Login | Register

Modifiable Areal Unit Problem (MAUP) Effects on Assessment of Accessibility via Public Transit

Title:

Modifiable Areal Unit Problem (MAUP) Effects on Assessment of Accessibility via Public Transit

Wan, Min (2016) Modifiable Areal Unit Problem (MAUP) Effects on Assessment of Accessibility via Public Transit. Masters thesis, Concordia University.

This is the latest version of this item.

[img]
Preview
Text (application/pdf)
Min Wan_MSc_2016 Fall.pdf - Accepted Version
Available under License Spectrum Terms of Access.
10MB

Abstract

Integrating accessibility by public transit with land use planning is a crucial precondition for sustainable urban development. Accessibility by public transit has been widely assessed in a GIS environment using aggregated zonal data, such as traffic analysis zones, census tracts, dissemination areas, dissemination blocks, 200 * 200 m grids and 50 * 50 m grids. Nevertheless, it has been proved that the scale and zoning scheme of zones may alter analysis results, which is known as the Modifiable Areal Unit Problem (MAUP). Therefore, it is essential to know how the MAUP affects assessment of accessibility. This research addressed the MAUP effects, when evaluating accessibility based on cumulative opportunity measures. This research applied a cumulative accessibility measure, which calculated accessibility in terms of the number of urban nodes that could be reached within a given travel time or distance. The City of Windsor, Canada, was used as the study area. The MAUP effects were examined based on 6 types of zones (e.g. census tracts, dissemination areas, dissemination blocks, 0.6 km, 0.3 km and 0.15 km grids) at comparable scales or zoning schemes. It was found that the MAUP may significantly alter assessment results of accessibility and should be paid highly attention to. The two outcomes of the MAUP effects on accessibility measurements are: changes of accessibility score and alterations of policy implications that are based on accessibility measurements. Three ways were discussed to deal with the MAUP impacts on accessibility measurements: using disaggregate data if possible, using low aggregated data and selecting zones according to research purposes.

Divisions:Concordia University > Faculty of Arts and Science > Geography, Planning and Environment
Item Type:Thesis (Masters)
Authors:Wan, Min
Institution:Concordia University
Degree Name:M. Sc.
Program:Geography, Urban & Environmental Studies
Date:September 2016
Thesis Supervisor(s):Townsend, Craig
Keywords:Accessibility; Cumulative Opportunity Measures; Public Transit; MAUP
ID Code:981905
Deposited By: MIN WAN
Deposited On:08 Nov 2016 19:30
Last Modified:18 Jan 2018 17:54

References:

