, Volume 43, Issue 4, pp 705–724 | Cite as

Impact of family in-home quality time on person travel demand

  • Goran Vuk
  • John L. Bowman
  • Andrew Daly
  • Stephane Hess


This paper introduces the concept of Primary Family Priority Time (PFPT), which represents a high priority household decision to spend time together for in-home activities. PFPT is incorporated into a fully specified and operational activity based discrete choice model system for Copenhagen, called COMPAS, using the DaySim software platform. Structural tests and estimation results identify two important findings. First, PFPT has a place high in the model hierarchy, and second, strong interactions exist between PFPT and the other day level activity components of the model system. Forecasts are generated for a road pricing and congestion scenario by COMPAS and a comparison version of the model system that excludes PFPT. COMPAS with PFPT exhibits less mode changing and time-of-day shifting in response to pricing and congestion than the comparison version.


Activity based modelling Quality in-home time Primary Family Priority Time COMPAS DaySim Denmark 



The work represented in this paper was funded by the Danish Research Council as part of the ACTUM project. The authors gratefully acknowledge the suggestions of anonymous reviewers of earlier drafts.


  1. Aalborg University (2012) ACTUM WP2: P0/P1 Analysis Report - making daily mobilityGoogle Scholar
  2. Arentze, T.A., Timmermans, H.J.P.: A learning-based transportation oriented simulation system. Transp. Res. B 38(7), 613–633 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bonke, J. (2002) Forældres brug af tid of penge på deres børn. Report from Rockwool fondens forskningsenhed, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  4. Bonke, J. (2009) Tid og velfærd. Report from Socialforskningsinstitut, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  5. Bowman, J.L.: The day activity schedule approach to travel demand analysis. Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA (1998). Available at
  6. Bradley, M., Bowman, J.L.: A summary of design features of activity-based microsimulation models for U.S. MPOs. White paper presented at the TRB Conference on Innovations in Travel Demand Modelling, Austin, USA May 2006. Available at
  7. Bradley, M., Bowman, J.L., Griesenbeck, B.: SACSIM: An applied activity-based model system with fine-level spatial and temporal resolution. J. Choice Model. 3(1), 5–31 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bradley, M., Vovsha, P.: A model for joint choice of daily activity pattern types of household members. Transportation 32, 545–571 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chapin, F.S.: Human activity patterns in the city: Things people do in time and space. Wiley, New York (1974)Google Scholar
  10. Commission of Work-Life Balance (Familie of Arbejdslivskommissionen) (2007) Chance for balance—etfællesansvar. Report of the Danish GovernmentGoogle Scholar
  11. Gupta, S., Vovsha, P.: A model for work activity schedules with synchronization for multiple-worker households. Transportation 40, 827–845 (2013)Google Scholar
  12. Hagerstrand, T.: What about people in regional science? Reg. Sci. Assoc. Pap. 24, 7–21 (1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ho, C., Mulley, C.: Tour-based mode choice of joint household travel patterns on weekend and weekday. Transportation 40, 789–811 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jones, P.M., Dix, M.C., Clarke, M.I., Heggie, I.G.: Understanding travel behaviour. Gower, Aldershot (1983)Google Scholar
  15. Kitamura, R., Fujii, S.: two computational process models of activity-travel behavior. In: Garling, T., Laitila, T., Westin, K. (eds.) Theoretical Foundations of Travel Choice Modeling, pp. 251–279. Elsevier, Amsterdam (1997)Google Scholar
  16. Konduri, K.C., Xin, Y., Pendyala, R.: Probit-based discrete-continuous model of activity choice and duration with history dependency. Transp. Res. Rec. 2156, 17–27 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Meloni, I., Bez, M., Spissu, E.: Activity-based model of women’s activity-travel patterns. Transp Res Rec 2125, 26–35 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pas, E.I.: The effect of selected sociodemographic characteristics on daily travel-activity behavior. Environ. Plan. A 16, 571–581 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Srinivasan S., Bhat, C.: A multiple discrete-continuous model for independent and joint-discretionary-activity participation decisions. Transportation 33, 497–515 (2006)Google Scholar
  20. Vovsha, P., Freedman, J., Livshits, V., Sun, W.: Design features of activity-based models in practice: Coordinated travel-regional activity modeling platform. Transp. Res. Rec. 2254, 19–27 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Vovsha, P., Petersen, E., Donnelly, R.: Model for allocation of maintenance activities to household members. Transp. Res. Rec. 1894, 170–179 (2004a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Vovsha, P., Petersen, E., Donnelly, R.: Impact of intra-household interactions on individual daily activity-travel patterns. Transp. Res. Rec. 1898, 87–97 (2004b)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Goran Vuk
    • 1
  • John L. Bowman
    • 2
  • Andrew Daly
    • 3
    • 4
  • Stephane Hess
    • 3
  1. 1.Danish Road DirectorateCopenhagen KDenmark
  2. 2.Bowman Research and ConsultingBrooklineUSA
  3. 3.Institute for Transport StudiesUniversity of LeedsLeedsUK
  4. 4.RAND EuropeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations