Study on the Characteristics of Urban Residents’ Commuting Behavior and Influencing Factors from the Perspective of Resilience Theory: Theoretical Construction and Empirical Analysis from Nanjing, China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Construction and Discrimination of Concepts
2.1. Construction of Concepts Related to Commuting Resilience
2.2. Discrimination of Concepts Similar to Commuting Resilience
3. Data sources and Research Methods
3.1. Overview of the Study Area
3.2. Data Sources and Basic Characteristics
3.3. Research Ideas and Methods
4. Results
4.1. Characteristics of Commuting Behavior from the Perspective of Resilience Theory
4.2. Influencing Factors of Commuting Behavior from the Perspective of Resilience Theory
4.2.1. Influencing Factors of Commuting Space Pressure
4.2.2. Influencing Factors of Commuting Time Adaptability
4.2.3. Influencing Factors of Commuting Mode Adaptability
4.2.4. Influencing Factors of Commuting Resilience
5. Discussion and Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Horner, M. Spatial dimensions of urban commuting: A review of major issues and their implications for future geographic research. Prof. Geogr. 2004, 56, 160–173. [Google Scholar]
- Koster, H.R.A.; Rouwendal, J. Agglomeration, commuting costs, and the internal structure of cities. Reg. Sci. Urban Econ. 2013, 43, 352–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Macmillan, A.; Connor, J.; Witten, K.; Kearns, R.; Rees, D.; Woodward, A. The societal costs and benefits of commuter bicycling: Simulating the effects of specific policies using system dynamics modeling. Environ. Health Perspect. 2014, 122, 335–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Luca, S.D.; Pace, R.D. Modelling users’ behaviour in inter-urban carsharing program: A stated preference approach. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2015, 71, 59–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Monte, F.; Redding, S.J.; Rossi-Hansberg, E. Commuting, Migration, and Local Employment Elasticities. Am. Econ. Rev. 2018, 108, 3855–3890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yigitcanlar, T.; Kamruzzaman, M. Smart Cities and Mobility: Does the Smartness of Australian Cities Lead to Sustainable Commuting Patterns? J. Urban Technol. 2019, 26, 21–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lois, D.; Moriano, J.A.; Rondinella, G. Cycle commuting intention: A model based on theory of planned behaviour and social identity. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2015, 32, 101–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santos, G.; Maoh, H.; Potoglou, D.; von Brunn, T. Factors influencing modal split of commuting journeys in medium-size European cities. J. Transp. Geogr. 2013, 30, 127–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Axisa, J.J.; Scott, D.M.; Newbold, K.B. Factors influencing commute distance: A case study of Toronto’s commuter shed. J. Transp. Geogr. 2012, 24, 123–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kwoka, G.J.; Boschmann, E.E.; Goetz, A.R. The impact of transit station areas on the travel behaviors of workers in denver, colorado. Transp. Res. Part. A Policy Pract. 2015, 80, 277–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Horner, M. Extensions to the concept of excess commuting. Environ. Plan. A 2002, 34, 543–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Horner, M.; Murray, A. A multi-objective approach to improving regional jobs-housing balance. Reg. Stud. 2003, 37, 135–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suzuki, T.; Lee, S. Jobs-housing imbalance, spatial correlation, and excess commuting. Transp. Res. Part. A Policy Pract. 2012, 46, 322–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wener, R.E.; Evans, G.W. A morning stroll: Levels of physical activity in car and mass transit commuting. Environ. Behav. 2007, 39, 62–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hilbrecht, M.; Smale, B.; Mock, S.E. Highway to health? Commute time and well-being among Canadian adults. World Leis. J. 2014, 56, 151–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ingenfeld, J.; Wolbring, T.; Bless, H. Commuting and Life Satisfaction Revisited: Evidence on a Non-linear Relationship. J. Happiness Stud. 2019, 20, 2677–2709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hensher, D.A.; Puckett, S.M. Congestion and variable user charging as an effective travel demand management instrument. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2007, 41, 615–626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zaman, H.; Habib, K.M.N. Commuting mode choice in the context of travel demand management (tdm) policies: An empirical investigation in Edmonton, Alberta. Can. J. Civ. Eng. 2011, 38, 433–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rotaris, L.; Danielis, R. The impact of transportation demand management policies on commuting to college facilities: A case study at the University of Trieste, Italy. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2014, 67, 127–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, P.; Lü, B. Transportation implications of the metropolitan spatial planning in megacity Beijing. Int. Dev. Plan. Rev. 2009, 31, 235–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, P.; Lü, B.; Roo, G.D. Impact of the jobs-housing balance on urban commuting in Beijing in the transformation era. J. Transp. Geogr. 