Abstract
Carey (1858) and Ravenstein (1885) first proposed, through analogy, the gravity model of Newtonian physics as a description for economic and social spatial interaction, with Sen and Smith (1995) furnishing a comprehensive treatment of this model more than a century later. In the late 1960s, Wilson spelled out an entropy maximizing derivation of the gravity model, including the use of row and column totals as additional information for modeling purposes (that is, the doubly-constrained version), followed by a utility maximization derivation of it by Niedercorn and Bechdolt (1969). Flowerdew and Atkin (1982) and Flowerdew and Lovett (1988) articulated linkages between the Poisson probability model and spatial interaction. Within this same time interval, Anas (1983) established a linkage between the doubly-constrained gravity model and a logit model of joint origin-destination choice, which indirectly relates to a Poisson specification that includes a separate indicator variable for each origin and each destination (that is, 2n 0–1 binary variables, each having a single 1 and n-1 0s). Curry (1972; also see Curry et al. 1975, 1976) followed by Griffith and Jones (1980), first raised the issue of spatial autocorrelation effects embedded in spatial interaction. These investigations were followed by a formulation of the network autocorrelation concept (see Black 1992; Black and Thomas 1998; Tiefelsdorf and Braun 1999). More recently, LeSage and Pace (2008), Griffith (2008), and Fischer and Griffith (2008) have returned to the issue of spatial autocorrelation effects embedded in spatial interaction, specifying spatial autoregressive and spatial filter versions of the unconstrained gravity model, but in terms of attribute geographic distributions. Chun (2007) moves beyond this conceptualization to that of more explicitly spatially autocorrelated flows.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
None of the 88 candidate eigenvectors portraying negative spatial autocorrelation were selected.
References
Black W (1992) Network autocorrelation in transportation network and flow systems, Geogr Anal 24:207–222
Black W, Thomas I (1998) Accidents on Belgium's motorways: a network autocorrelation analysis, J Transp Geogr 6:23–31
Bolduc D, Laferriere R, Santarossa G (1992) Spatial autoregressive error components in travel flow models, Reg Sci Urban Econ 22(3):371–385
Bolduc D, Laferriere R, Santarossa G (1995) Spatial autoregressive error components in travel flow models: an application to aggregate mode choice, In: Anselin L, Florax RJ (eds) New Directions in Spatial Econometrics, Springer, Berlin, pp 96–108
Bolduc D, Fortin B Gordon S (1997) Multinomial probit estimation of spatially interdependent choices: an empirical comparison of two techniques, Int Reg Sci Rev 20(1):77–101
Carey H (1858) Principles of social science. Lippincott, Philadelphia
Chun Y (2007) Behavioral specifications of network autocorrelation in migration modeling: an analysis of migration flows by spatial filtering, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Geography, The Ohio State University
Curry L (1972) Spatial analysis of gravity flows, Reg Stud 6:131–147
Curry L, Griffith D, Sheppard E (1975) Those gravity parameters again. Reg Stud 9:289–296
Fischer M, Griffith D (2008) Modelling spatial autocorrelation in spatial interaction data: an application to patent data in the European Union, J Reg Sci 48:969–989
Flowerdew R, Aitkin M (1982) A method of fitting the gravity model based on the Poisson distribution, J Reg Sci 22:191–202
Flowerdew R, Lovett A (1988) Fitting constrained Poisson regression models to interurban migration flows, Geogr Anal 20:297–307
Foot D (1981) Operational urban models: an introduction. Methuen, NY
Griffith D (2000) A linear regression solution to the spatial autocorrelation problem. J Geogr Syst 2:141–156
Griffith D (2002) A spatial filtering specification for the auto-Poisson model. Stat Probab Lett 58:245–251
Griffith D (2003) Spatial autocorrelation and spatial filtering: gaining understanding through theory and scientific visualization. Springer, Berlin
Griffith D (2007) Spatial structure and spatial interaction: 25 years later, Rev Reg Stud 37(1):28–38
Griffith D (2009) Modeling spatial autocorrelation in spatial interaction data. J Geogr Syst
Griffith D, Jones K (1980) Explorations into the relationship between spatial structure and spatial interaction, Environ Plan A 12:187–201
LeSage J, Pace R (2008) Spatial econometric modelling of origin-destination flows, J Reg Sci 48:941–967
Niedercorn J, Bechdolt B (1969) An economic derivation of the ‘gravity law’ of spatial interaction. J Reg Sci 9:273–282
Ravenstein E (1885) The laws of migration. J R Stat Soc 48:241–305
Sen A, Smith T (1995) Gravity models of spatial interaction behavior. Springer, Berlin
Sheppard E, Griffith D, Curry L (1976) A final comment on mis-specification and autocorrelation in those gravity parameters. Reg Stud 10:337–339
Tiefelsdorf M, Braun G (1999) Network Autocorrelation in Poisson Regression Residuals: Inter-district Migration Patterns and Trends within Berlin. Paper presented at the 11th European Colloquium on Quantitative and Theoretical Geography, Durham City, England, September 3–7
Wilson A (1967) A statistical theory of spatial distribution models. Transp Res 1:253–269
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Griffith, D.A. (2009). Spatial Autocorrelation in Spatial Interaction. In: Reggiani, A., Nijkamp, P. (eds) Complexity and Spatial Networks. Advances in Spatial Science. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01554-0_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01554-0_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-01553-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-01554-0
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)