Appendices
Tab. 1: Commuting flows by spatial categories
|
Place of residence ... |
Total | ||||||
|
Agglomeration |
Urban Fringe |
Low Density |
Peripheral |
Commuting |
Average | ||
|
Centers |
Regions |
Regions |
rate |
distance | |||
|
Agglomerations - Agglomeration Centers |
40,65% |
51,68% |
6,27% |
1,40% |
23,47% |
64,65 km | |
|
Place of |
- Urban Fringe |
54,67% |
38,04% |
5,98% |
1,30% |
47,68%% |
38,40 km |
|
work ... |
Non Agglomeration Areas |
12,12% |
11,80% |
74,01% |
2,08% |
38,75% |
43,38 km |
|
- Peripheral Regions |
9,38% |
6,94% |
7,76% |
75,93% |
40,17% |
45,93 km | |
|
West Germany |
38,33% |
44,69 km | |||||
Source: Employment statistic 2003, own calculations.
14
More intriguing information
1. Optimal Vehicle Size, Haulage Length, and the Structure of Transport Costs2. Migrating Football Players, Transfer Fees and Migration Controls
3. Testing Hypotheses in an I(2) Model with Applications to the Persistent Long Swings in the Dmk/$ Rate
4. Comparison of Optimal Control Solutions in a Labor Market Model
5. The name is absent
6. On s-additive robust representation of convex risk measures for unbounded financial positions in the presence of uncertainty about the market model
7. Why unwinding preferences is not the same as liberalisation: the case of sugar
8. Reconsidering the value of pupil attitudes to studying post-16: a caution for Paul Croll
9. Centre for Longitudinal Studies
10. Electricity output in Spain: Economic analysis of the activity after liberalization