• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >Metropolitan form, transportation, and labor accessibility: Empirical evidence from four US metropolitan areas.
【24h】

Metropolitan form, transportation, and labor accessibility: Empirical evidence from four US metropolitan areas.

机译：大都市的形式，交通和劳动力的可及性：来自美国四个大都市地区的经验证据。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Urban planners and economists have long debated the optimal size and spatial structure of metropolitan areas, including the question of whether low density development or sprawl is desirable or not. One aspect generally overlooked in the debate is whether sprawl enhances or reduces agglomeration economies. This thesis explores the extent to which jobs in metropolitan areas are concentrated in employment centers and whether those centers are accessible to large numbers of workers; both factors thought to contribute to agglomeration economies. These issues are explored by examining four metropolitan areas with similar populations but different spatial structures: Atlanta, Boston, Phoenix and Washington, DC. Boston and Washington DC are relatively dense while Atlanta and Phoenix are not.;Approximately 30 percent of the metropolitan employment is concentrated in centers either in the Central Business District (CBD) or the suburbs, but the size and location of these centers vary considerably. The employment centers are identified using the approach pioneered by Giuliano and her colleagues but with additional tests to confirm that the differences in the size of the analysis zones do not contaminate the result. While Boston's employment centers are dominated by its CBD, Atlanta and Washington DC are more polycentric having an important CBD and some strong and large suburban business districts (SBDs). Phoenix exhibits more dispersed pattern with a smaller CBD and smaller SBDs.;The labor accessibility to the employment centers also varies considerably and in unexpected ways. The CBDs are not the most accessible centers in their metropolitan areas. Moreover, the centers in Boston and Phoenix are much more accessible than the centers in Atlanta and Washington, DC. Although Atlanta and Washington DC enjoy the polycentric form many planners favor, their centers are relatively less accessible because they suffer both from a modest residential density and fairly low speeds. A statistical analysis suggests that increasing residential density would not increase the size of the accessible labor force proportionally because higher density makes it harder to maintain high commuting speeds. Public transit appears to have far less effect on labor market accessibility than highways, although its contribution is difficult to measure.
机译：长期以来，城市规划者和经济学家一直在争论大都市区的最佳规模和空间结构，包括是否需要低密度发展或扩张的问题。辩论中通常被忽略的一个方面是蔓延是增加还是减少集聚经济。本文探讨了大都市地区就业集中在就业中心的程度以及这些中心是否可供大量工人使用；这两个因素都被认为有助于集聚经济。通过研究四个人口相似但空间结构不同的大都市区来探索这些问题：亚特兰大，波士顿，凤凰城和华盛顿特区。波士顿和华盛顿特区相对密集，而亚特兰大和菲尼克斯则不。；大约30％的大都市就业集中在中央商务区（CBD）或郊区的中心，但是这些中心的规模和位置相差很大。使用Giuliano和她的同事率先采用的方法来识别就业中心，但还要进行额外的测试，以确认分析区域大小的差异不会污染结果。波士顿的就业中心以中央商务区为主导，而亚特兰大和华盛顿特区则更为多元化，拥有重要的中央商务区和一些强大而大型的郊区商业区（SBD）。凤凰城呈现出更分散的格局，CBD较小，SBD较小。;就业中心的劳动力可及性也以意想不到的方式变化很大。 CBD并非其大都市地区最容易接近的中心。此外，波士顿和凤凰城的中心比亚特兰大和华盛顿特区的中心要方便得多。尽管亚特兰大和华盛顿特区享有许多规划者青睐的多中心形式，但由于居住密度不高且速度较慢，它们的中心相对较难到达。统计分析表明，增加居住密度并不会成比例地增加可利用的劳动力的规模，因为更高的密度使保持高通勤速度变得更加困难。公共交通对劳动力市场可及性的影响似乎远不及高速公路，尽管其贡献难以衡量。

著录项

  • 作者

    Matsuo, Miwa.;

  • 作者单位

    Harvard University.;

  • 授予单位 Harvard University.;
  • 学科 Transportation.;Urban and Regional Planning.
  • 学位 D.Des.
  • 年度 2008
  • 页码 208 p.
  • 总页数 208
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 综合运输;区域规划、城乡规划;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号