190 likes | 201 Views
This study examines the interplay between residential location and household expenditures for transport and housing in the Greater Paris region. It explores the trade-off between transport and housing costs and provides insights into the budgetary efforts required for both. The study also investigates the impact of residential location on car ownership, public transport availability, congestion problems, travel time, and housing prices.
E N D
Residential Location and Household Expenditures for Transport and Housing: the example of the Greater Paris region Akli BERRI INRETS-DEST COST 355 WG 1 & 2 Piraeus meeting, 18-19 April 2006.
Transport and housing interplay • Residential location strongly influences car ownership and use • Availability of public transport according to the degree of urbanisation and population density • Congestion problems in dense areas • Choice of residential location • Travel time (to work, shopping, etc.) • Housing prices • Owning a house; living in a “likely-country” environment • What does this interaction imply in terms of budgetary efforts devoted to transport and housing? What about the reality of a trade-off between transport and housing?
Polacchini & Orfeuil study (1998) • Greater Paris region: 9 zones according to property prices (private sector) • Home buyers and households renting non low-cost accommodation • Expenditures estimated from two surveys: Comprehensive Transport Survey (1991) and Residential Mobility Survey (1994) • As one moves from the centre to the periphery… • … the budget share of transport increases, while that of housing remains roughly constant • … household size and the percentage of home-buying households increase, while income per CU falls • … travel-time budget does not vary to a marked degree, despite large differences in the distances covered • Constrained location far from the centre, at least for low income households (particularly if they wish to become home-owners)
Data and zoning • Household Expenditure Surveys: 1978-79, 1984-85, 1989 and 1994-95 • All households • By zone of residence, standard of living and dwelling occupation status • 4 concentric zones preserving the hierarchy of property prices • City of Paris • Inner suburbs • Outer suburbs • Periphery • Expenditure groupings • Private transport: vehicle purchases (incl. leasing); insurance; fuels, lubricants, tires and accessories; maintenance and repair; garage rent; parking costs; tolls; car registration and annual taxes; fines • Local public transport • Housing (principal residence): rent and expenses; reimbursements of loans for purchase, construction and restoration; maintenance and equipment; heating and lighting; taxes; insurance
Changes in prices in the Greater Paris Region (Relative price indices: baseline 100 in 1978) Source : INSEE ; calculations performed by INRETS.
Housing budget shares (%) Note: Share of the amount net of housing subsidies.
Budget shares of transport and housing, by zone of residence Source : INSEE Household Budget Survey, 1994-95.
Socio-economic characteristics and housing conditions of households, by zone of residence Source : INSEE Household Budget Survey, 1994-95.
(*) Amounts in 1994-95 Francs 1994-95 (period of the last survey).
Low-cost accommodation and housing subsidies, by zone of residence
Home-buyers and home-owners outright living in a house (%) Recent movings in by zone – Home-buying households (%)
Budgetary constraints and property prices force low income households to live in peripheral zones (particularly if they wish to become home-owners) • Evaluation procedures by banks and lessors • Only housing expenditures are accounted for • Peripheral location; favour urban sprawl • “Driven tospend” more on transport
Conclusions • Evaluation of solvency of households • Taking into account transport expenditures, in addition to those for housing • Maximum housing shares (of income) may depend on the accessibility of the zone by public transport • Policies to reduce car use • An integrated approach of transport and housing • Actions on the housing market to attenuate urban sprawl: solvency evaluation; promotion of low-cost accommodation in zones accessible by public transport; a land use planning (densification of the urban fabric, mixing dwellings and jobs) • Conciliate car use reduction measures and equity • Low income households dependent on the car : a uniform increase of utilisation costs (e.g. fuels) would be unfair • Area-specific measures: access restrictions, urban toll, … • Improving public transport supply (service, frequency, comfort, punctuality)
The End Thank you for your attention !