Advertisement

Transportation

, Volume 45, Issue 5, pp 1231–1247 | Cite as

The spatial dimensions of immobility in France

  • Benjamin Motte-Baumvol
  • Olivier Bonin
Article
  • 138 Downloads

Abstract

In travel surveys, immobility is often approached as a technical issue that needs to be dealt with in order to measure mobility more accurately. By covering mobility patterns over a full week, the 2008 French Travel Survey allows immobility to be analysed other than as a marginal and random phenomenon. For working days alone, 28.8% of the adults in the survey had experienced one or more immobility episodes. By considering the intensity of immobility, and by introducing latent variables into Structural Equation Modelling, we have been able to propose a model with reasonable explanatory power. Our findings agree with previous studies and also show that within suburban or rural areas, access to shops or the type of local residential fabric are also factors that influence the number of immobile days. In addition, our findings show that the effects of the determinants differ between categories of individuals, notably between working adults and students on the one hand, and between retired and non-working people on the other.

Keywords

Immobility Mobility Spatial analysis Travel survey France Structural equation modeling 

References

  1. Armoogum, J., Castaigne, M., Hubert, J.-P., Madre, J.-L.: Immobilité et mobilité observées à travers les enquêtes ménages de transport ou d’emploi du temps. In: Xèmes journées de méthodologie statistique, INSEE, Paris, France (2005)Google Scholar
  2. Armoogum, J., Hubert, J.P., Roux, S., Le Jeannic, T.: Plus de voyages, plus de kilomètres quotidiens: une tendance à l’homogénéisation des comportements de mobilité des Français, sauf entre ville et campagne. In: La mobilité des Français, panorama issu de l’enquête nationale transports et déplacements 2008, pp. 5–24. Commissariat Général au Développement Durable, La Défense, France (2010)Google Scholar
  3. Armoogum, J., Bonsall, P., Browne, M., Christensen, L., Cools, M., Cornélis, E., Diana, M., Guilloux, T., Harder, H., Hegner Reinau, K., et al.: Survey Harmonisation with New Technologies Improvement. SHANTI. IFSTTAR, Marne-la-Vallée (2014)Google Scholar
  4. Axhausen, K.W., Löchl, M., Schlich, R., Buhl, T., Widmer, P.: Fatigue in long-duration travel diaries. Transportation 34, 143–160 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Axhausen, K.W., Zimmermann, A., Schönfelder, S., Rindsfüser, G., Haupt, T.: Observing the rhythms of daily life: a six-week travel diary. Transportation 29, 95–124 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Belton-Chevallier, L.: Prendre en compte l’immobilité dans les imaginaires de la mobilité. SociologieS. http://sociologies.revues.org/5155 (2015)
  7. Brutel, C., Lévy, D.: Le nouveau zonage en aires urbaines de 2010. 95% de la population vit sous l’influence des villes. Insee première. 1374, 1–4 (2011)Google Scholar
  8. Cao, X., Mokhtarian, P.L., Handy, S.L.: Do changes in neighborhood characteristics lead to changes in travel behavior? A structural equations modeling approach. Transportation 34, 535–556 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chlond, B., Lipps, O., Manz, W., Zumkeller, D.: Auswertung zum Deutschen Mobilitäts-Panel 1998/1999: Haushaltsbefragung zur Alltagsmobilität in verschiedenen Raumtypen. Final report FE-Projekt 70569, 98 (1999)Google Scholar
  10. Dargirolle, R.: Les exclus de la mobilité: de l’observation à la décision. Ph.D. thesis, Université de Bourgogne, Dijon, France (2014)Google Scholar
  11. Drevon, G., Jambon, F., Chardonnel, S., Christophe, S., André-Poyaud, I., Davoine, P.-A., Lutoff, C.: Évaluation comparée de l’apport de l’assistance GPS aux enquêtes de mobilité. Netcom 28, 13–34 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hannam, K., Sheller, M., Urry, J.: Editorial: mobilities, immobilities and moorings. Mobilities 1, 1–22 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hubert, J.-P., Armoogum, J., Axhausen, K.W., Madre, J.-L.: Immobility and mobility seen through trip-based versus time-use surveys. Transp. Rev. 28, 641–658 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jahanshahi, K., Jin, Y., Williams, I.: Direct and indirect influences on employed adults’ travel in the UK: new insights from the National Travel Survey data 2002–2010. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 80, 288–306 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jouffe, Y., Caubel, D., Fol, S., Motte-Baumvol, B.: Faire face aux inégalités de mobilité. Tactiques, stratégies et projets des ménages pauvres en périphérie parisienne. Cybergeo Eur. J. Geogr. doi: 10.4000/cybergeo.26697 (2015)
  16. Kim, S.: Analysis of elderly mobility by structural equation modeling. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 1854, 81–89 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Madre, J.-L., Axhausen, K.W., Brög, W.: Immobility in travel diary surveys. Transportation 34, 107–128 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Motte-Baumvol, B., Bonin, O., David Nassi, C., Belton-Chevallier, L.: Barriers and (im)mobility in Rio de Janeiro. Urban Stud. 53, 2956–2972 (2016)Google Scholar
  19. Motte-Baumvol, B., Nassi, C.D.: Immobility in Rio de Janeiro, beyond poverty. J. Transp. Geogr. 24, 67–76 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Oberski, D.L.: Lavaan. survey: an R package for complex survey analysis of structural equation models. J. Stat. Softw. 57, 1–27 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Quételard, B.: Se rendre au travail ou faire ses courses motive toujours un déplacement quotidien sur deux. Le recours à la voiture se stabilise. In: La mobilité des Français, panorama issu de l’enquête nationale transports et déplacements 2008, pp. 25–47. Commissariat Général au Développement Durable, La Défense, France (2010)Google Scholar
  22. Richardson, T.: Immobility in urban travel surveys. In: 30th Australasian Transport Research Forum. Crawley, Australia (2007)Google Scholar
  23. Rosseel, Y.: Lavaan: an R package for structural equation modeling. J. Stat. Softw. 48, 1–36 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Schlich, R., Axhausen, K.W.: Habitual travel behaviour: evidence from a six-week travel diary. Transportation 30, 13–36 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Schwanen, T., Ettema, D., Timmermans, H.: If you pick up the children, I’ll do the groceries: spatial differences in between-partner interactions in out-of-home household activities. Environ. Plan. A 39, 2754–2773 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Susilo, Y.O., Axhausen, K.W.: Repetitions in individual daily activity–travel–location patterns: a study using the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index. Transportation 41, 995–1011 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tarigan, A., Kitamura, R.: Week-to-week leisure trip frequency and its variability. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2135, 43–51 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.THEMA, UMR 6049, CNRSUniversité Bourgogne Franche-ComtéDijonFrance
  2. 2.LVMT, UMR-T 9403École des Ponts, IFSTTAR, UPEM, UPEMarne-la-Vallée Cedex 2France

Personalised recommendations