Self-Selection in Home Choice

Abstract

The role of self-selection in shaping travel patterns, by affecting one's home location choice, is a critical issue. Developers, planners, and policy makers regularly debate to what extent the built environment and land use patterns can alleviate roadway congestion, greenhouse gas emissions, and myriad other urban problems. A study illustrates the use of Heckman's latent index model to ascertain travel impacts of neighborhood type in Austin, Texas. Under this approach, self-selection is formulated as sample selection bias in receiving a treatment. Here, treatment is defined to be one's residence in a suburban or rural zone, rather than Austin's central business district (CBD) and nearby urban zones. This approach of treatment or no-treatment is a meaningful advance in models of self-selection effects and requires estimation of three straightforward models. Depending on model specification used, results suggest that at least half (58% to 90%) of the differences in vehicle miles traveled observed between similar households living in CBD or urban versus rural or suburban neighborhoods of Austin is due to the location or treatment itself, whereas self-selection of such treatment (by households that wish to meet special travel needs or preferences) accounts for the remainder.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Cervero

and Kockelman

Travel Demand and the Three Ds: Density, Diversity, and Design. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 2, No. 2 1997, pp. 199–219.

Ewing

and Cervero

Travel and the Built Environment: A Synthesis. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1780, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2001, pp. 87–114.

Cervero

and Gorham

Commuting in Transit Versus Automobile Neighborhoods. Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 61, No. 2 1995, pp. 210–226.

Rutherford

G. S.

McCormack

and Wilkinson

Travel Impacts of Urban Form: Implications from an Analysis of Two Seattle Area Travel Diaries.

Presented at Travel Model Improvement Program Conference on Urban Design, Telecommuting, and Travel Behavior, Washington, D.C., 1996.

Khattak

A. J.

and Rodriguez

Travel Behavior in Neo-Traditional Neighborhood Developments: A Case Study in USA. Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 39, 2005, pp. 481–500.

Shay

and Khattak

A. J.

Automobile Ownership and Use in Neotraditional and Conventional Neighborhoods. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1902, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2005, pp. 18–25.

Crane

and Crepeau

Does Neighborhood Design Influence Travel? A Behavioral Analysis of Travel Diary and GIS Data. Transportation Research D, Vol. 3, No. 4 1998, pp. 225–238.

Salon

Cars and the City: An Investigation of Transportation and Residential Location Choices in New York City. PhD dissertation. University of California, Davis, 2006.

Krizek

K. J.

Residential Relocation and Changes in Urban Travel: Does Neighborhood-Scale Urban Form Matter?

Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 69, No. 3 2003, pp. 265–281.

10.

Mokhtarian

P. L.

and Cao

Examining the Impacts of Residential Self-Selection on Travel Behavior: A Focus on Methodologies. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 42, 2008, pp. 204–228.

11.

Kitamura

Mokhtarian

P. L.

and Laidet

A Microanalysis of Land Use and Travel in Five Neighborhoods in the San Francisco Bay Area. Transportation, Vol. 24, 1997, pp. 125–158.

12.

Bagley

M. N.

and Mokhtarian

P. L.

The Impact of Residential Neighborhood Type on Travel Behavior: A Structural Equations Modeling Approach. Annals of Regional Science, Vol. 36, No. 2 2002, pp. 279–297.

13.

Boarnet

M. G.

and Sarmiento

Can Land-Use Policy Really Affect Travel Behavior? A Study of the Link between Non-Work Travel and Land-Use Characteristics. Urban Studies, Vol. 35, No. 7 1998, pp. 1155–1169.

14.

Greenwald

M. J.

The Road Less Traveled: New Urbanist Inducements to Travel Mode Substitution for Nonwork Trips. Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol. 23, 2003, pp. 39–57.

15.

Bhat

C. R.

and Guo

J. Y.

A Comprehensive Analysis of Built Environment Characteristics on Household Residential Choice and Auto Ownership Levels. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 41, No. 5 2007, pp. 506–526.

16.

Heckman

J. J.

The Common Structure of Statistical Models of Truncation, Sample Selection, and Limited Dependent Variables and A Simple Estimator for Much Models. Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, Vol. 5, 1976, pp. 475–492.

17.

Heckman

J. J.

Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error. Econometrica, Vol. 47, No. 1 1979, pp. 153–162.

18.

Heckman

J. J.

and Vytlaci

E. J.

Local Instrumental Variables and Latent Variable Models for Identifying and Bounding Treatment Effects. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 96, 1999, pp. 4730–4734.

19.

Heckman

J. J.

Tobias

J. L.

and Vytlaci

E. J.

Four Parameters of Interest in the Evaluation of Social Programs. Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 68, No. 2 2001, pp. 210–223.

20.

Heckman

J. J.

and Vytlaci

E. J.

Structural Equations, Treatment Effects, and Econometric Policy Evaluation. Econometrica, Vol. 73, No. 3 2005, pp. 669–738.