Changing Effects of Job Accessibility on Employment and Commute: A Case Study of Los Angeles

Literature Cited

• Alonso, W. 1964. Location and land use: Toward a general theory of land rent. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Anas, A., R. Arnott, and K.A. Small. 1998. Urban spatial structure. Journal of Economic Literature 36:1426–64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anselin, L. 2005. Exploring spatial data with GeoDaTM: A workbook. Urbana, IL: Spatial Analysis Laboratory and Santa Barbara, CA: Center for Spatially Integrated Social Science.
   Google Scholar
• Aponte, R. 1996. Urban employment and the mismatch dilemma: Accounting for the immigration exception. Social Problems 43:268–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Åslund, O., J. Östh, and Y. Zenou. 2010. How important is access to jobs? Old question—Improved answer. Journal of Economic Geography 10:389–422.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bania, N., L. Leete, and C. Coulton. 2008. Job access, employment and earnings: Outcomes for welfare leavers in a US urban labour market. Urban Studies 45:2179–202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berechman, J., and R. Paaswell. 2001. Accessibility improvements and local employment: An empirical analysis. Journal of Transportation and Statistics 4:49–66.
   Google Scholar
• Boschmann, E.E., and M.-P. Kwan. 2010. Metropolitan area job accessibility and the working poor: Exploring local spatial variations of geographic context. Urban Geography 31:498–522.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cervero, R., T. Rood, and B. Appleyard. 1995. Job accessibility as a performance indicator: An analysis of trends and their social policy implications in the San Francisco Bay Area. Berkeley, CA: The University of California Transportation Center.
   Google Scholar
• Cervero, R., O. Sandoval, and J. Landis. 2002. Transportation as a stimulus of welfare-to-work: Private versus public mobility. Journal of Planning Education and Research 22:50–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charron, M. 2007. From excess commuting to commuting possibilities: More extension to the concept of excess commuting. Environment and Planning A 39:1238–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, W.A. V., and M. Kuijpers-Linde. 1994. Commuting in restructuring urban regions. Urban Studies 31:465–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellwood, D.T. 1986. The spatial mismatch hypothesis: Are there teenage jobs missing in the ghetto? In The Black youth employment crisis, ed. R.B. Freeman and H.J. Holzer, 147–90. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Esri. 2011. ArcGIS Desktop: Release 10. Redlands, CA: Esri.
   Google Scholar
• Fotheringham, A.S., and D.W. Wong. 1991. The modifiable areal unit problem in multivariate statistical analysis. Environment and Planning A 23:1025–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gao, S., P.L. Mokhtarian, and R.A. Johnston. 2008. Exploring the connections among job accessibility, employment, income, and auto ownership using structural equation modeling. The Annals of Regional Science 42:341–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giuliano, G. 1995. The weakening transportation–land use connection. Access 6:3–11.
   Google Scholar
• Giuliano, G., C. Redfearn, A. Agarwal, C. Li, and D. Zhuang. 2007. Employment concentrations in Los Angeles, 1980–2000. Environment and Planning A 39:2935–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giuliano, G., and K.A. Small. 1993. Is the journey to work explained by urban structure? Urban Studies 30:1485–500.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ———. 1999. The determinants of growth of employment subcenters. Journal of Transport Geography 7:189–201.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, P., A. Kumar, and H.W. Richardson. 1989. The influence of metropolitan spatial structure on commuting time. Journal of Urban Economics 26:138–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham, S., and S. Marvin. 1996. Telecommunications and the city: Electronic spaces, urban places. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Grengs, J., J. Levine, Q. Shen, and Q. Shen. 2010. Intermetropolitan comparison of transportation accessibility: Sorting out mobility and proximity in San Francisco and Washington, DC. Journal of Planning Education and Research 29:427–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grogger, J. 2003. The effects of time limits, the EITC, and other policy changes on welfare use, work, and income among female-headed families. Review of Economics and Statistics 85:394–408.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Handy, S.L. 2002. Accessibility- vs. mobility-enhancing strategies for addressing automobile dependence in the US. In European Conference of Ministers of Transport . Paris: European Conference of Ministers of Transport.
   Google Scholar
• Hansen, W.G. 1959. How accessibility shapes land use. Journal of the American Planning Association 25:73–76.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanson, S., and M. Schwab. 1987. Accessibility and intraurban travel. Environment and Planning A 19:735–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helling, A., and P.L. Mokhtarian. 2001. Worker telecommunication and mobility in transition: Consequences for planning. Journal of Planning Literature 15:511–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holloway, S.R. 1996. Job accessibility and male teenage employment, 1980–1990: The declining significance of space? The Professional Geographer 48:445–58.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horner, M.W. 2002. Extensions to the concept of excess commuting. Environment and Planning A 34:543–66.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ———. 2004. Spatial dimensions of urban commuting: A review of major issues and their implications for future geographic research. The Professional Geographer 56:160–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ———. 2007. A multi-scale analysis of urban form and commuting change in a small metropolitan area (1990–2000). The Annals of Regional Science 41:315–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horner, M.W., and A.T. Murray. 2002. Excess commuting and the modifiable areal unit problem. Urban Studies 39:131–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horner, M.W., and D. Schleith. 2012. Analyzing temporal changes in land-use–transportation relationships: A LEHD-based approach. Applied Geography 35:491–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ihlanfeldt, K.R., and D.L. Sjoquist. 1990. Job accessibility and racial differences in youth employment rates. American Economic Review 80:267–76.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Immergluck, D. 1998. Neighborhood jobs, race, and skills: Urban unemployment and commuting. New York: Garland.
