higher level of acceptability of the road pricing measure leads to a lower chance of searching
for another job. Finally, again a significant relation is found between the probability of
moving residential and work location; respondents with a higher probability of moving their
residential location due to the price measures also indicated a higher chance of searching for
another job.
5. Location preferences households
This section focuses on studying the influence of different trip and location related variables
on the residential location choices of people. For the analyses data from a stated choice
experiment has been used (see section 3). The outline of this section is as follows. In section
5.1 the importance of trip versus location related variables in a residential location decision is
assessed. Special emphasis will be put on the comparison of the importance of travel cost
(especially due to road pricing) versus housing cost and travel time in location decisions.
Furthermore section 5.2 extends the analysis presented in section 5.1 by explicitly taking into
account explanatory trip and household related characteristics.
5.1 Comparison influence trip and location related variables
Table 8 presents the multinomial logit (MNL) results in which only basic location and trip
related variables are taken into account; no distinction was made into explanatory socio-
economic or other characteristics. First of all, the sign of the coefficients in table 8 seems to
be logical. An increase in the number of bedrooms is valued positively. Furthermore, cost
components, such as the monthly housing and travelling costs, and travel time are valued
negatively. The type of location finally is a qualitative variable consisting of three levels:
(big) city (more than 100.000 inhabitants), medium sized town/city (10.000 to 100.000
inhabitants), rural area or small town (less than 10.000 inhabitants). The preference for
location has been estimated by using effect codes. Table 6 shows that respondents in general
dislike living in a big city and prefer to live in a small town/rural area. The parameter value
for a medium sized city amounts to 0.21, meaning that the respondents on average like to
reside in such a medium sized city. Note that these results are only representative for
respondents who drive to work by car two or more times per week and face congestion of 10
or more minutes per trip for at least two times a week.
15