Commuting in multinodal urban systems: An empirical comparison of three alternative models

Minimal distance of commuting and wasteful commuting

The average distance of the concentrated model minus the reduction in distance made possible
in the deconcentrated model leads to the minimal distance (see figure 4). Differences in
minimal distance are related to differences in residental and employment locations as
reflected by, on the one hand, the potential labour force density functions and, on the other
hand, the employment density functions. As table 5 shows, the minimal distance for The
Hague is relative small. Utrecht has the largest differences in the location of population and
employment.

Table 5        Minimal distance of commuting and wasteful commuting

The difference between the actual average distance (see table 2) and the minimal distance is
the ‘wasteful’ or ‘excess’ commuting (see table 5). It is the number of kilometers which don't
have to be covered when the presuppositions of the concentrated model are satisfied. Or, in
other words, it is the commuting distance which can't be explained by the concentration
model. This relates to the first main question of this article after the degree the concentration
model is able to explain actual commuting distances. Table 5 shows that wasteful commuting
is very large. About 96 percent of the actual commuting distance within the four urban
regions is wasteful. Although not surprising, the conclusion must be, that the concentrated
model dramatically fails to explain actual commuting distances.

Two causes are responsible for this. The first is the failure of the supposition of an
exponential decrease of the population and employment densities. Only a small proportion of
the actual distances is explained by the respective density functions. Table 6 shows the
correlation coefficients of the population and employment density functions with actual
distances (see also table 3 and 4). The coefficients are particular low in the Amsterdam
region. For this region the population density function only amounts to 7 percent, but also
for other regions the relationship is not clear. The highest is the Hague with 65 per cent. The
employment function shows a similar picture. Causes for the deviation between actual
distances and the supposed ones are, for example, that the centre of the region is actually not
exactly in the middle and that the region itself is not circular.

19

<<   <   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   >   >>