   Google Scholar
• Janelle, D.G. 2004. Impact of information technologies. In The geography of urban transportation, ed. S. Hanson and G. Giuliano, 86–112. New York: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Jencks, C., and S. Mayer. 1990. The social consequences of growing up in a poor neighborhood. In Inner-city poverty in the United States, ed. National Research Council, 111–86. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kain, J.F. 1968. Housing segregation, Negro employment, and metropolitan decentralization. Quarterly Journal of Economics 82:175–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kawabata, M. 2003. Job access and employment among low-skilled autoless workers in US metropolitan areas. Environment and Planning A 35:1651–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kawabata, M., and Q. Shen. 2007. Commuting inequality between cars and public transit: The case of the San Francisco Bay Area, 1990–2000. Urban Studies 44:1759–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwan, M.P. 1998. Space-time and integral measures of individual accessibility: A comparative analysis using a point-based framework. Geographical Analysis 30:191–216.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwan, M.P., A.T. Murray, M.E. O’Kelly, and M. Tiefelsdorf. 2003. Recent advances in accessibility research: Representation, methodology and applications. Journal of Geographical Systems 5:129–38.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, B., P. Gordon, H.W. Richardson, and J.E. Moore. 2009. Commuting trends in US cities in the 1990s. Journal of Planning Education and Research 29:78–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leon, C.B. 1981. Employment-population ratio: Its value in labor force analysis. The Monthly Labor Review 104:36–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levinson, D.M. 1998. Accessibility and the journey to work. Journal of Transport Geography 6:11–21.
   Google Scholar
• Light, I. 2008. Deflecting immigration: Networks, markets, and regulation in Los Angeles. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, W.A., and N.A. McGuckin. 1998. Travel estimation techniques for urban planning. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
   Google Scholar
• Massey, D.S. 2001. Residential segregation and neighborhood conditions in US metropolitan areas. In America becoming: Racial trends and their consequences, ed. N.J. Smelser, W.J. Wilson, and F. Mitchell, 391–434. Washington, DC: National Academies Press
   Google Scholar
• Miller, H.J. 1991. Modelling accessibility using space-time prism concepts within geographical information systems. International Journal of Geographical Information System 5:287–301.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mills, E.S. 1970. Urban density functions. Urban Studies 7:5–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mokhtarian, P.L., G.O. Collantes, and C. Gertz. 2004. Telecommuting, residential location, and commute-distance traveled: Evidence from State of California employees. Environment and Planning A 36:1877–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muth, R.F. 1969. Cities and housing: The spatial pattern of urban residential land use. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ong, P.M., and E. Blumenberg. 1998. Job access, commute and travel burden among welfare recipients. Urban Studies 35:77–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osland, L. 2010. Spatial variation in job accessibility and gender: An intraregional analysis using hedonic house-price estimation. Environment and Planning A 42:2220–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Páez, A., and D.M. Scott. 2005. Spatial statistics for urban analysis: A review of techniques with examples. GeoJournal 61:53–67.
   Google Scholar
• Páez, A., D.M. Scott, and C. Morency. 2012. Measuring accessibility: Positive and normative implementations of various accessibility indicators. Journal of Transport Geography 25:141–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peng, Z.R. 1997. The jobs-housing balance and urban commuting. Urban Studies 34:1215–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwanen, T., and T. de Jong. 2008. Exploring the juggling of responsibilities with space-time accessibility analysis. Urban Geography 29:556–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz, A. 1976. Migration, age, and education. The Journal of Political Economy 84:701–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, D., and M. Horner. 2008. Examining the role of urban form in shaping people's accessibility to opportunities: An exploratory spatial data analysis. Journal of Transport and Land Use 1 (2): 89–119.
   Google Scholar
• Shen, Q. 1998. Location characteristics of inner-city neighborhood and employment accessibility of low-wage workers. Environment and Planning B 25:345–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ———. 2000. Spatial and social dimensions of commuting. Journal of the American Planning Association 66:68–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stoll, M.A. 1999a. Spatial job search, spatial mismatch, and the employment and wages of racial and ethnic groups in Los Angeles. Journal of Urban Economics 46:129–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ———. 1999b. Spatial mismatch, discrimination, and male youth employment in the Washington, DC area: Implications for residential mobility policies. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 18:77–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sultana, S., and J. Weber. 2007. Journey-to-work patterns in the age of sprawl: Evidence from two midsize Southern metropolitan areas. The Professional Geographer 59:193–208.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, B.D., and P.M. Ong. 1995. Spatial mismatch or automobile mismatch? An examination of race, residence and commuting in US metropolitan areas. Urban Studies 32:1453–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas, R.W., and R.J. Huggett. 1980. Modelling in geography: A mathematical approach. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Tienda, M., and J. Glass. 1985. Household structure and labor force participation of black, Hispanic, and white mothers. Demography 22:381–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Energy. 2012. Historical gasoline prices, 1929–2011. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/facts/2012_fotw741.html (last accessed 12 April 2013).
   Google Scholar
• Wachs, M., and T.G. Kumagai. 1973. Physical accessibility as a social indicator. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 7:437–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, F. 2000. Modeling commuting patterns in Chicago in a GIS environment: A job accessibility perspective. The Professional Geographer 52:120–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ———. 2001. Explaining intraurban variations of commuting by job proximity and workers’ characteristics. Environment and Planning B 28:169–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wasmer, E., and Y. Zenou. 2002. Does city structure affect job search and welfare? Journal of Urban Economics 51:515–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weber, J. 2003. Individual accessibility and distance from major employment centers: An examination using space-time measures. Journal of Geographical Systems 5:51–70.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, W.J. 1980. The declining significance of race: Blacks and changing American institutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, J. 2008. Policy implications of excess commuting: Examining the impacts of changes in US metropolitan spatial structure. Urban Studies 45:391–405.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar