Modeling micro-spatial employment location patterns: A comparison of count and choice approaches

被引:16
|
作者
Kim, Hyungtai [2 ]
Waddell, Paul [1 ,3 ]
Shankar, Venkataraman N. [4 ]
Ulfarsson, Gudmundur F. [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Washington, Dept Urban Design & Planning, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[2] Korea Dev Inst, Publ & Private Infrastruct Investment Management, Seoul, South Korea
[3] Univ Washington, Evans Sch Publ Affairs, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[4] Penn State Univ, Dept Civil & Environm Engn, University Pk, PA 16802 USA
[5] Washington Univ, Dept Civil Engn, St Louis, MO 63130 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1111/j.1538-4632.2008.00716.x
中图分类号
P9 [自然地理学]; K9 [地理];
学科分类号
0705 ; 070501 ;
摘要
This article studies employment location patterns in the Puget Sound Region of Washington State at a micro level of geography. Traditional discrete choice modeling using multinomial logit (MNL) models may be problematic at a micro level of geography due to the high dimensionality of the set of alternative locations and the likely violations of the independence from irrelevant alternatives (IIA) assumption. Count models are free from the IIA assumption and, unlike logit models, actually benefit from large numbers of alternatives by adding degrees of freedom. This study identifies the best-fitting count model as the zero-inflated negative binomial (ZINB) model, because this model more effectively addresses the large number of cells with no jobs and reflects a dual process that facilitates the identification of threshold clustering effects such as those found in specialized employment centers. The estimation and prediction results of ZINB are compared with those of MNL with a random sampling of alternatives estimated on an equivalent data set. The ZINB and MNL models largely agree on major trends, with the ZINB model providing more insightful details, but with less capacity to predict large count situations.
引用
下载
收藏
页码:123 / 151
页数:29
相关论文
共 45 条
  • [31] A comparison between parametric and non-parametric approaches to the analysis of replicated spatial point patterns
    Diggle, PJ
    Mateu, J
    Clough, HE
    ADVANCES IN APPLIED PROBABILITY, 2000, 32 (02) : 331 - 343
  • [32] Comparison of landscape approaches to define spatial patterns of hillslope-scale sediment delivery ratio
    Vigiak, O.
    Newham, L. T. H.
    Whitford, J.
    Melland, A.
    Borselli, L.
    18TH WORLD IMACS CONGRESS AND MODSIM09 INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON MODELLING AND SIMULATION: INTERFACING MODELLING AND SIMULATION WITH MATHEMATICAL AND COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCES, 2009, : 4064 - 4070
  • [33] Continuum modeling approach to the spatial analysis of air quality and housing location choice (vol 11, pg 319, 2017)
    Yin, Jun
    Wong, S. C.
    Choi, Keechoo
    Du, Y. C.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION, 2017, 11 (10) : 788 - 788
  • [34] Predicting spatial patterns of plant species richness: a comparison of direct macroecological and species stacking modelling approaches
    Dubuis, Anne
    Pottier, Julien
    Rion, Vanessa
    Pellissier, Loic
    Theurillat, Jean-Paul
    Guisan, Antoine
    DIVERSITY AND DISTRIBUTIONS, 2011, 17 (06) : 1122 - 1131
  • [35] Comparison of the Spatial Wind Erosion Patterns of Erosion Risk Mapping and Quantitative Modeling in Eastern Austria
    Scheper, Simon
    Weninger, Thomas
    Kitzler, Barbara
    Lackoova, Lenka
    Cornelis, Wim
    Strauss, Peter
    Michel, Kerstin
    LAND, 2021, 10 (09)
  • [36] Comparison of Modeling Grassland Degradation with and without Considering Localized Spatial Associations in Vegetation Changing Patterns
    Wang, Yuwei
    Wang, Zhenyu
    Li, Ruren
    Meng, Xiaoliang
    Ju, Xingjun
    Zhao, Yuguo
    Sha, Zongyao
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2018, 10 (02)
  • [37] Modeling spatial patterns of saturated areas: A comparison of the topographic wetness index and a dynamic distributed model
    Grabs, T.
    Seibert, J.
    Bishop, K.
    Laudon, H.
    JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY, 2009, 373 (1-2) : 15 - 23
  • [38] Performance Evaluation of GIS-Based Artificial Intelligence Approaches for Landslide Susceptibility Modeling and Spatial Patterns Analysis
    Lei, Xinxiang
    Chen, Wei
    Binh Thai Pham
    ISPRS INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEO-INFORMATION, 2020, 9 (07)
  • [39] Accounting for spatial correlation between outcomes during the regression modeling process: A comparison of GEE and Bayesian approaches
    Boyd, HA
    Waller, LA
    Addiss, DG
    Flanders, WD
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2003, 157 (11) : S53 - S53
  • [40] Spatial modeling of daily concentrations of ground-level ozone in Montreal Canada: A comparison of geostatistical approaches
    Ramos, Yuddy
    Requia, Weeberb J.
    St-Onge, Benoit
    Blanchet, Jean-Pierre
    Kestens, Yan
    Smargiassi, Audrey
    ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH, 2018, 166 : 487 - 496