A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Modeling experienced accessibility for utility-maximizers and regret-minimizers
Highlights ► Logsum-based measures of accessibility measure decision-utility, but should ideally measure experienced utility. ► Paper presents alternatives that approximate experienced utility by allowing for preference and evaluation-rule volatility. ► Numerical analyses suggest that the different accessibility measures may imply different land use/transport strategies.
Abstract This paper argues that there is a discrepancy between what Logsum-measures of accessibility aim to measure (experienced-utility) and what they actually measure (decision-utility). The latter type of utility refers to the evaluation of an alternative with the aim of making a decision, while the former refers to the evaluation of a chosen alternative after the choice has been made. We argue that accessibility should preferably be conceptualized and operationalized in terms of experienced-utility, but that this type of utility is difficult to measure. Motivated by these observations we show, taking the Logsum as a starting point, how its building blocks (parameters estimated from choice patterns) can be used to construct closed-form and easy to compute accessibility-measures that provide an approximation of experienced-utility. We distinguish between decision-making based on utility-maximization and regret-minimization premises. Using a small-scale case-study building on departure time-choice data, we illustrate the working of the developed accessibility-measures and highlight how they differ from the Logsum-approach.
Modeling experienced accessibility for utility-maximizers and regret-minimizers
Highlights ► Logsum-based measures of accessibility measure decision-utility, but should ideally measure experienced utility. ► Paper presents alternatives that approximate experienced utility by allowing for preference and evaluation-rule volatility. ► Numerical analyses suggest that the different accessibility measures may imply different land use/transport strategies.
Abstract This paper argues that there is a discrepancy between what Logsum-measures of accessibility aim to measure (experienced-utility) and what they actually measure (decision-utility). The latter type of utility refers to the evaluation of an alternative with the aim of making a decision, while the former refers to the evaluation of a chosen alternative after the choice has been made. We argue that accessibility should preferably be conceptualized and operationalized in terms of experienced-utility, but that this type of utility is difficult to measure. Motivated by these observations we show, taking the Logsum as a starting point, how its building blocks (parameters estimated from choice patterns) can be used to construct closed-form and easy to compute accessibility-measures that provide an approximation of experienced-utility. We distinguish between decision-making based on utility-maximization and regret-minimization premises. Using a small-scale case-study building on departure time-choice data, we illustrate the working of the developed accessibility-measures and highlight how they differ from the Logsum-approach.
Modeling experienced accessibility for utility-maximizers and regret-minimizers
Chorus, Caspar G. (author) / de Jong, Gerard C. (author)
Journal of Transport Geography ; 19 ; 1155-1162
2011-01-01
8 pages
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
English
Modeling experienced accessibility for utility-maximizers and regret-minimizers
| Online Contents | 2011