Does the built environment shape commuting? The case of Lyon (France)

Is built environment the most influential factor on travel behavior when compared to individual socioeconomic characteristics? This paper extends the empirical knowledge by providing and comparing quantitative estimates of these various effects on both commuting distance and mode choice in a Europea...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Charles Raux, Ayana Lamatkhanova, Lény Grassot
Format: Article
Language:deu
Published: Unité Mixte de Recherche 8504 Géographie-cités 2021-04-01
Series:Cybergeo
Subjects:
Online Access:http://journals.openedition.org/cybergeo/36629
id doaj-122e9d4beebf4ac7b46c2c89970c3923
record_format Article
spelling doaj-122e9d4beebf4ac7b46c2c89970c39232021-05-04T11:25:04ZdeuUnité Mixte de Recherche 8504 Géographie-citésCybergeo1278-33662021-04-0110.4000/cybergeo.36629Does the built environment shape commuting? The case of Lyon (France)Charles RauxAyana LamatkhanovaLény GrassotIs built environment the most influential factor on travel behavior when compared to individual socioeconomic characteristics? This paper extends the empirical knowledge by providing and comparing quantitative estimates of these various effects on both commuting distance and mode choice in a European city spatial context, while using up-to-date and novel methodology. Eight indicators of built and social environment are identified in order to characterize clusters of residential locations, giving a rich view of spatial and social diversity of locations. To disentangle the causal effects of residential self-selection and built environment, both sample selection and specific matching preprocessing (“coarsened exact matching”, a novel approach in the field) are implemented. Regarding commuting distance, the true effect of built and social environment appears modest with an increase of distance in the range of 10-20%. It comes behind individual socioeconomic characteristics such as car availability and skill. Regarding commuting mode choice, again the true effect of built and social environment is modest, with a near 20%pt increase of car share and around 10%pt decrease or public transport share for the most prominent effects, and it comes behind car availability. These results suggest the primary importance of directly influencing car use, if not car ownership, in the European context, while trying to modify the built environment would provide only limited results.http://journals.openedition.org/cybergeo/36629urban environmentcommutingmodal choicedistanceLyon
collection DOAJ
language deu
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Charles Raux
Ayana Lamatkhanova
Lény Grassot
spellingShingle Charles Raux
Ayana Lamatkhanova
Lény Grassot
Does the built environment shape commuting? The case of Lyon (France)
Cybergeo
urban environment
commuting
modal choice
distance
Lyon
author_facet Charles Raux
Ayana Lamatkhanova
Lény Grassot
author_sort Charles Raux
title Does the built environment shape commuting? The case of Lyon (France)
title_short Does the built environment shape commuting? The case of Lyon (France)
title_full Does the built environment shape commuting? The case of Lyon (France)
title_fullStr Does the built environment shape commuting? The case of Lyon (France)
title_full_unstemmed Does the built environment shape commuting? The case of Lyon (France)
title_sort does the built environment shape commuting? the case of lyon (france)
publisher Unité Mixte de Recherche 8504 Géographie-cités
series Cybergeo
issn 1278-3366
publishDate 2021-04-01
description Is built environment the most influential factor on travel behavior when compared to individual socioeconomic characteristics? This paper extends the empirical knowledge by providing and comparing quantitative estimates of these various effects on both commuting distance and mode choice in a European city spatial context, while using up-to-date and novel methodology. Eight indicators of built and social environment are identified in order to characterize clusters of residential locations, giving a rich view of spatial and social diversity of locations. To disentangle the causal effects of residential self-selection and built environment, both sample selection and specific matching preprocessing (“coarsened exact matching”, a novel approach in the field) are implemented. Regarding commuting distance, the true effect of built and social environment appears modest with an increase of distance in the range of 10-20%. It comes behind individual socioeconomic characteristics such as car availability and skill. Regarding commuting mode choice, again the true effect of built and social environment is modest, with a near 20%pt increase of car share and around 10%pt decrease or public transport share for the most prominent effects, and it comes behind car availability. These results suggest the primary importance of directly influencing car use, if not car ownership, in the European context, while trying to modify the built environment would provide only limited results.
topic urban environment
commuting
modal choice
distance
Lyon
url http://journals.openedition.org/cybergeo/36629
work_keys_str_mv AT charlesraux doesthebuiltenvironmentshapecommutingthecaseoflyonfrance
AT ayanalamatkhanova doesthebuiltenvironmentshapecommutingthecaseoflyonfrance
AT lenygrassot doesthebuiltenvironmentshapecommutingthecaseoflyonfrance
_version_ 1721479477775564800