Cumulative versus Gravity-based Accessibility Measures: Which One to Use?

This paper compares two popular approaches to calculate access to jobs by public transport: gravity and cumulative opportunities. Using data on commute patterns and public transport schedules from Montreal, Canada, we find cumulative opportunities-based measures estimated at the mean transit commute...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Manuel Santana Palacios, Ahmed El-geneidy
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Findings Press 2022-02-01
Series:Findings
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.32866/001c.32444
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849396639916097536
author Manuel Santana Palacios
Ahmed El-geneidy
author_facet Manuel Santana Palacios
Ahmed El-geneidy
author_sort Manuel Santana Palacios
collection DOAJ
description This paper compares two popular approaches to calculate access to jobs by public transport: gravity and cumulative opportunities. Using data on commute patterns and public transport schedules from Montreal, Canada, we find cumulative opportunities-based measures estimated at the mean transit commute time and gravity-based measures generated through various decay functions are highly correlated -- all above 0.9. This finding holds even when replicating the analysis for low- and non-low-wage jobs available in the same metropolitan region. These findings strongly suggest that easy-to-communicate and -operationalize cumulative opportunities accessibility constructs measured at the mean commute time perform similarly to more theoretically-sound gravity-based measures.
format Article
id doaj-art-0f5919beae5848bb935adfcb8b38f156
institution Kabale University
issn 2652-8800
language English
publishDate 2022-02-01
publisher Findings Press
record_format Article
series Findings
spelling doaj-art-0f5919beae5848bb935adfcb8b38f1562025-08-20T03:39:17ZengFindings PressFindings2652-88002022-02-0110.32866/001c.32444Cumulative versus Gravity-based Accessibility Measures: Which One to Use?Manuel Santana PalaciosAhmed El-geneidyThis paper compares two popular approaches to calculate access to jobs by public transport: gravity and cumulative opportunities. Using data on commute patterns and public transport schedules from Montreal, Canada, we find cumulative opportunities-based measures estimated at the mean transit commute time and gravity-based measures generated through various decay functions are highly correlated -- all above 0.9. This finding holds even when replicating the analysis for low- and non-low-wage jobs available in the same metropolitan region. These findings strongly suggest that easy-to-communicate and -operationalize cumulative opportunities accessibility constructs measured at the mean commute time perform similarly to more theoretically-sound gravity-based measures.https://doi.org/10.32866/001c.32444
spellingShingle Manuel Santana Palacios
Ahmed El-geneidy
Cumulative versus Gravity-based Accessibility Measures: Which One to Use?
Findings
title Cumulative versus Gravity-based Accessibility Measures: Which One to Use?
title_full Cumulative versus Gravity-based Accessibility Measures: Which One to Use?
title_fullStr Cumulative versus Gravity-based Accessibility Measures: Which One to Use?
title_full_unstemmed Cumulative versus Gravity-based Accessibility Measures: Which One to Use?
title_short Cumulative versus Gravity-based Accessibility Measures: Which One to Use?
title_sort cumulative versus gravity based accessibility measures which one to use
url https://doi.org/10.32866/001c.32444
work_keys_str_mv AT manuelsantanapalacios cumulativeversusgravitybasedaccessibilitymeasureswhichonetouse
AT ahmedelgeneidy cumulativeversusgravitybasedaccessibilitymeasureswhichonetouse