Spatial associations in global household bicycle ownership

Abstract

The interest in bicycling and its determining factors is growing within the public health, transportation and geography communities. Ownership is one factor affecting bicycle usage, but work is still ongoing to not only quantify its effects but also to understand patterns in its growth and influence. In recent work, we mined and discovered patterns in global bicycle ownership that showed the existence of four characteristic country groups and their trends. Building on these results, we show in this paper that the ownership dataset can be modeled as a network. First, we observe mixing tendencies that indicate neighboring countries are more likely to be in the same ownership group and we map the likelihoods for cross-group mixings. Further, we define the strength of connections between countries by their proximity in ownership levels. We then determine the weighted degree assortative coefficient for the network and for each group relative to the network. We find that while the weighted degree assortativity of the ownership network is statistically insignificant, the highest and lowest ownership groups exhibit disassortative behavior with respect to the entire network. The second and third ranked groups, however, are strongly assortative. Our model serves as a step toward further work in studying the relationship between proximity and bicycle ownership among nations and unearthing possible patterns of influence. Considering further developments, this work can inform policy-relevant recommendations toward regional planning. This effort also contributes to expanding research in assortativity analyses, especially in weighted networks.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Notes

  1. 1.

    The data and supporting code are available at www.ce.jhu.edu/sauleh/obls-gbu.

  2. 2.

    The dynamic time warping algorithm was first introduced by Bellman and Kalaba (1959). Its application was subsequently furthered by Sakoe and Chiba (1978). See Giorgino (2009) for more on its execution in R.

  3. 3.

    The error term is given by \(\varepsilon _{k} = \sqrt{\left(1 + \frac{1}{B}\right)\frac{1}{B} \sum _{b}\left\rbrace \log (W_{k,b}^{*}) - \frac{1}{B}\sum _{b}\log (W^{*}_{k,b})\right\lbrace ^{2}}\), where b is the index number of the generated sample (Tibshirani et al. 2001).

  4. 4.

    For a complete discussion on the global and group trends, please refer to Oke et al. (2015). Also, trends in bicycle ownership for each country in the dataset set can be viewed in Appendix B (Ibid).

  5. 5.

    Subsequent summations over i or j are over the same ranges indicated in Eq. 3.2.

  6. 6.

    This threshold corresponds to the Z-score, for which \(3\sigma \) or \(2\sigma \) are commonly employed as the minimum value for significance. Here, we use the more stringent \(5\sigma \) threshold (Colquhoun 2014; Foster et al. 2010; Newman 2002).

  7. 7.

    Subsequent summations over b or c are on the same set D, except where otherwise noted.

References

  1. Anagnostopoulos, A., Kumar, R., & Mahdian, M. (2008). Influence and correlation in social networks. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining (KDD’08) (pp. 7–15). New York, NY, USA: ACM. doi:10.1145/1401890.1401897.

  2. Baerveldt, C., Bunt, G., & Vermande, M. M. (2014). Selection patterns, gender and friendship aim in classroom networks. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 17, 171–188. doi:10.1007/s11618-014-0546-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Barrat, A., Barthélemy, M., Pastor-Satorras, R., & Vespignani, A. (2004). The architecture of complex weighted networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101(11), 3747–3752. doi:10.1073/pnas.0400087101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bellman, R., & Kalaba, R. (1959). A mathematical theory of adaptive control processes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 4(2), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Capocci, A., Servedio, V. D., Colaiori, F., Buriol, L. S., Donato, D., Leonardi, S., et al. (2006). Preferential attachment in the growth of social networks: The internet encyclopedia Wikipedia. Physical Review E, 74(3), 036,116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Caprarelli, G., & Fletcher, S. (2014). A brief review of spatial analysis concepts and tools used for mapping, containment and risk modelling of infectious diseases and other illnesses. Parasitology, 141, 581–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Colquhoun, D. (2014). An investigation of the false discovery rate and the misinterpretation of p-values. Open Science, 1, 140216.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dales, J., & Jones, P. (2014). International cycling infrastructure best practice study. London: Report for transport for London, Urban Movement, Phil Jones Associates.

  9. Darmofal, D. (2015). Spatial analysis for the social sciences. Analytical methods for social research. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Dijkstra, A., Hak, E., & Janssen, F. (2013). A systematic review of the application of spatial analysis in pharmacoepidemiologic research. Annals of Epidemiology, 23(8), 504–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Fleiss, J. L., Cohen, J., & Everitt, B. S. (1969). Large sample standard errors of kappa and weighted kappa. Psychological Bulletin, 72(5), 323–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Foster, J. G., Foster, D. V., Grassberger, P., & Paczuski, M. (2010). Edge direction and the structure of networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(24), 10,815–10,820. doi:10.1073/pnas.0912671107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Giorgino, T. (2009). Computing and visualizing dynamic time warping alignments in R: The DTW package. Journal of Statistical Software, 31(7), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hens, N., Goeyvaerts, N., Aerts, M., Shkedy, Z., Van Damme, P., & Beutels, P. (2009). Mining social mixing patterns for infectious disease models based on a two-day population survey in Belgium. BMC Infectious Diseases, 9(1), 1–18. doi:10.1186/1471-2334-9-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Jacobsen, P. L. (2013). Safety in numbers: More walkers and bicyclists, safer walking and bicycling. Injury Prevention, 9(3), 205–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Jain, A. K., Murty, M. N., & Flynn, P. J. (1999). Data clustering: A review. ACM Computing Surveys, 31(3), 264–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Leung, C., & Chau, H. (2007). Weighted assortative and disassortative networks model. Physica A, 378(2), 591–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Li, H., Xu, S. H., & Kuo, W. (2014). Asymptotic analysis of simultaneous damages in spatial boolean models. Annals of Operations Research, 212(1), 139–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ma, H., Fang, C., Pang, B., & Li, G. (2014). The effect of geographical proximity on scientific cooperation among Chinese cities from 1990 to 2010. PLoS ONE, 9(11), e111705. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0111705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Mérigot, B., Durbec, J. P., & Gaertner, J. C. (2010). On goodness-of-fit measure for dendrogram-based analyses. Ecology, 91(6), 1850–1859.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Midgley, P. (2011). Bicycle-sharing schemes: Enhancing sustainable mobility in urban areas. Background Paper 8, Global Transport Knowledge Partnership, International Road Federation, New York.

