision of an individual to include a given mode in his/her choice set. Along this line, this study focuses on two important directions. The first is to gain an understanding of how the key factors and their influence on consideration propensity differ across market segments based on personal vehicle availability and accessibility. The second is to quantify the spatial heterogeneity in the influence of those key factors across geographical locations. A new geographically weighted segmented logistic regression (GWSLR) model is proposed to address these research issues. The model is developed using household survey data from a sample of work-commuters from Chennai city, India. The findings reveal that neglecting either segmentation or spatial heterogeneity cannot only result in inaccurate model predictions and inferences, but also lead to sub-optimal policy interventions. Results show that factors influencing consideration differ significantly across segments based on captivity and accessibility. Choice users within walking distance to bus stops can benefit from direct bus service, whereas those beyond walking distance prioritise first-mile connectivity. Results also highlight significant variations in the influence of different factors across locations. Improved walkability in central business districts (CBD) could increase consideration, while non-CBD areas should focus on first-mile connectivity. Finally, this study illustrates that customised policy interventions for specific segments and locations can be more effective in enhancing bus consideration than segment-agnostic or geographically uniform policies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.30%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: Description The journal has an applied focus: it actively promotes the importance of geographical research in real world settings It is policy-relevant: it seeks both a readership and contributions from practitioners as well as academics The substantive foundation is spatial analysis: the use of quantitative techniques to identify patterns and processes within geographic environments The combination of these points, which are fully reflected in the naming of the journal, establishes a unique position in the marketplace. RationaleA geographical perspective has always been crucial to the understanding of the social and physical organisation of the world around us. The techniques of spatial analysis provide a powerful means for the assembly and interpretation of evidence, and thus to address critical questions about issues such as crime and deprivation, immigration and demographic restructuring, retailing activity and employment change, resource management and environmental improvement. Many of these issues are equally important to academic research as they are to policy makers and Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy aims to close the gap between these two perspectives by providing a forum for discussion of applied research in a range of different contexts  Topical and interdisciplinaryIncreasingly government organisations, administrative agencies and private businesses are requiring research to support their ‘evidence-based’ strategies or policies. Geographical location is critical in much of this work which extends across a wide range of disciplines including demography, actuarial sciences, statistics, public sector planning, business planning, economics, epidemiology, sociology, social policy, health research, environmental management.   FocusApplied Spatial Analysis and Policy will draw on applied research from diverse problem domains, such as transport, policing, education, health, environment and leisure, in different international contexts. The journal will therefore provide insights into the variations in phenomena that exist across space, it will provide evidence for comparative policy analysis between domains and between locations, and stimulate ideas about the translation of spatial analysis methods and techniques across varied policy contexts. It is essential to know how to measure, monitor and understand spatial distributions, many of which have implications for those with responsibility to plan and enhance the society and the environment in which we all exist.   Readership and Editorial BoardAs a journal focused on applications of methods of spatial analysis, Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy will be of interest to scholars and students in a wide range of academic fields, to practitioners in government and administrative agencies and to consultants in private sector organisations. The Editorial Board reflects the international and multidisciplinary nature of the journal.
×
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