2011, 19, 59–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, B.; Lei, X.N.; Xiu, G.L.; Gao, C.Y.; Qian, N.S. Personal exposure to black carbon during commuting in peak and off-peak hours in Shanghai. Sci. Total Environ. 2015, 524–525, 237–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liu, W.; Hou, Q. Excess commuting in transitional urban china: A case study of Guangzhou. Chin. Geogr. Sci. 2016, 26, 599–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sun, B.; Dan, B. Impact of urban built environment on residential choice of commuting mode in Shanghai. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2015, 70, 1665–1674. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Li, S.; Liu, Y. The jobs-housing relationship and commuting in Guangzhou, China: Hukou and dual structure. J. Transp. Geogr. 2015, 54, 286–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, X.; Liu, C.; Wen, H.; Wang, Y.; Wu, Y.J. Understanding commuting patterns using transit smart card data. J. Transp. Geogr. 2017, 58, 135–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, X.; Yeh, A.G.O.; Yue, Y. Spatial variation of self-containment and jobs-housing balance in Shenzhen using cellphone big data. J. Transp. Geogr. 2018, 68, 102–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, L.; Wang, D.; Zhang, S.; Xie, D. Evaluating the multi-scale patterns of jobs-residence balance and commuting time-cost using cellular signaling data: A case study in Shanghai. Transportation 2019, 46, 777–792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xinhua. Full Text of Xi Jinping’s Report at 19th CPC National Congress. Available online: http://www. xinhuanet.com//english/special/2017-11/03/c_136725942.htm (accessed on 1 December 2019).
- Holling, C.S. Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1973, 4, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Meerow, S.; Newell, J.P.; Stults, M. Defining urban resilience: A review. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2016, 147, 38–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holling, C.S. Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems. Ecosystems 2001, 4, 390–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alberti, M.; Marzluff, J.M.; Shulenberger, E.; Bradley, G.; Ryan, C.; Zumbrunnen, C. Integrating humans into ecology: Opportunities and challenges for studying urban ecosystems. BioScience 2003, 53, 1169–1179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Folke, C. Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2006, 16, 253–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gunderson, L.H. Ecological resilience-in theory and application. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 2000, 31, 425–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pickett, S.T.A.; Cadenasso, M.L.; Grove, J.M. Resilient cities: Meaning, models, and metaphor for integrating the ecological, socio-economic, and planning realms. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2004, 69, 369–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, H.; Cheng, X.; Dai, M. Regional flood disaster resilience evaluation based on analytic network process: A case study of the Chaohu lake basin, Anhui province, China. Nat. Hazards 2016, 82, 39–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, H.; Zhen, F.; Tashi, L.; Li, Z. Spatial characteristics of urban life resilience from the perspective of supply and demand: A case study of Nanjing, China. Habitat Int. 2019, 88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tse, C.; Chan, A. Estimating the commuting cost and commuting time property price gradients. Reg. Sci. Urban Econ. 2003, 33, 745–767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Boussauw, K.; Witlox, F. Introducing a commute-energy performance index for Flanders. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2009, 43, 580–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Costa, S.; Ogilvie, D.; Dalton, A.; Westgate, K.; Brage, S.; Panter, J. Quantifying the physical activity energy expenditure of commuters using a combination of global positioning system and combined heart rate and movement sensors. Prev. Med. 2015, 81, 339–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Huang, J.; Deng, F.; Wu, S.; Guo, X. Comparisons of personal exposure to pm2.5 and CO by different commuting modes in Beijing, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2012, 425, 52–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mao, Z.; Ettema, D.; Dijst, M. Commuting trip satisfaction in Beijing: Exploring the influence of multimodal behavior and modal flexibility. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2016, 94, 592–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, Y.; Kwan, M.P.; Chai, Y. Investigating commuting flexibility with GPS data and 3D geovisualization: A case study of Beijing, China. J. Transp. Geogr. 2013, 32, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, F. Modeling Commuting patterns in Chicago in a GIS environment: A job accessibility perspective. Prof. Geogr. 2000, 52, 120–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Baidu Map. China Urban Transport Report 2018. Available online: http://jiaotong.baidu.com/landings/2018annualtrafficreport.html (accessed on 1 December 2019).
