Advertisement

Transportation

, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp 383–409 | Cite as

Impact of telecommuting on spatial and temporal patterns of household travel

  • Ram M. Pendyala
  • Konstadinos G. Goulias
  • Ryuichi Kitamura
Article

Abstract

A spatial and temporal analysis of travel diary data collected during the State of California Telecommuting Pilot Project is performed to determine the impacts of telecommuting on household travel behavior. The analysis is based on geocoded trip data where missing trips and trip attributes have been augmented to the extent possible. The results confirm the earlier finding that the Pilot Project telecommuters substantially reduced travel; on telecommuting days, the telecommuters made virtually no commute trips, reduced peak-period trips by 60%, total distance traveled by 75%, and freeway miles by 90%. The spatial analysis of the trip records has shown that the telecommuters chose non-work destinations that are closer to home; they exhibited contracted action spaces after the introduction of telecommuting. Importantly, this contraction took place on both telecommuting days and commuting days. The telecommuters distributed their trips, over the day and avoided peak-period travel on telecommuting days. Non-work trips, however, show similar patterns of temporal distribution on telecommuting days and commuting days. Non-work trips continued to be made during the lunch period and late afternoon and evening hours.

Key words

action space impact assessment panel survey spatial analysis telecommuting temporal distribution 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Garrison WL & Deakin E (1988) Travel, work, and telecommunications: a view of the electronics revolution and its potential impacts. Transportation Research A 22A (4): 239–245.Google Scholar
  2. Golob TF & Meurs H (1986) Biases in response over time in seven-day travel diaries. Transportation 13: 163–181.Google Scholar
  3. Goulias KG, Pendyala RM & Kitamura R (1990) Updating a panel survey questionnaire. In the Proceedings of The Third International Conference on Survey Methods in Transportation, Washington D.C. January.Google Scholar
  4. Horowitz JL (1982) Air Quality Analysis for Urban Transportation Planning. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  5. JALA Associates, Inc. (1985) Telecommuting: A Pilot Project Plan. The Department of General Services, State of California, Sacramento, CA. June.Google Scholar
  6. — (1990) California Telecommuting Pilot Project Final Report. Department of General Services, State of California. June.Google Scholar
  7. Kitamura R, Nilles JM, Conroy P & Fleming DM (1990a) Telecommuting as a transportation planning measure: initial results of the State of California Pilot Project. Transportation Research Record 1285: 98–104. National Research Council, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  8. Kitamura R, Goulias KG & Pendyala RM (1990b) Telecommuting and Travel Demand: An Impact Assessment for State of California Pilot Project Participants. Research Report No. UCD-TRG-RR-90-8. Final Report submitted to California State Department of Transportation.Google Scholar
  9. Meurs JH, Visser J & van Wissen L (1989) Measurement biases in panel data. Transportation 16(2): 175–194.Google Scholar
  10. Nilles JM (1988) Traffic reduction by telecommuting: a status review and selected bibliography. Transportation Research A 22A(4): 301–317.Google Scholar
  11. Pas EI (1986) Multiday samples, parameter estimation precision, and data collection costs for least squares regression trip generation models. Environment and Planning 16A: 571–581.Google Scholar
  12. Pendyala R, Goulias KG & Kitamura R (1991) Impact of Telecommuting on Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Household Travel: An Assessment for the State of California Pilot Project Participants. Research Report No. UCD-ITS-RR-91-07. University of California, Davis. Prepared for the California Department of Transportation.Google Scholar
  13. van Wissen LJG (1989) A Model of household interactions in activity patterns. In: The Proceedings of the International Conference on Dynamic Travel Behavior Analysis. Kyoto, Japan. July 18–19.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ram M. Pendyala
    • 1
  • Konstadinos G. Goulias
    • 2
  • Ryuichi Kitamura
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute of Transportation Studies and Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of California at DavisDavisUSA
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  3. 3.Institute of Transportation Studies and Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of California at DavisDavisUSA

Personalised recommendations