Table 3 Average commuting distance for the four urban regions in
the case of a concentrated employment pattern
|
Amsterdam |
Utrecht |
Rotterdam |
The Hague | |
|
- constant C |
49839 |
80971 |
159002 |
216230 |
|
- τ |
-0.28 |
-0.59 |
-0.70 |
-0.95 |
|
- P (x) |
49839 x-0.28 |
80971 x-0.59 |
159002 x-.70 |
216230 x-0.95 |
|
(21.76) (-1.94) |
(29.84) (-4.66) |
(28.70) (-5.21) |
(25.45) (-5.01) | |
|
- R2 |
0.07 |
0.47 |
0.44 |
0.65 |
|
- A |
6.1 |
7.3 |
7.2 |
4.1 |
17
More intriguing information
1. Reputations, Market Structure, and the Choice of Quality Assurance Systems in the Food Industry2. Review of “The Hesitant Hand: Taming Self-Interest in the History of Economic Ideas”
3. WP 1 - The first part-time economy in the world. Does it work?
4. Wettbewerbs- und Industriepolitik - EU-Integration als Dritter Weg?
5. Higher education funding reforms in England: the distributional effects and the shifting balance of costs
6. Opciones de política económica en el Perú 2011-2015
7. Language discrimination by human newborns and by cotton-top tamarin monkeys
8. The name is absent
9. FOREIGN AGRICULTURAL SERVICE PROGRAMS AND FOREIGN RELATIONS
10. The name is absent