Alam, B. M., Thompson, G. L., & Brown, J. R. (2010). Estimating transit accessibility with an alternative method. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2144(1), 62-71.
Al Mamun, M., &Lownes, N. E. (2011).A composite index of public transit accessibility. Journal of Public Transportation, 14(2), 4.
Bertolini, L., Le Clercq, F., &Kapoen, L. (2005). Sustainable accessibility: A conceptual framework to integrate transport and land use plan-making. two test-applications in the netherlands and a reflection on the way forward. Transport Policy, 12(3), 207-220.
Biba, S., Curtin, K. M., &Manca, G. (2010).A new method for determining the population with walking access to transit. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 24(3), 347-364.
Chen, Y., Ravulaparthy, S., Deutsch, K., Dalal, P., Yoon, S. Y., Lei, T., . . . Hu, H. (2011). Development of indicators of opportunity-based accessibility. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2255(1), 58-68.
Cheng, C., & Agrawal, A. W. (2010). TTSAT: A new approach to mapping transit accessibility. Journal of Public Transportation, 13(1).
Dong, X., Ben-Akiva, M. E., Bowman, J. L., & Walker, J. L. (2006). Moving from trip-based to activity-based measures of accessibility. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 40(2), 163-180.
El-Geneidy, A. M., & Levinson, D. M. (2006). Access to destinations: Development of accessibility measures.
El-Geneidy, A., Cerdá, A., Fischler, R., & Luka, N. (2011). Evaluating the impacts of transportation plans using accessibility measures. Canadian Journal of Urban Research, 20(1), 81.
Fotheringham, A. S., & Wong, D. W. (1991). The modifiable areal unit problem in multivariate statistical analysis. Environment and Planning A, 23(7), 1025-1044.
Guerra, E., Cervero, R., &Tischler, D. (2012). Half-mile circle. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2276(1), 101-109.
Guti, J., &Garc, J. C. (2008). Distance-measure impacts on the calculation of transport service areas using GIS. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 35(3), 480-503.
Handy, S. L., & Clifton, K. J. (2001). Evaluating neighborhood accessibility: Possibilities and practicalities. Journal of Transportation and Statistics, 4(2/3), 67-78.
Horner, M. W., & Murray, A. T. (2004). Spatial representation and scale impacts in transit service assessment. Environment and Planning B, 31, 785-798.
Hsiao, S., Lu, J., Sterling, J., & Weatherford, M. (1997).Use of geographic information system for analysis of transit pedestrian access. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (1604), 50-59.
Huang, R., & Wei, Y. D. (2002). Analyzing neighborhood accessibility via transit in a GIS environment. Geographic Information Sciences, 8(1), 39-47.
Jelinski, D. E., & Wu, J. (1996). The modifiable areal unit problem and implications for landscape ecology. Landscape Ecology, 11(3), 129-140.
Kwan, M., & Weber, J. (2008). Scale and accessibility: Implications for the analysis of land use–travel interaction. Applied Geography, 28(2), 110-123.
Kawabata, M., & Shen, Q. (2006). Job accessibility as an indicator of auto-oriented urban structure: a comparison of Boston and Los Angeles with Tokyo. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 33(1), 115-130.
Kittelson& Associates, United States. Federal Transit Administration, Transit Cooperative Research Program, & Transit Development Corporation.(2003).Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual (Vol. 100).Transportation Research Board.
LaMondia, J. J., Blackmar, C. E., & Bhat, C. R. (2010). Comparing transit accessibility measures: A case study of access to healthcare facilities.
Lei, T., & Church, R. (2010). Mapping transit‐based access: Integrating GIS, routes and schedules. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 24(2), 283-304.
Li, Q., Zhang, T., Wang, H., & Zeng, Z. (2011). Dynamic accessibility mapping using floating car data: A network-constrained density estimation approach. Journal of Transport Geography, 19(3), 379-393.
Liu, S., & Zhu, X. (2004).An integrated GIS approach to accessibility analysis. Transactions in GIS, 8(1), 45-62.
Maoh, H., & Tang, Z. (2012). Determinants of normal and extreme commute distance in a sprawled midsize Canadian city: evidence from Windsor, Canada. Journal of Transport Geography, 25, 50-57.
Mavoa, S., Witten, K., McCreanor, T., & O’Sullivan, D. (2012). GIS based destination accessibility via public transit and walking in auckland, new zealand. Journal of Transport Geography, 20(1), 15-22.
Miller, H. J. (1996). GIS and geometric representation in facility location problems. International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 10(7), 791-816.
Mitra, R., &Buliung, R. N. (2012). Built environment correlates of active school transportation: Neighborhood and the modifiable areal unit problem. Journal of Transport Geography, 20(1), 51-61.
Moon, Z. K., & Farmer, F. L. (2001). Population density surface: A new approach to an old problem. Society & Natural Resources, 14(1), 39-51.
Murray, A. T. (2001). Strategic analysis of public transport coverage. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 35(3), 175-188.
Murray, A. T., & O'Kelly, M. E. (2002). Assessing representation error in point-based coverage modeling. Journal of Geographical Systems, 4(2), 171-191.
O'Sullivan, D., Morrison, A., & Shearer, J. (2000). Using desktop GIS for the investigation of accessibility by public transport: An isochrone approach. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 14(1), 85-104.
Ryus, P., Ausman, J., Teaf, D., Cooper, M., & Knoblauch, M. (2000).Development of Florida's transit level-of-service indicator. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (1731), 123-129.
Scheurer, J., & Curtis, C. (2007). Accessibility measures: Overview and practical applications. Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Curtin University, 52.
Statistics Canada. (2014). Dissemination area: Detailed definition. Retrieved December 23, 2014 from: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/92-195-x/2011001/geo/da-ad/def-eng.htm
Statistics Canada. (2014). Dissemination block (DB). Retrieved December 23, 2014 from: http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/ref/dict/geo014-eng.cfm
Statistics Canada (2015), National Household Survey, 2011. Table 1.a Proportion of workers commuting to work by car, truck or van, by public transit, on foot, or by bicycle, census metropolitan areas, 2011. Retrieved October 20, 2015 from: http://www12.statcan.ca/nhs-enm/2011/as-sa/99-012-x/99-012-x2011003_1-eng.cfm
Statistics Canada (2015), Census of Population, 2006. Table 1.b
Proportion of workers commuting to work by car, truck or van, by public transit, on foot, or by bicycle, census metropolitan areas, 2006. Retrieved October 20, 2015 from: http://www12.statcan.ca/nhs-enm/2011/as-sa/99-012-x/2011003/tbl/tbl1a-eng.cfm
Statistics Canada. (2016). Chart A description: Windsor, CMA - Population, 2011 and 2006 censuses. Retrieved March 24, 2016 from: https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/as-sa/fogs-spg/Facts-cma-eng.cfm?LANG=Eng&GK=CMA&GC=559
The City of Windsor Urban Structure Plan, 2011. Retrieved March 20, 2016 from: http://www.citywindsor.ca/residents/planning/plans-and-community-information/official-plan-review/documents/opr%20draft%20urban%20structure%20plan%20background%20report.pdf
The City of Windsor Urban Official Plan, 2012. Retrieved June 20, 2016 from: http://www.citywindsor.ca/residents/planning/Plans-and-Community-Information/Windsor---Official-Plan/Documents/1%20Introduction.pdf
Waddell, P., &Ulfarsson, G. F. (2003). Accessibility and agglomeration: Discrete-choice models of employment location by industry sector. TRB Annual Meeting’, Transportation Research Board.
Wong, D. W. (2004). The modifiable areal unit problem (MAUP).Worldminds: Geographical perspectives on 100 problems (pp. 571-575) Springer.
Wu, C., & Murray, A. T. (2005). Optimizing public transit quality and system access: The multiple-route, maximal covering/shortest-path problem. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 32(2), 163-178.
Xin, Y., Fu, L., &Saccomanno, F. F. (2005). Assessing transit level of service along travel corridors: Case study using the transit capacity and quality of service manual. Transportation Research Record, (1927), 259-267.
Yigitcanlar, T., Sipe, N., Evans, R., & Pitot, M. (2007).A GIS‐based land use and public transport accessibility indexing model. Australian Planner, 44(3), 30-37.
Zhang, M., &Kukadia, N. (2005).Metrics of urban form and the modifiable areal unit problem. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1902(1), 71-79.

Available Versions of this Item

  • Modifiable Areal Unit Problem (MAUP) Effects on Assessment of Accessibility via Public Transit. (deposited 08 Nov 2016 19:30) [Currently Displayed]
All items in Spectrum are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved. The use of items is governed by Spectrum's terms of access.

Repository Staff Only: item control page

Downloads per month over past year

Research related to the current document (at the CORE website)
- Research related to the current document (at the CORE website)
Back to top Back to top