nep-tre New Economics Papers
on Transport Economics
Issue of 2016‒11‒20
five papers chosen by
Erik Teodoor Verhoef
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

  1. What Drives Gender Differences in Commuting? Evidence from the American Time Use Survey By Gray Kimbrough
  2. A Simple Command to Calculate Travel Distance and Travel Time By Sylvain Weber; Martin Peclat
  3. Editorial: Thinking beyond the cost-benefit analysis: the wider impact of high-speed rail on local development By Marie Delaplace; Frédéric Dobruszkes
  4. Nodewise Decay in Two-way Flow Nash Network: a Study of Network Congestion By Banchongsan Charoensook
  5. Methods Used in Future Technology Analysis and its Selection: an application to VTOL transportation system By Abdurrahman M. Yazan

  1. By: Gray Kimbrough
    Abstract: A wealth of research has shown that the commutes of American women are shorter, both in time and distance, than those of American men. This study takes advantage of a large, nationally representative dataset, the American Time Use Survey (ATUS), to examine gender differences in commute character and time. A method of calculating commuting time that accounts for stops along the journey is applied to ATUS data; analysis of gender differences in the number, type, and length of stops demonstrates the need for this commuting measure. Explanations for womenâs shorter commutes are reviewed and tested alongside predicted relationships from a simple labor supply model. Controlling for marital status and the presence of children, women are more likely to be accompanied by children for their commute, and women tend to make longer stops than men. Multivariate regression results support two previously proposed explanations for the gender commuting time gap, based on gender differences in wages and types of jobs held. Contrary to the previously proposed Household Responsibility Hypothesis, this analysis provides evidence that greater household responsibility does not explain womenâs shorter commutes.
    JEL: J22 R41 J16
    Date: 2016–11–11
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:jmp:jm2016:pki275&r=tre
  2. By: Sylvain Weber (University of Neuchatel, Institute of Economic Research, Rue Abram-Louis Breguet 2, 2000 Neuchtel, Switzerland.); Martin Peclat (University of Neuchatel, Institute of Economic Research, Rue Abram-Louis Breguet 2, 2000 Neuchtel, Switzerland and University of Applied Sciences Western Switzerland (HES-SO Geneva), Rue de la Tambourine 17, 1227 Carouge, Switzerland.)
    Abstract: Obtaining the routing distance between two addresses should not be a hassle in the current state of technology. This is unfortunately more complicated than it first seems. Recently, several Stata commands have been implemented for this purpose (traveltime, traveltime3, mqtime, osrmtime), but most of them went out of order only a few months after their introduction or appear as complicated to use. In this paper, we introduce the new command georoute to retrieve travel distance and travel time between two points, defined either by their addresses or by their geographical coordinates. Compared to other existing commands, we argue it is simple to use, efficient in terms of computational speed, and versatile regarding the information that can be provided as input.
    Keywords: Stata, geocoding, travel distance, travel time.
    JEL: C87 R41
    Date: 2016–11
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:irn:wpaper:16-10&r=tre
  3. By: Marie Delaplace; Frédéric Dobruszkes
    Date: 2016
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ulb:ulbeco:2013/239672&r=tre
  4. By: Banchongsan Charoensook (Keimyung Adams College, Keimyung University)
    Abstract: This paper studies a noncooperative model of network formation. Built upon the two-way flow model of Bala and Goyal (2000a), it assumes that information decay as it flows through each agent, and the decay is increasing and concave in the number of his links. This assumption results in the fact that a large set of Nash networks are disconnected and consist of components of different sizes, a feature that resembles that of real-world networks. Discussions on this insight are provided.
    Keywords: Two-way Flow Network, Network Formation, Information Network
    JEL: C72 D85
    Date: 2016–11
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:fem:femwpa:2016.65&r=tre
  5. By: Abdurrahman M. Yazan (IET/CICS.NOVA, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Portugal)
    Abstract: Change is happening at an ever faster rate today, driven partly by technological changes leading to changes in all other areas of our lives. Today’s global trends, uncertainties, and surprises have the potential to significantly change the way the world works tomorrow. Shaping the world we want to live in means being more aware of the future and seeking better approaches. In such increasingly uncertain environment, planning uncertainties force policy and decision makers to foster future-oriented technology analyses (FTA) by using foresight methodologies. FTA can help us react on the likely directions of technologies, manage the risks involved and shape technological trajectories in order to improve the long term benefits to society. Foresight methodologies seek to gather data and make sense of it so that people can think in different and new ways about the future. That data might be collected from humans or from the analysis of documents and artefacts, or both. The data might be analysed using qualitative or quantitative techniques, or both. To be used in strategy processes, however, data needs to be analysed, interpreted and used in ways that make sense to the organisation. There is no single set of methods used in all foresight activities. The methods used need to reflect the resources available and the objectives of the exercise. The choice of methods is critical, though it often appears to be based upon what is fashionable or which practitioners have experience in. The methods may be organised and interrelated in different ways. In other terms, the conduct of foresight analyses needs to be tailored to the type. The first thing to do is to choose the right methods which are most appropriate to the analysis and technology characteristics. One of the substantial advances has been a move away from a tool or method driven approach to one which relies on the selection of tools in accord with their appropriateness for the particular issue being examined, their relative strengths and limitations. Thus, the experience of observing so many developing nations attempting to conduct a Japanese style Delphi survey, with an extremely limited number of ‘experts’ and doubtful relevance of estimated technology realisation times to their economy, indicates the need to develop foresight appropriate to local conditions. Their use and contribution will be determined primarily by the values, structures and cultures of the organisations applying them. This paper will try to discuss the importance of future oriented technology analysis, in particularly technology foresight, and the question of how to select the best methodology among the existing ones. Although this paper intends to lay a framework and cover the tools used in technology futures analysis, in particularly emerging air transportation technologies, a full understanding of each of these tools is out of this paper. The conduct of analysis needs to be tailored to the type. The first thing to do is to choose the right tools which are most appropriate to the analysis and the technology characteristics. Thus, we have to set the criteria and figure out key aspects and factors for designing our research. In our case, the key aspects and factors are: it is a long term vision for 10-15 years later; an emerging air transportation mode; a socio- technological system of systems in transportation area which is composed of resources and stakeholders network, drivers and disruptors; and also normative, both qualitative and quantitative, national and global. The probably research tools that can be used are; agent based modelling, cost benefit analysis, scenarios, impact analysis, case study (Visioning), subjective judgement, roadmap, interviews, benefit visualization tool, literature reviews, and attending conferences.
    Keywords: Foresight; air transportation; Methods; Scenarios; future oriented technology analysis
    JEL: L9 O14 R41
    Date: 2016–05
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ieu:wpaper:70&r=tre

This nep-tre issue is ©2016 by Erik Teodoor Verhoef. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at http://nep.repec.org. For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <director@nep.repec.org>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.