- Melissa, B.; Vikash, G.; Matthew, C. Examining the link between public transit use and, active commuting. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2015, 12, 4256–4274. [Google Scholar]
- Piatkowski, D.P.; Marshall, W.E. Not all prospective bicyclists are created equal: The role of attitudes, socio-demographics, and the built environment in bicycle commuting. Travel Behav. Soc. 2015, 2, 166–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, M. Job accessibility and its impacts on commuting time of urban residents in Beijing: From a spatial mismatch perspective. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2011, 66, 457–467. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zhou, J.; Chen, X.; Huang, W.; Yu, P.; Zhang, C. Jobs-housing balance and commute efficiency in cities of central and western China:A case study of Xi’an. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2013, 68, 1316–1330. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Gan, D.; Wang, D.; Zhu, W. Research on the residents’ commuting feature of large-scale residential district in suburban Shanghai: A case study of Gucun, Baoshan District. Geogr. Res. 2015, 34, 1481–1491. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zhao, P. The impact of the built environment on individual workers’ commuting behavior in Beijing. Int. J. Sustain. Transp. 2013, 7, 389–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ta, N.; Zhao, Y.; Chai, Y. Built environment, peak hours and route choice efficiency: An investigation of commuting efficiency using gps data. J. Transp. Geogr. 2016, 57, 161–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chen, P.; Zhou, S.; Jiang, C. Study on impact of built environment on residents’ multi-purpose commuting trips: A case of Guangzhou downtown. Urban Plan. Forum 2017, 4, 67–74. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Schad, J.; Lewis, M.W.; Raisch, S.; Smith, W.K. Paradox research in management science: Looking back to move forward. Acad. Manag. Ann. 2016, 17, 5–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Personal Attributes | Type of Attribute | Percentage of Commuters (%) | Personal Attributes | Type of Attribute | Percentage of Commuters (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 53 | Marriage | Married | 76 |
Age | Female | 47 | Unmarried | 24 | |
30 and below | 33 | Type of jobs | Civil servant | 23 | |
30–40 | 34 | Enterprise staff | 59 | ||
40–50 | 21 | Self-employed laborer | 3 | ||
50 and above | 12 | General service staff | 15 | ||
Household registration | Local registration | 72 | BMI | Thin | 5 |
Non-local registration | 28 | Normal | 60 | ||
Education | High school degree and below | 18 | Slightly overweight | 25 | |
Bachelor’s degree | 65 | Obese | 10 | ||
Master’s degree and above | 17 | Personal monthly income | 4000 and below | 18 | |
Number of family members living together | 1 | 11 | 4000–6000 | 22 | |
2 | 18 | 6000–8000 | 17 | ||
3 | 43 | 8000–10,000 | 17 | ||
4 and above | 28 | 10,000–15,000 | 13 | ||
Household monthly income | 8000 and below | 19 | 15,000 and above | 13 | |
8000–12,000 | 18 | Number of cars owned by family | 0 | 35 | |
12,000–16,000 | 19 | 1 | 51 | ||
16,000–20,000 | 14 | 2 and above | 14 | ||
20,000–30,000 | 17 | ||||
30,000 and above | 13 |
Main Mode of Commuting | Percentage of Commuters (%) | Average One-Way Commuting Distance (km) | Average One-Way Commuting Time (min) |
---|---|---|---|
Walking | 20 | 1.1 | 13.2 |
Bicycle | 8 | 6 | 21.8 |
Electrical motorcycle | 13 | 6.7 | 19.3 |
Subway | 22 | 17.2 | 42 |
Public bus | 11 | 15.1 | 40.3 |
Private car | 23 | 16.6 | 31 |
Company shuttle | 3 | 20.8 | 50.4 |
Commuting Space Pressure | Commuting Time Adaptability | Commuting Mode Adaptability | Commuting Resilience |
---|---|---|---|
No (0) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Medium (2) |
No (0) | Yes (1) | No (0) | Low (1) |
No (0) | No (0) | Yes (1) | Low (1) |
Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | High (3) |
Yes (1) | Yes (1) | No (0) | Medium (2) |
Yes (1) | No (0) | Yes (1) | Medium (2) |
No (0) | No (0) | No (0) | None (0) |
Yes (1) | No (0) | No (0) | Low (1) |
Dependent Variable | Independent Variable | |
---|---|---|
Dimension | Index | |
Commuting space pressure | Personal attributes | Type of jobs, BMI (Body Mass Index), gender, age, household registration, education level, marital status, number of family members living together, personal monthly income, household monthly income, number of cars owned by family |
Commuting time Adaptability | Living and employment environment | Housing price in the place of residence, recruitment volume in the place of residence, diversity of infrastructure in the place of residence, housing price in the place of employment, recruitment volume in the place of employment, diversity of infrastructure in the place of employment |
Commuting mode adaptability | Commuting environment | Subway station density in the place of residence, bus station density in the place of residence, distance from the place of residence to the city center, subway station density in the place of employment, bus station density in the place of employment |
Commuting resilience |
Characteristics of Commuting Behavior | Types of Commuting Behavior Characteristics | Percentage of Commuters (%) |
---|---|---|
Commuting space pressure | Yes | 53 |
No | 47 | |
Commuting time adaptability | Yes | 79 |
No | 21 | |
Commuting mode adaptability | Yes | 77 |
No | 23 | |
Commuting resilience | Low | 8 |
Medium | 74 | |
High | 18 |
Variable | Dependent Variable | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Commuting Space Pressure | Commuting Time Adaptability | Commuting Mode Adaptability | Commuting Resilience | |||
Independent Variable | Exp (B) | Exp (B) | Exp (B) | Odds Ratio | ||
Personal attributes | Type of jobs | Civil servant | 2.37 * | 0.56 | 0.33 | 1.20 |
Enterprise staff | 3.49 *** | 0.43 | 0.11 ** | 1.02 | ||
Self-employed laborer | 0.36 | 1.89 | 0.13 * | 0.58 | ||
General service staff | Control group | |||||
BMI | Thin | 0.38 | 1.15 | 0.11 ** | 0.30 *** | |
Normal | 0.48 | 0.97 | 0.67 | 0.55 ** | ||
Slightly overweight | 0.61 | 0.92 | 0.68 | 0.60 * | ||
Obese | Control group | |||||
Gender | Female | 0.96 | 0.90 | 4.4 *** | 1.71 *** | |
Male | Control group | |||||
Age | 30 and below | 1.58 | 1.48 | 0.09 ** | 0.78 | |
30–40 | 0.93 | 1.40 | 0.39 | 0.81 | ||
40–50 | 0.89 | 1.47 | 0.15 ** | 0.64 | ||
50 and above | Reference group | |||||
Household registration | Non-local registration | 0.58 * | 0.95 | 2.51 * | 0.85 | |
Local registration | Control group | |||||
Education level | High school degree and below | 1.08 | 1.40 | 0.50 | 0.82 | |
Bachelor’s degree | 1.04 | 1.07 | 1.32 | 1.09 | ||
Master’s degree and above | Control group | |||||
Marital status | Unmarried | 0.48 * | 1.83 | 2.95 | 0.90 | |
Married | Control group | |||||
Number of family members living together | 1 | 0.51 | 1.26 | 0.47 | 0.63 | |
2 | 1.27 | 0.86 | 1.15 | 1.10 | ||
3 | 1.08 | 0.90 | 0.83 | 0.89 | ||
4 and above | Control group | |||||
Personal monthly income | 4000 and below | 1.14 | 0.17 ** | 5.93 * | 1.03 | |
