Operationalizing the concept of neighborhood: Application to residential location choice analysis
Introduction
In the literature relating to urban planning and travel behavior modeling, ‘neighborhood’ is a widely used and important term. Studies of the housing market investigate what kind of people live in what kind of neighborhoods (Hunt et al., 1994). Research work on the land-use/transportation interaction frequently use neighborhood as a synonym for built environment or land-use. In particular, advocates and skeptics of the ‘New Urbanism’ concept talk about whether neighborhood design and other characteristics can affect various aspects of travel behavior (Ewing and Cervero, 2001).
Obviously, any study about neighborhoods is a spatial investigation. Yet, the spatial definition of neighborhood has received very little attention in the literature. Theoretical studies of neighborhood effects often use the term neighborhood rather loosely. For instance, New Urbanism designs tend to focus on the microscale of 400 m (one-quarter mile) or less. Yet it is not clear on an a priori basis whether residential and travel choice behavior is influenced by the urban form within small neighborhoods, or over larger areas, or both. On the other hand, empirical studies of neighborhood effects across many disciplines typically use census tracts, zip code areas, or transport analysis zones (TAZ) as operational surrogates for neighborhoods (Sampson et al., 2002, Dietz, 2002). This use of administrative boundaries as operational units typically has little theoretical foundation and subjects the analysis to the modifiable areal unit problem (MAUP) (Openshaw, 1984), leading to potentially inaccurate analytic outcomes and erroneous recommendations for urban policy (see, for example, Fotheringham and Wong, 1991, Guo and Bhat, 2004, for more detailed discussions of the MAUP).
So how do we define neighborhoods? Or, how do we measure neighborhood characteristics and the associated effects? Our simple answer is that we should measure what matters to people over the area that really matters to people. For example, in the study of residential location choice, a common hypothesis is that good access to stores is an attractive neighborhood feature. When examining such a hypothesis, if we define a neighborhood over too large an area, any spatially concentrated commercial activities would likely be averaged out with surrounding low-density patterns. Consequently, it would be difficult to associate the commercial intensity with the choice behavior being studied. Alternatively, if we arbitrarily define a neighborhood to exclude a commercial center that is in fact easily accessible for a given household, it would again be difficult to account for the presence of the commercial center in explaining the residential location choice of that household. Therefore, only when the chosen definition reflects the decision makers’ perceived neighborhoods can we accurately study the effect of neighborhoods.
The objective of this paper is to clarify what we, as decision makers and as analysts, mean by neighborhood and to develop ways of operationalizing the concept of neighborhood. With residential location choice as the application context, we expand on an earlier work (Guo and Bhat, 2004) that proposed a hierarchical spatial representation of neighborhoods to examine neighborhood effects. Our previous study showed the superiority of the hierarchical, multi-scale, approach over the conventional, single-scale, approach to accommodate the effect of built form, land-use, and other neighborhood attributes. However, the challenge remains regarding how to exploit the flexibility of using analyst-defined spatial units to appropriately identify the impacts of neighborhood factors. In this paper, we specifically examine three alternative sets of operational units for neighborhood definition and embed these spatial representations to study the effects of neighborhood factors on households’ residential location choices. Our results demonstrate the feasibility of using these operational units of neighborhood, the sensitivity of modeling outcomes to the choice of spatial units, and the strengths and limitations of the alternative units.
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. The next section discusses the concept of neighborhood, as used in earlier studies. Section 3 provides a background for residential location choice analysis and discusses the methodological shortcomings in the conventional approach with regard to the definition of neighborhood. Section 4 briefly reviews the hierarchical approach proposed in Guo and Bhat (2004) for representing neighborhoods in residential location choice analysis. Section 5 discusses three different ways to operationalize the concept of hierarchical neighborhoods. An empirical application of the three ways of representing neighborhoods is described in Section 6. Finally, Section 7 concludes with a summary of the contribution of the study.
Section snippets
Concept of neighborhood
Indeed, ‘neighborhood’ is a vague, difficult-to-define, concept. Scholars investigating the significance of neighborhood for individuals’ behavior and well-being often do not provide the term with an explicit definition. When spatial definition of neighborhood is required for“Urban social scientists have treated ‘neighborhood’ in much the same way as courts of law have treated pornography: a term that is hard to define precisely, but everyone knows it when they see it”. (Galster, 2001, p. 2111)
Residential location choice
The home is where people typically spend most of their time, a common venue for social contact and, for most people, a major financial and personal investment. One’s choice of residence also reflects one’s choice of the surrounding neighborhood, which has a significant impact on one’s well-being and quality of life. The concept of neighborhood and its definition are, therefore, central to residential location choice analysis.