  22. Milgram, S. (1967). The small-world problem. Psychology Today, 1(1), 61–67.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Newman, M. E. J. (2002). Assortative patterns in networks. Physical Review Letters, 89(20).

  24. Newman, M. E. J. (2003). Mixing patterns in networks. Physical Review E, 67(2).

  25. Newman, M. E. J. (2004). Detecting community structure in networks. The European Physical Journal B, 38, 321–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Noldus, R., & Van Mieghem, P. (2015). Assortativity in complex networks. Journal of Complex Networks, 3(4), 507–542. doi:10.1093/comnet/cnv005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Oke, O., Bhalla, K., Love, D. C., & Siddiqui, S. (2015). Tracking global bicycle ownership patterns. Journal of Transport & Health, 2(4), 490–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Páez, A., & Scott, D. M. (2005). Spatial statistics for urban analysis: A review of techniques with examples. GeoJournal, 61(1), 53–67. doi:10.1007/s10708-005-0877-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Piraveenan, M., Prokopenko, M., & Zomaya, A. Y. (2010). Classifying complex networks using unbiased local assortativity. In Proceedings of the Alife XII conference (pp. 329–336). Odense, Denmark.

  30. Piraveenan, M., Prokopenko, M., & Zomaya, A. (2012). Assortative mixing in directed biological networks. IEEE-ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, 9(1), 66–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Roseland, M. (2012). Toward sustainable communities: Solutions for citizens and their governments (4th ed.). Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Sakoe, H., & Chiba, S. (1978). Dynamic programming algorithm optimization for spoken word recognition. IEEE Transactions on ASSP, 26(1), 43–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Serrano, M. A., Boguná, M., Pastor-Satorras, R., & Vespignani, A. (2007). Large scale structure and dynamics of complex networks: From information technology to finance and natural sciences. World Scientific, chap Correlations in complex networks (pp. 35–66).

  34. Small, H. (1973). Co-citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24(4), 265–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Steglich, C., Snijders, T. A. B., & Pearson, M. (2010). Dynamic networks and behavior: Separating selection from influence. Sociological Methodology, 40(1), 329–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Szmyt, J. (2014). Spatial statistics in ecological analysis: From indices to functions. Silva Fennica. doi:10.14214/sf.1008.

  37. Teichmann, S. A., & Babu, M. M. (2004). Gene regulatory network growth by duplication. Nature Genetics, 36(5), 492–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Tibshirani, R., Walther, G., & Hastie, T. (2001). Estimating the number of clusters in a data set via the gap statistic. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B, 63(2), 411–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Tsui, K. L., Chen, V. C. P., Jiang, W., & Aslandogan, Y. A. (2006). Springer handbook of engineering statistics, Book chapter data mining methods and applications (pp. 651–669). London: Springer.

  40. Vandenbulcke-Plasschaert, G. (2011). Spatial analysis of bicycle use and accident risks for cyclists. Thèses de l’Université catholique de Louvain, Presses universitaires de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.

  41. Vieira, I. T., Cheng, R. C. H., Harper, P. R., & de Senna, V. (2010). Small world network models of the dynamics of HIV infection. Annals of Operations Research, 178(1), 173–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Visualign. (2013). Number of neighbors for world countries. http://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1agWAs620UntEQGY0yXUo5_C6zZesLEjBj1TVd3tTEDc/edit#gid=0. Accessed at http://visualign.wordpress.com/2011/10/06/number-of-neighbors-for-world-countries/.

  43. Wall, R. S., Burger, M. J., & van der Knaap, G. A. B. (2011). The geography of global corporate networks: The poor, the rich, and the happy few countries. Environment and Planning A, 43, 904–927.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Zhukov, Y. M., & Stewart, B. M. (2013). Choosing your neighbors: Networks of diffusion in international relations. International Studies Quarterly, 57, 271–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the participants of the 2014 INFORMS Workshop on Data Mining and Analytics participants for their valuable comments in the earlier stages of our work. The Gordon Croft Fellowship awarded by the Energy, Environment, Sustainability and Health Institute \((\hbox {E}^{2}\hbox {SHI})\) at The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, funded this research in part. This quality of this paper was greatly improved as a result of the work of the two anonymous reviewers to whom the authors are grateful.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Olufolajimi Oke.

Appendix: Country parameters

Appendix: Country parameters

Table 6 lists the degree parameters for each country. The code (written in Python) and supporting data for this work are available at http://modl.jhu.edu/resources/spatial-bicycle-ownership/.

Table 6 Degree, weighted degree, average neighbor weighted degree and group membership of the countries in the dataset

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Oke, O., Bhalla, K., Love, D.C. et al. Spatial associations in global household bicycle ownership. Ann Oper Res 263, 529–549 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-016-2358-2

Download citation

Keywords

  • Bicycle ownership
  • Spatial associations
  • Networks
  • Assortativity