4000–6000 | 0.98 | 0.19 ** | 2.00 | 0.94 | ||
6000–8000 | 1.49 | 0.14 ** | 0.94 | 0.93 | ||
8000–10,000 | 1.02 | 0.23 ** | 1.43 | 0.89 | ||
10,000–15,000 | 0.67 | 0.25 ** | 2.94 * | 0.90 | ||
15,000 and above | Control group | |||||
Household monthly income | 8000 and below | 0.41 | 2.94 | 4.83 | 1.59 | |
8000–12,000 | 0.35 * | 1.87 | 1.12 | 0.92 | ||
12,000–16,000 | 0.42 * | 1.98 | 1.75 | 1.23 | ||
16,000–20,000 | 0.40 * | 1.32 | 1.35 | 0.70 | ||
20,000–30,000 | 0.81 | 0.65 | 0.86 | 0.86 | ||
30,000 and above | Control group | |||||
Number of cars owned by family | 0 | 1.03 | 0.16 ** | 84.57 *** | 1.84 ** | |
1 | 0.90 | 0.36 ** | 5.56 *** | 1.47 * | ||
2 and above | Control group | |||||
Living and employment environment | Housing price in the place of residence | 6.05 *** | 0.49 | 0.05 *** | 0.59 | |
Recruitment volume in the place of residence | 1 | 1.00 | 1.03 ** | 1.00 | ||
Diversity of infrastructure in the place of residence | 0.44 * | 1.60 | 4.98 *** | 1.41 * | ||
Housing price in the place of employment | 0.98 | 1.08 | 1.5 * | 1.17 * | ||
Recruitment volume in the place of employment | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.01 * | 1.00 | ||
Diversity of infrastructure in the place of employment | 1.04 | 1.08 | 0.89 | 0.95 | ||
Commuting environment | Subway station density in the place of residence | 0.09 *** | 2.46 | 19.3 *** | 1.50 | |
Bus station density in the place of residence | 0.91 | 0.93 | 0.74 *** | 0.85 *** | ||
Distance from the place of residence to the city center | 0.75 *** | 1.19 | 1.43 ** | 1.07 | ||
Subway station density in the place of employment | 1.52 | 0.65 | 1.32 | 1.03 | ||
Bus station density in the place of employment | 1.11 * | 0.99 | 1.16 * | 1.09 ** | ||
Distance from the place of employment to the city center | 1.1 *** | 0.93 *** | 0.99 | 0.99 | ||
N | 468 | 468 | 468 | 468 | ||
Pseudo R2 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.46 | 0.15 | ||
Log likelihood | –257 | –190 | –134 | –292 | ||
LR Chi2 | 131 | 93 | 236 | 100.3 | ||
Prob > Chi2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Sun, H.; Zhen, F.; Jiang, Y. Study on the Characteristics of Urban Residents’ Commuting Behavior and Influencing Factors from the Perspective of Resilience Theory: Theoretical Construction and Empirical Analysis from Nanjing, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 1475. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17051475
Sun H, Zhen F, Jiang Y. Study on the Characteristics of Urban Residents’ Commuting Behavior and Influencing Factors from the Perspective of Resilience Theory: Theoretical Construction and Empirical Analysis from Nanjing, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(5):1475. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17051475
Chicago/Turabian StyleSun, Honghu, Feng Zhen, and Yupei Jiang. 2020. "Study on the Characteristics of Urban Residents’ Commuting Behavior and Influencing Factors from the Perspective of Resilience Theory: Theoretical Construction and Empirical Analysis from Nanjing, China" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 5: 1475. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17051475
APA StyleSun, H., Zhen, F., & Jiang, Y. (2020). Study on the Characteristics of Urban Residents’ Commuting Behavior and Influencing Factors from the Perspective of Resilience Theory: Theoretical Construction and Empirical Analysis from Nanjing, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(5), 1475. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17051475