Residential location, commuting and non-work travel in two urban areas of different size and with different center structures

There is an extensive literature on relationships between the built environment and travel, but the vast majority of such studies rely solely on statistical analyses of available travel survey data, with limited possibilities for demonstrating causality. This article presents findings from a methodologically novel study drawing on a combination of a tailor-made questionnaire survey and in-depth qualitative interviews, including cross-sectional as well as longitudinal analyses. Our mixed-methods approach offers stronger evidence of causal influences than in most previous studies on the built environment and travel. We illuminate such relationships in two metropolitan areas differing considerably in their size and urban structure: the relatively monocentric Norwegian capital Oslo and the smaller, predominantly polycentric Stavanger area. The study encompasses travel distances and modes for both commuting and intra-metropolitan non-work purposes. The paper thus offers a comparison of the influences of built environment characteristics on travel across metropolitan contexts as well as for different travel purposes. In both metropolitan areas and for commuting as well as non-work trips, inner-city dwellers make a higher proportion of trips by non-motorized modes and a lower share by car. Inner-city residents in both metropolitan areas also travel shorter distances for non-work purposes than their suburban counterparts do. In the relatively monocentric Oslo metropolitan area, commuting distances also tend to increase substantially the further away from the city center the workers live. In the more polycentric Stavanger metropolitan area, commuting distances are first and foremost influenced by the location of the dwelling relative to a large suburban employment center, and only secondarily by its distance to the city center of Stavanger. Commuting distances as well as travel modes for both commuting and non-work travel depend mostly on the distance from the dwelling to the main or second-order centers of the urban region. Local built environment characteristics play a greater role for trip distances to non-work destinations, particularly in the Oslo region. The results generally support urban containment as a strategy to promote sustainable mobility, with inner-city densification as particularly favorable.acceptedVersio

Report on energy efficiency potentials in the transport sector

This report illuminates potentials for energy saving within the transportation sector in the EU/EFTA area through energy efficiency measures for bringing about a modal shift from energy-demanding to more energy-efficient modes of transportation and reducing the movement of persons and goods

