Measuring the Gap between Car and Transit Accessibility: Estimating access using a High-Resolution Transit Network Geographic Information System

Abstract

Accessibility is increasingly identified in the academic literature and in planning practice as a key criterion to assess transport policies and urban land use development. This paper contributes in two respects to the growing body of literature on accessibility and accessibility measurement. First, it proposes a set of accessibility measures that directly relates transit-based and car-based accessibility to each other. Second, it presents a tool based on a geographic information system (GIS) that measures accessibility at a high level of resolution. The tool, called Urban.Access, has been developed as an ArcGIS extension and can be used in urban regions worldwide, provided high-resolution GIS data are available. Urban.Access enables a detailed representation of travel times by transit and car and thus makes it possible to adequately compare accessibility levels by transport mode. The first application of Urban.Access to the Tel Aviv, Israel, region shows substantial gaps between car-based and transit-based accessibility throughout the metropolitan area. The paper ends with a brief discussion highlighting the policy consequences of this finding.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Martens

Justice in Transport: Applying Walzer's “Spheres of Justice” to the Transport Sector. Presented at 88th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2009.

Bristow

, Farrington

, Shaw

, and Richardson

Developing an Evaluation Framework for Crosscutting Policy Goals: The Accessibility Policy Assessment Tool. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 41, No. 1, 2009, pp. 48–62.

Garb

, and Levine

Congestion Pricing's Conditional Promise: Promotion of Accessibility or Mobility?

Transport Policy, Vol. 9, No. 3, 2002, pp. 179–188.

Bruinsma

F. R.

, Nijkamp

, and Rietveld

Infrastructure and Metropolitan Development in an International Perspective: Survey and Methodological Exploration (in Dutch). Faculteit der Economische Wetenschappen en Econometrie, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1990.

Feitelson

Introducing Environmental Equity Dimensions into the Sustainable Transport Discourse: Issues and Pitfalls. Transportation Research Part D, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2002, pp. 99–118.

Kwok

R. C. W.

, and Yeh

A. G. O.

The Use of Modal Accessibility Gap as an Indicator for Sustainable Transport Development. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 36, No. 5, 2004, pp. 921–936.

Farrington

, and Farrington

Rural Accessibility, Social Inclusion and Social Justice: Towards Conceptualisation. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 13, No. 1, Special issue, 2005, pp. 1–12.

Handy

S. L.

, and Niemeier

D. A.

Measuring Accessibility: An Exploration of Issues and Alternatives. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 29, No. 7, 1997, pp. 1175–1194.

Geurs

K. T.

, and Ritsema van Eck

J. R.

Accessibility Measures: Review and Applications. Evaluation of Accessibility Impacts of Land-Use Transport Scenarios and Related Social and Economic Impacts (in Dutch). RIVM—National Institute of Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands, 2001.

10.

Geurs

K. T.

, and van Wee

Accessibility Evaluation of Land-Use and Transport Strategies: Review and Research Directions. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2004, pp. 127–140.

11.

Shen

Location Characteristics of Inner-City Neighborhoods and Employment Accessibility of Low-Wage Workers. Environment and Planning B, Vol. 25, No. 3, 1998, pp. 345–365.

12.

Blumenberg

, and Ong

Cars, Buses, and Jobs: Welfare Participants and Employment Access in Los Angeles. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1756, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2001, pp. 22–31.

13.

Hess

D. B.

Access to Employment for Adults in Poverty in the Buffalo–Niagara Region. Urban Studies, Vol. 42, No. 7, 2005, pp. 1177–1200.

14.

Kawabata

, and Shen

Job Accessibility as an Indicator of Auto-Oriented Urban Structure: A Comparison of Boston and Los Angeles with Tokyo. Environment and Planning B, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2006, pp. 115–130.

15.

Kawabata

Spatiotemporal Dimensions of Modal Accessibility Disparity in Boston and San Francisco. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 41, No. 1, 2009, pp. 183–198.

16.

B. M.

, and Hine

J. P.

A PTAL Approach to Measuring Changes in Bus Service Accessibility. Transport Policy, Vol. 10, No. 4, 2003, pp. 307–320.

17.

C. S.

, and Murray

A. T.

Optimizing Public Transit Quality and System Access: The Multiple-Route, Maximal Covering/Shortest-Path Problem. Environment and Planning B, Vol. 32, No. 2, 2005, pp. 163–178.

18.

Lao

, and Liu

Performance Evaluation of Bus Lines with Data Envelopment Analysis and Geographic Information Systems. Computers, Environment, and Urban Systems, Vol. 33, No. 4, 2009, pp. 247–255.

19.

de Dios Ortuzar

, and Willumsen

L. G.

Modelling Transport. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, United Kingdom, 2001.

20.

Lucas

Running on Empty: Transport, Social Exclusion and Environmental Justice. Policy Press, Bristol, United Kingdom, 2004.