Search

Telecommuting has been proposed by policy makers as a strategy to reduce travel and emissions. In studying the metropolitan size impact of telecommuting on personal travel, this paper addresses two questions: (1) whether telecommuting is consistently a substitute or complement to travel across different MSA sizes; and (2) whether the impact of telecommuting is higher in larger MSAs where telecommuting programs and policies have been more widely adopted. Data from the 2001 and 2009 National Household Travel Surveys are used. Through a series of tests that address two possible empirical biases, we find that telecommuting consistently had a complementary effect on one-way commute trips, daily total work trips and daily total non-work trips across different MSA sizes in both 2001 and 2009. The findings suggest that policies that promote telecommuting may indeed increase, rather than decrease, people’s travel demand, regardless of the size of the MSA. This seems to contradict what telecommuting policies are designed for. In addition, model results show that the complementary impact of telecommuting on daily travel is lower in larger MSAs, in terms of both daily total work trips and daily total non-work trips. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When optimising the overall commuting pattern for a city or a region, there are often winners and losers among commuters at the subdivision level. Losers are those who are burdened with longer commutes than before the optimisation. Knowing who or where losers are is of interest to both researchers and policy-makers. The information would help them efficiently locate losers and compensate them. Few, however, pay attention to such losers. By revisiting ‘excess commuting’ in the economic framework, we show that optimising the commuting pattern is comparable to restoring Pareto optimality in commuting. Using Beijing as a case study, we identify and geo-visualise the losers when the city’s bus commuting pattern is optimised. We examine the severity of the loss among the losers, the spatial pattern of the losers and their influencing factors. We find that most losers are located around the epicenter. The severity of the loss is independent of jobs/housing ratio but is associated with the commute distance before the optimisation. Workers whose commute distance is less than the global average are more likely to become losers. Places where losers reside have significantly lower employment density in a few industries than where non-losers reside. A low jobs/housing ratio in individual subareas does not necessarily increase the average trip length of commuters therein. A low jobs/housing ratio of one or several subareas, however, could influence the average trip length of all the commuters in the area. Locating diverse jobs and housing opportunities around or along transit corridors could compensate the losers and reduce the overall commuting cost. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines, via a case study, what efforts a university needs to make to initiate and sustain a carsharing program. It also examines how subsidies offered to employees affect the subscription to a carsharing program and the employees’ carsharing consumption. It finds that a university must offer a significant amount of support (both financial and labor) to initaite and sustain a carshsaring program. In the case study, it shows that at least an annual subsidy of $1500/vehicle needs be offered to attract a carsharing company to serve a university. In addition, commuter benefits offered by the university help attract university carsharers and stabilize the customer pool of the carsharing program. In the studied case, 34% of all the carsharers join carsharing because of commuter benefits. Reduced carsharing subsidies (e.g., decreased free carsharing hours) significantly decrease carsharing consumption but not the overall subscriptions to the carsharing program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on a study aimed at mapping the commuting with cellular network data for solving problem of traffic jam in Shanghai, China. It mentions need for quantifying and visualizing the location of commuters where they reside and work. It states various solutions for dealing with traffic jam such as increasing the carrying capacity of the transportation system, reducing number of commuting trips and distributing commuting trips across modes of travel, space and time.

Abstract: This paper analyzes personal and car-sharing characteristics of commuters at university in Los Angeles, California. These commuters do not hold an on-campus parking permit and commute by an alternative mode other than driving alone. Each month, the university offers them 8h free use of shared vehicles across the campus. University employee car-sharers’ housing distribution is significantly different from that of their counterparts who drive to work. Commuter benefits influence not only the participation rate of a car-sharing program but also the program participants’ frequency, time and quantity of car-sharing consumption. Car-sharing is most popular among bus commuters, university students and female employees. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This manuscript examines employees' participation in a free and discounted try-transit program called 'Dump the Pump' (DtP) in Los Angeles, California. DtP offered eligible employee drivers a 12-week free transit pass and a discounted transit pass after the free trial as long as the employee drivers continued buying transit passes. By one-year after the program's introduction, DtP attracted 33% more transit riders to the system. At the program's zenith, 5% of the eligible drivers who lived within a half-mile from a direct transit line to their workplace had switched. Drivers were more likely to try the program under conditions in which (1) gas prices were relatively high and (2) the travel time difference between driving and transit was relatively low. After trying transit, participants remained on transit longer if they had no children, were unresponsive to lower gas prices, and had a bus schedule that matched their travel needs. The DtP experience indicates recruitment programs can attract drivers over the long-term, but those drivers who do stay with the program have more flexible commute schedules than drivers as a whole. These findings echo those of previous studies. Parents and other caregivers respond to service quality differences between transit and driving more than other commuters. Employers will need to consider that sensitivity when designing try-transit programs if they want drivers to stick with public transit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]