Residential location choice has long been a multi-disciplinary
The multi-scale logit model
The use of the GAC model to approximate the ideal disaggregate models (where every distinguishable dwelling is treated as a distinct choice entity) was a result of the lack of detailed data for modeling purposes (Lerman, 1976). The same data constraint has also in part contributed to the use of administrative boundaries as proxy spatial separations for neighborhood definitions. However, the growing availability of rich, microlevel spatial data and the proliferation of geographical information
Neighborhood representations
As discussed earlier, the MSL model structure promotes the use of a hierarchy of spatial units to capture the effects of neighborhood variables. In this section, we consider three alternative ways of operationalizing some of the ideas discussed in Section 2 to produce spatial units that can be used in a MSL model to represent residential neighborhoods. Below, we describe each of these three ways and also discuss their respective merits and drawbacks.
Empirical application
The three alternative ways described in Section 5 for representing neighborhoods have been implemented and empirically applied to the context of residential location choice modeling. The empirical application involves estimating three MSL models, each based on one of the three neighborhood representations. The objectives here are twofold: (1) to examine if, and how, the three configurations suggest different neighborhood effects on residential location choice behavior; and (2) compare the
Summary and conclusions
The ‘neighborhood’ is a key concept in urban study. Its attributes can be observed and accurately measured only after a location has been specified and a space of relevance been demarcated. In this study, we investigate the spatial definition problem of neighborhood in the context of residential location choice analysis. From past research efforts aimed at conceptualizing the nature of neighborhood, we learn that neighborhood is intrinsically hierarchical and is continuously shaped by the
Acknowledgement
We would like to thank Professor Harvey Miller for his suggestion on defining neighborhoods based on network distance and an anonymous individual for constructive comments on an earlier version of the paper.
References (43)
- et al.
A mixed multinomial logit model analysis of weekend recreational episode type choice
Transportation Research Part B
(2004) The effectiveness of McFadden’s nested logit model in valuing amenity improvement
Regional Science and Urban Economics
(2000)- et al.
Racial differences in homeownership: the effect of residential location
Regional Science and Urban Economics
(2003) The estimation of neighborhood effects in the social sciences: an interdisciplinary approach
Social Science Research
(2002)Spatial autocorrelation and neighborhood quality
Regional Science and Urban Economics
(1992)- et al.
Community choice and local public services: a discrete choice approach
Regional Science and Urban Economics
(1998) Consumer choice of dwelling, neighborhood and public services
Regional Science and Urban Economics
(1985)Housing demand and community choice: an empirical analysis
Journal of Urban Economics
(1997)- et al.
Representing the differences between female and male commute behavior in residential location choice models
Journal of Transport Geography
(2001) - et al.
Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand
(1985)
Can land-use policy really affect travel behavior? A study of the link between non-work travel and land-use characteristics
Urban Studies
PSOC in community context: multilevel correlates of a measure of psychological sense of community in low income, urban neighborhoods
Journal of Community Psychology
Mapping residents’ perceptions of neighborhood boundaries: a methodological note
American Journal of Community Psychology
A multilevel contextual model of neighborhood collective efficacy
American Journal of Community Psychology
Travel and the built environment – synthesis
Transportation Research Record
The modifiable areal unit problem in multivariate statistical analysis
Environment and Planning A
Household location and race: estimates of a multinomial logit model
The Review of Economics and Statistics
On the nature of neighborhood
Urban Studies
Multilevel Statistical Models
The importance of trivial streets: residential streets and residential segregation
American Journal of Sociology
Cited by (150)
Designing climate resilient energy systems in complex urban areas considering urban morphology: A technical review
2023, Advances in Applied EnergyDifferential impacts of autonomous and connected-autonomous vehicles on household residential location
2023, Travel Behaviour and SocietyFrom an agent-based laboratory to the real world: Effects of “neighborhood” size on urban sprawl
2023, Computers, Environment and Urban SystemsRelaxation–discretization algorithm for spatially constrained secondary location assignment
2023, Transportmetrica A: Transport Science