Arealbruk og reiseatferd i små byer

Research on the relationship between land-use and travel behavior has been at the forefront of finding solutions to the ever-growing challenges of energy demand and urban pollution associated with transportation. However, much of the research has been focused on medium-to-large cities. Since relationships between built environment and travel behavior are geographically contextualized, the extent of influence of built environment on travel is contingent on geographic context. As a result, the effect of policy-relevant built environment factors are likely to vary between cities of different sizes. Small cities accommodate a sizable share of national populations (e.g. 28 % in Norway). Small city residents are largely car dependent, often with long driving distances and low shares of active travel. A serious effort attempting to promote sustainable mobility cannot do so without properly understanding what shapes travel behavior in small cities at both local and regional scale. To contribute in filling the knowledge gap and inform small-city planners on their quest for sustainable mobility, this thesis focuses on the relationship between built environment and travel behavior in a small-city context. The overarching research question of the thesis is: which built environment attributes and transport strategies can best serve the goal of sustainable mobility in a small city context? This main question was addressed by formulating a number of researchable questions addressed in the four articles included in the thesis. The four articles fall under three main research themes. The aim of the first research theme is to investigate the significance of travel attitude as a source of bias in land-use and transportation research. Its purpose in the thesis is to inform the succeeding two research themes on how to model travel attitudes in travel behavior research. The second research theme investigates the influence of neighborhood, local (city scale) and regional built environment factors on car driving distance in a small city context. The third research theme focuses on so-called active transport (walking and biking) and investigates the relationship between built environment and active transport at the neighborhood as well as city scale in small cities. The role of attitudes towards active transport is given special attention in the last theme. In modeling active transport, travel attitude is included not as a control variable but as a variable of prime interest due to its direct effect on motivation to active transport. The modeling framework is inspired by ecological models and informed by lessons from the first research theme. Survey data from three small cities in the southeastern part of Norway are used to answer the research questions. In addition, the small-cities’ data is supplemented by data from Oslo metropolitan area, which is specifically used to address the issue of travel-induced residential self-selection. With the exception of the first article, where mixed-methods approach (combining quantitative and qualitative methods) was used, the thesis employed mainly quantitative methods of analysis in investigating the effect of the built environment on motorized and non-motorized travel behavior. The main conclusions of the study underscore that regional context is important to understand how and to what extent residential location affects travel behavior in a small city context. In a city such as Kongsvinger, where regional pull-factors from a nearby higher-order city is weaker, living close to the center of the small city significantly reduces total car driving distance. In cities with proximity to a higher-order city, the influence of residential distance from the city center on driving distance is weaker and likely mediated by transit commutes due to higher propensity among commuters working in the larger city to commute by transit if they live close to the center of the small town. Among the demographic and socio-economic characteristics, gender has an influence in all three cities, with men tending to drive longer distances than women do. The influence of income and employment are strongest in the cities that are most strongly integrated into the labor market of the Oslo region. Regarding the relationship between built environment and active transport behavior in small cities, attitude towards active travel is found to exert the strongest influence on the propensity to bike/walk. Neighbourhood-level accessibility to facilities is also important but its influence varies by trip purpose (facility type). For trips to grocery stores, availability of such stores in the neighborhood is highly influential whereas for more specialized stores and facilities (center facilities), concentration of facilities close to the city center is more strongly associated with a high frequency of walk/bike trips. Topography also influences the likelihood of traveling by active modes, irrespective of destination type, for example by reducing the frequency of walking and biking trips among residents of hilly neighborhoods. Three main recommendations with implications for urban planning policies can be drawn from this thesis. First, planners should avoid measures that lead to sprawling of center facilities, for example, shopping centers at city fringes. Second, since grocery stores accessible at a neighborhood scale increase the propensity of active travel, new residential areas should be developed in such a way that the population base for neighborhood facilities such as grocery stores is sufficiently high. Third, the analysis also reveals that attitude towards active travel exerts strong influence on people’s tendency to travel by non-motorized modes. Therefore, awareness campaigns to sway individual and community attitudes coupled, for example, with incentives to the adoption of electric bikes in order to reduce the level of exertion associated with topographical contours may likely boost walk/bike frequency.Forskningen om forholdet mellom arealbruk og reiseatferd har lenge vært en viktig del av innsatsen for å finne løsninger på de stadig voksende utfordringene om energibehov og luftforurensing i byer knyttet til transport. Mye av forskningen har imidlertid vært fokusert på store og mellomstore byer. Siden forholdet mellom bystruktur og reiseatferd avhenger av den geografiske konteksten, er det grunn til å tro at bystrukturelle faktorers innvirkning på folks reiseatferd vil variere mellom byer av forskjellige størrrelser. I mange europeiske land bor en betydelig andel av befolkningen i små byer (eksempelvis 28% i Norge). Beboerne i små byer er i stor grad bilavhengige, ofte med lang kjørelengde og lav andel av ikke-motoriserte reiser. Byplanlegging for å fremme bærekraftig mobilitet kan derfor neppe nå målene uten grundig forståelse av hvordan bystrukturen i små byer påvirker reiseatferd. Denne avhandlingen fokuserer på forholdet mellom bystruktur og reiseatferd i småbyer for å forbedre kunnskapsgrunnlaget for bærekraftig areal- og transportplanlegging i små byer.Norwegian Public Road AdministrationpublishedVersio

Built environment and car driving distance in a small city context

This article focuses on the effect of built-environment factors on travel behavior in the context of small cities. Urban size and spatial context are central to travel behavior analysis because of the spatiotemporal nature of transportation. Different urban structural attributes exert travel behavioral influences at different spatial scales (local vs. regional) and urban sizes. Due to this inherent geographic dimension in travel studies, findings from larger urban areas may not be transferable to small cities. Despite this, however, small cities remain scantily represented in the literature. Using multivariate analysis on survey data from three small cities in Norway, this paper finds that the built-environment effects on travel behavior are highly influenced by regional characteristics and the city’s center structure (poly-centered vs. single centered). Residential proximity to the city center leads to reduced car driving distance through its distance-minimizing effect to concentrations of facilities for local travel. At the regional scale, proximity to the city center influences car driving distance via the higher likelihood among centrally located commuters of choosing transit as their commute mode

The effect of neighbourhood and urban center structures on active travel in small cities

Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)Densification is the key intervention strategy proposed in the urban sustainability planning literature. Nevertheless, the blueprint for action is still vague, and especially so in small cities. Is, for example, the premise for and reward of densification relatively transferable between city scales? In addition, does difference in centre structures and distribution of facilities in small cities have an implication for active travel? By focusing on three Norwegian small cities, this paper addresses how built environment and attitudes influence active travel behaviour in small cities with different centre structures. Using descriptive statistics, ANOVA test and negative binomial regression on survey data, the paper finds that attitude towards active travel as well as accessibility significantly influence walk/bike trip frequency. Moreover, variation in small-city centre structure has an important implication for active travel but the effect varies between facility types.The effect of neighbourhood and urban center structures on active travel in small citiespublishedVersio

Land use and travel behavior in small cities

Research on the relationship between land-use and travel behavior has been at the forefront of finding solutions to the ever-growing challenges of energy demand and urban pollution associated with transportation. However, much of the research has been focused on medium-to-large cities. Since relationships between built environment and travel behavior are geographically contextualized, the extent of influence of built environment on travel is contingent on geographic context. As a result, the effect of policy-relevant built environment factors are likely to vary between cities of different sizes. Small cities accommodate a sizable share of national populations (e.g. 28 % in Norway). Small city residents are largely car dependent, often with long driving distances and low shares of active travel. A serious effort attempting to promote sustainable mobility cannot do so without properly understanding what shapes travel behavior in small cities at both local and regional scale. To contribute in filling the knowledge gap and inform small-city planners on their quest for sustainable mobility, this thesis focuses on the relationship between built environment and travel behavior in a small-city context. The overarching research question of the thesis is: which built environment attributes and transport strategies can best serve the goal of sustainable mobility in a small city context? This main question was addressed by formulating a number of researchable questions addressed in the four articles included in the thesis. The four articles fall under three main research themes. The aim of the first research theme is to investigate the significance of travel attitude as a source of bias in land-use and transportation research. Its purpose in the thesis is to inform the succeeding two research themes on how to model travel attitudes in travel behavior research. The second research theme investigates the influence of neighborhood, local (city scale) and regional built environment factors on car driving distance in a small city context. The third research theme focuses on so-called active transport (walking and biking) and investigates the relationship between built environment and active transport at the neighborhood as well as city scale in small cities. The role of attitudes towards active transport is given special attention in the last theme. In modeling active transport, travel attitude is included not as a control variable but as a variable of prime interest due to its direct effect on motivation to active transport. The modeling framework is inspired by ecological models and informed by lessons from the first research theme. Survey data from three small cities in the southeastern part of Norway are used to answer the research questions. In addition, the small-cities’ data is supplemented by data from Oslo metropolitan area, which is specifically used to address the issue of travel-induced residential self-selection. With the exception of the first article, where mixed-methods approach (combining quantitative and qualitative methods) was used, the thesis employed mainly quantitative methods of analysis in investigating the effect of the built environment on motorized and non-motorized travel behavior. The main conclusions of the study underscore that regional context is important to understand how and to what extent residential location affects travel behavior in a small city context. In a city such as Kongsvinger, where regional pull-factors from a nearby higher-order city is weaker, living close to the center of the small city significantly reduces total car driving distance. In cities with proximity to a higher-order city, the influence of residential distance from the city center on driving distance is weaker and likely mediated by transit commutes due to higher propensity among commuters working in the larger city to commute by transit if they live close to the center of the small town. Among the demographic and socio-economic characteristics, gender has an influence in all three cities, with men tending to drive longer distances than women do. The influence of income and employment are strongest in the cities that are most strongly integrated into the labor market of the Oslo region. Regarding the relationship between built environment and active transport behavior in small cities, attitude towards active travel is found to exert the strongest influence on the propensity to bike/walk. Neighbourhood-level accessibility to facilities is also important but its influence varies by trip purpose (facility type). For trips to grocery stores, availability of such stores in the neighborhood is highly influential whereas for more specialized stores and facilities (center facilities), concentration of facilities close to the city center is more strongly associated with a high frequency of walk/bike trips. Topography also influences the likelihood of traveling by active modes, irrespective of destination type, for example by reducing the frequency of walking and biking trips among residents of hilly neighborhoods. Three main recommendations with implications for urban planning policies can be drawn from this thesis. First, planners should avoid measures that lead to sprawling of center facilities, for example, shopping centers at city fringes. Second, since grocery stores accessible at a neighborhood scale increase the propensity of active travel, new residential areas should be developed in such a way that the population base for neighborhood facilities such as grocery stores is sufficiently high. Third, the analysis also reveals that attitude towards active travel exerts strong influence on people’s tendency to travel by non-motorized modes. Therefore, awareness campaigns to sway individual and community attitudes coupled, for example, with incentives to the adoption of electric bikes in order to reduce the level of exertion associated with topographical contours may likely boost walk/bike frequency

Workplace location, polycentricism, and car commuting

Although significant strides have been made regarding the relationship between urban structure and travel, some doubt appears to be lingering concerning the impacts of polycentric urban development. For example, the debate on whether a polycentric or monocentric workplace location pattern is favorable for reducing negative environmental effects from transportation has not been entirely settled. This study intends to contribute to clearing up some of the misconceptions by focusing on the implications of spatial distribution of jobs on commuting patterns among employees within the Oslo metropolitan area. Results show a strong tendency for a higher share of car commuting among employees working in suburban workplaces. This pattern persists also for suburban workplaces located close to suburban transit nodes. The share of transit commuters shows the opposite pattern. Commuting distances also tend to increase the farther from the city center the workplace is located. These conclusions are based on cross-sectional and quasi-longitudinal survey data as well as semi-structured in-depth interviews of workers, including several interviewees who had changed their workplace locations. To our knowledge, this is the first mixed-methods study on the influence of workplace location on commuting behavior. The results raise doubt about the appropriateness of polycentric intra-metropolitan workplace development as a strategy for sustainable mobility

How and why does intra-metropolitan workplace location affect car commuting?

This paper illuminates important causal processes that can explain differences between central, semi-central and suburban workplaces in commuting distances and modes. Its empirical base is qualitative interview material on the considerations and conditions underlying commuting behavior among employees of workplaces differently located within Oslo metropolitan area. The interviewees do not necessarily choose local jobs but rather travel a bit farther if this is necessary to find a more relevant job, especially if they have specialized job qualifications. Likewise, employers do not restrict their recruitment to local applicants. Workplaces close to the city center have a large number of potential employees within a short distance from the workplace and are therefore more likely to recruit workers locally. The interviewees’ rationales for travel mode choices, such as time-saving, flexibility, convenience and stress avoidance, encourage commuting by transit to central workplaces and by car to peripheral workplaces. For example, transit is often faster and more convenient than car when commuting to central workplaces, while the opposite is often the case for commutes to peripheral workplaces. Rationales of avoidance of stress and frustration and of predictability and control work in similar way

How and Why Does Intra-Metropolitan Workplace Location Affect Car Commuting?

This paper illuminates important causal processes that can explain differences between central, semi-central and suburban workplaces in commuting distances and modes. Its empirical base is qualitative interview material on the considerations and conditions underlying commuting behavior among employees of workplaces differently located within Oslo metropolitan area. The interviewees do not necessarily choose local jobs but rather travel a bit farther if this is necessary to find a more relevant job, especially if they have specialized job qualifications. Likewise, employers do not restrict their recruitment to local applicants. Workplaces close to the city center have a large number of potential employees within a short distance from the workplace and are, therefore, more likely to recruit workers locally. The interviewees’ rationales for travel mode choices, such as time-saving, flexibility, convenience and stress avoidance, encourage commuting by transit to central workplaces and by car to peripheral workplaces. For example, transit is often faster and more convenient than car when commuting to central workplaces, while the opposite is often the case for commutes to peripheral workplaces. Rationales of avoidance of stress and frustration and of predictability and control work in similar ways

How and why does intra-metropolitan workplace location affect car commuting?

This paper illuminates important causal processes that can explain differences between central, semi-central and suburban workplaces in commuting distances and modes. Its empirical base is qualitative interview material on the considerations and conditions underlying commuting behavior among employees of workplaces differently located within Oslo metropolitan area. The interviewees do not necessarily choose local jobs but rather travel a bit farther if this is necessary to find a more relevant job, especially if they have specialized job qualifications. Likewise, employers do not restrict their recruitment to local applicants. Workplaces close to the city center have a large number of potential employees within a short distance from the workplace and are therefore more likely to recruit workers locally. The interviewees’ rationales for travel mode choices, such as time-saving, flexibility, convenience and stress avoidance, encourage commuting by transit to central workplaces and by car to peripheral workplaces. For example, transit is often faster and more convenient than car when commuting to central workplaces, while the opposite is often the case for commutes to peripheral workplaces. Rationales of avoidance of stress and frustration and of predictability and control work in similar way