1 / 18

Jon Inge Lian, Institute of Transport Economics, Oslo COST 355 meeting, Paris 1. July 2004

Urban sprawl and transport - the case of Oslo and Bergen a presentation of research activities at TOI. Jon Inge Lian, Institute of Transport Economics, Oslo COST 355 meeting, Paris 1. July 2004. Background. Car ownership Major cities Oslo 0,8 mill Bergen 0,21 m. Stavanger 0,17 m.

phyre
Download Presentation

Jon Inge Lian, Institute of Transport Economics, Oslo COST 355 meeting, Paris 1. July 2004

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Urban sprawl and transport - the case of Oslo and Bergena presentation of research activities at TOI Jon Inge Lian, Institute of Transport Economics, Oslo COST 355 meeting, Paris 1. July 2004

  2. Background • Car ownership • Major cities • Oslo 0,8 mill • Bergen 0,21 m. • Stavanger 0,17 m. • Trondheim 0,15 m.

  3. Data • National Travel Surveys 1992, 1998, 2001 • Registers on population, cars and income • Local travel surveys

  4. Analysis: Oslo 1992, NTS

  5. Discussions • Travel time (from transport models) proved better than distance, linear relationship? • Travel time and time difference (car – transit) and number of children were significant • Regressions on zones gave similar results • But time difference were not significant, due to local differences in walking distances to transit • Travel time, income and single unit dwelling had high t-values (~5)

  6. Urban sprawl analysis: Oslo 1998 • Based on 1900 census districts • Regression on cars per adult, R2: 0.66 • The effect of distance from CBD not very strong Change from 2.7 km to 7.4 km from CBD => +0,085 cars/adult

  7. Cars per adult by distance from Oslo c

  8. Cars per adult by distance from Oslo c

  9. Cars per adult by distance from Oslo c

  10. Cars per adult by road distance from Oslo c

  11. Car use and distance, Oslo 1998

  12. The case of Bergen • Regression on cars per adult, R2: 0.76 • Even weaker effect of distance

  13. Cars per adult by distance from Bergen c

  14. Cars per adult by distance from Bergen c

  15. Residential location and travel

  16. “Other” locations and travel

  17. Workplace location and travel

  18. Summary • Residential location effect effect car use mainly by differences in car ownership • The distance effect is diminishing after 6 km • Change in settlement pattern is very slow; mixed trends • Workplace location strongly affect car use • Workplace and shopping centre location change at a higher rate than housing, but income growth is by far the most important driver of car ownership and use. • Future studies based on NTS 2001 will elaborate more on socio-demographics and travel alternatives.

More Related