Search

The increasing demand for foreign trade in inland areas has led to an increasingly prominent problem of competition between land ports-of-entry (POEs) and sea POEs, and it has also made the comparative study of land POEs and sea POEs cross-border logistics necessary. However, the data used in the existing literature are usually based on surveys or small samples, resulting in inaccurate research results, and most studies generally ignore the spatial heterogeneity of shippers who uses cross-border logistics service and individual preference differences. Taking the international trade between China, Myanmar and Vietnam as an example, and considering the geographical spatial characteristics of various factors, we analyze how geographical factors affect the cross-border logistics routes choice. By using the conditional logit model, the influence of geographical factors on the land POEs and sea POEs cross-border logistics routes choice is compared. The results show that there are significant differences in the characteristics and their influencing factors, which are reflected in the scale of freight, transportation distance, duration, transportation expense, infrastructure quality, geographical location and characteristics of the shippers and POEs. The distance equivalent tool is introduced to calculate the competition balance point of the sea/road POE. The impact mechanism of cross-border logistics choice of land POEs and sea POEs cross-border logistics is explored. Finally, according to the spatial differences of POEs, policy suggestions are proposed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents an analysis of the spatial characteristic of the modal accessibility gap (MAG) in Guangzhou based on travel times for public transport and cars to public centers calculated by the Travel O-D point Intelligent Query System (TIQS). Four spatial regression models are used to investigate the effect on the MAG of six factors of the built environment (distance to city public centers, residential density, landuse mix, bus stop density, metro station density and road network density). The results show that travel time for a given origin to destination (OD) trip is likely to be larger by public transport than by car, especially for a trip of longer travel time. The MAG values of all the communities are larger than 0, indicating that when compared with public transport, travelling by car takes less travel time for individuals. Residential density, land-use mix, bus stop density and metro rail station density have significant negative direct impacts and indirect impacts (spatial spillover effects) on MAG, which indicates that appropriate increase in community residential density, providing diversified service facilities within a community, and improving public transport supply are beneficial to promote modal shift. Specifically, the role of metro rail is greater than that of buses. However, the road network density has significant direct positive impacts on MAG, and its spillover effect is also significantly positive, which indicates that building more roads is not an effective way to narrow the accessibility gap between public transport and cars but may facilitate more car travel instead. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many cities have made massive investments on rail systems to substitute transit for driving. Some studies have considered the confounding effect of attitudes in the connections between rail transit and travel behavior. However, they often focused on the average effect of rail transit and assumed that individuals' responses to transit improvements do not vary by their tastes. Using the 2014 data from Xi'an in China, this study explores the interaction effect between metro transit (heavy rail) and the propensity (i.e., predicted probability) of living in neighborhoods with metro transit on transit use. The propensity is positively associated with commute by metro transit and bus. Further, individuals with a strong propensity use transit equivalently no matter whether they live near metro transit, but metro transit tends to promote transit commute for those with a weak propensity of living near metro transit. Overall, building a rail line helps enhance transit ridership. Planners should also consider the variation in responses by individuals with different tastes when using policies to shape urban travel. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]