1 s2.0 S2352146517305604 Main

Available online at www.sciencedirect.
com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Transportation
Available Research
online Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000
at www.sciencedirect.com
Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
Transportation Research Procedia 25 (2017) 3459–3478
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
World Conference on Transport Research - WCTR 2016 Shanghai. 10-15 July 2016
World Conference on Transport Research - WCTR 2016 Shanghai. 10-15 July 2016
Research on individual carbon dioxide emissions of commuting in
Research on individual carbon dioxide emissions of commuting in
peri-urban area of metropolitan cities
peri-urban area of metropolitan cities
—an empirical study in Shanghai
—an empirical study in Shanghai
Peng Weia,a, *, Haixiao Panbb
a
Peng Wei *, Haixiao Pan
Wuhan Land Use and Urban Spatial Planning Research Center,No.55 Sanyang Road,Wuhan 430014,China
b a
WuhanofLand
College Use and and
Architecture Urban Spatial
Urban Planning
Planning Research
,Tongji Center,No.55 Sanyang
University,No.1239 Road,Wuhan
Siping Road, Shanghai430014,China
200092, China
b
College of Architecture and Urban Planning ,Tongji University,No.1239 Siping Road, Shanghai 200092, China
Abstract
Abstract
Based on an empirical study in Shanghai, this paper firstly analyses distribution of commuting co2 emissions among the
Based on anand
populations, empirical study
finds that in Shanghai,
almost this paper
80% of emissions arefirstly
from topanalyses distribution of
20% respondents. To commuting co2 emissions
find which factors among
make those the
people
populations, and finds that almost
producing a disproportionately large80% of of
share emissions arethis
emissions, from top 20%
paper respondents.
further analyses theTolink
findbetween
which factors make
individual those people
socio-economic
producing a disproportionately
characteristics, large urban
transit accessibility, share of emissions,
built this paper
environment further analyses
and commuting the linkThe
emissions. between
resultsindividual
show thatsocio-economic
among socio-
characteristics, transit accessibility,
economic characteristics, male gender,urban builtand
income environment and are
car ownership commuting emissions.
strongly related withThe results Rail
emissions. showaccessibility
that amongdoesn’t
socio-
economic characteristics,
have a significant male
impact on gender, while
emissions, income theand car ownership
influence of urbanare strongly
density related
is weak butwith emissions. Rail accessibility doesn’t
significant.
have a significant impact on emissions, while the influence of urban density is weak but significant.
© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
© 2017 The Authors.
Peer-review Published by
under responsibility
responsibility of Elsevier
WORLDB.V. CONFERENCE ON ON TRANSPORT
TRANSPORT RESEARCH
RESEARCH SOCIETY.
SOCIETY.
Peer-review under of WORLD CONFERENCE
Peer-review under responsibility of WORLD CONFERENCE ON TRANSPORT RESEARCH SOCIETY.
Keywords: commuting co2 emissions; peri-urban area; Shanghai
Keywords: commuting co2 emissions; peri-urban area; Shanghai
1. Research background and aims

1. Research background and aims
There is a growing concern about carbon dioxide (co2) emissions of urban transport in the worldwide. According
to aThere
recentis research
a growing
in concern
2008 of about
CICEROcarbon dioxide
(Centre for (co 2) emissions
International of urban
Climate andtransport in the worldwide.
Environmental According
Research—Oslo), co2
to a recent had
emissions research in 2008
increased by of CICERO
13% (Centre
in the past ten for International
years, Climate
and the figure forand Environmental
transport Research—Oslo),
was as high co2
as 25%. In 2000,
emissions had increased by 13% in the past ten years, and the figure for transport was as high as 25%. In 2000,
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +86-27-18571500475; fax: +86-27-82788745.

* E-mail address:author.
Corresponding Tel.: +86-27-18571500475; fax: +86-27-82788745.
weipeng@wlsp.org.cn
E-mail address: weipeng@wlsp.org.cn
2214-241X© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
2214-241X© 2017 responsibility
Peer-review under The Authors. ofPublished
WORLD byCONFERENCE
Elsevier B.V. ON TRANSPORT RESEARCH SOCIETY.
2352-1465 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

10.1016/j.trpro.2017.05.253
3460 Peng Wei et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25 (2017) 3459–3478
2 Peng Wei, Haixiao Pan/ Transportation Research Procedia00 (2017) 000–000
emissions from transport accounted for 13.5% of the global total, while in 2009, the share rose up to 23%. In China,
from 2002 to 2007, the domestic transport emissions steadily increased at the rate of more than 10% each year.
Moreover, with the further development of urbanization in China, household car ownership as expected will
continually be growing in the future. As a result, co2 emissions from transport will increase correspondingly. The
current and future growth of transport emissions has posed a great challenge for policy making targeting at emissions
reduction.
There has been much research on the factors influencing transport co2 emissions, and the majority of which focus
on the scale of region/city, for instance, the link between total populations, GDP, motorized vehicle ownerships and
emissions (Xu Yanan et al.,2011; Zhang Taoxin,2012; Shen Manhong et al.,2012). On the other hand, the number
relatively little but beginning increasing is research on the scale of individual/household (Christian Brand et al.,2009;
Petter Naess,2010;Xiao Zuopeng et al.,2011), for example, the associations between individual demographic, socio-
economic, environment characteristics with travel emissions from different purposes, like commuting, business,
shopping, leisure, etc.
Among the studies of individual/household travel emissions, there is much research evidence confirming the
significance of the strong link between co2 emissions and individual socio-economic features, such as male gender,
car ownership, working status and income levels (Jean-Pierre Nicolas et al., 2009;Christian Brand et al. 2009;Becky
P.Y,Loo et al.,2012;Xu Xibao,2014).Research by Christian et al. (2009) in the UK showed that a small proportion
individuals were responsible for a disproportionately large share of travel emissions, i.e. 60% emissions were produced
by 20% of the population. This result reflects the necessity of profiling high emission producers and making policies
aimed at those people in order to be more effective.
Although many governments claim to build a green and low-carbon transit system when carrying out transit priority
policies, little robust research evidence exists on the emissions reduction of transit. In other words, whether transit can
benefit the reduction of urban transport emissions is not identified. Zhou Xuemei et al. (2007) predicted residential
modal split after the city of Cixi (Zhejiang province, China) improving transit service, and the result showed that the
improvement could raise the transit share of travel mode by 23%, but out of which, 16% were switched from previously
bicycle riders. The total travel emissions thus did not get reduced. Similarly, another research by Pascal Poudenx in
2011, based on European case study, also confirmed this point that travel emissions are not necessarily decreased with
the promotion of transit system.
In the terms of association between urban built environment and travel emissions, related research doesn’t reach a
consensus. The majority suggests that density has a negative influence on transport emissions, while others consider
the influence is so small that can be ignored. An empirical research in Melbourne by Sharpe found that transport
emissions could only be reduced by 11% when increasing the density by 3 times. Brownstone compared travel
behavior of two household with similar socio-economic characteristic but in different density areas, and the result
showed that vehicle mileage and gasoline consumption in low-density household was just 4.8% and 5.5% respectively
more than the other in high-density area.
Travel emissions according to travel purposes can be divided to several types, such as commuting emissions,
shopping travel emissions, leisure travel emissions, etc. Among these, because commuting occurring steadily and at a
high frequency (at least two times each day for every commuter), commuting emissions make up an important part of
travel emissions. However, research on factors influencing commuting emissions is still relatively not sufficient.
The purpose of this paper is to analyse the relationship between individual socio-economic characteristics, transit
accessibility, urban built environment and commuting emissions, in order to find which factors significantly influence
the emissions. On the other hand, this paper focuses on peri-urban areas of metropolitan cities, because these areas in
China are experiencing the most rapid development of motorization. This result in research on commuting co2
emissions in above areas is highly necessary.
The main research questions are:
• What is the distribution of emissions? How large is the emissions gap between the highest and the lowest?
• What socio-economic characteristics make individuals producing more co2?
• Does the promotion of transit accessibility can reduce commuting emissions?
• Is there a significant association between commuting emissions and urban built environment?
Peng Wei et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25 (2017) 3459–3478 3461
Peng Wei, Haixiao Pan/ Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 3
2. Approach
2.1. Overall approach
To research the link between commuting emissions and individual socio-economic characteristics, transit
accessibility as well as built environment, the paper carried out an empirical case study involving random samples of
the population of Jinqiao and Xinzhuang, both located in peri-urban areas of Shanghai. The data collection and
analysis could be divided into three stages.
Fig.1. the location of Jinqiao and Xinzhuang in Shanghai.
First, two household surveys, one in Jinqiao and the other in Xinzhuang, were undertaken to collect individual
socio-economic characteristics and travel behaviors on weekday at the disaggregate level. Secondly, emission factors
for each travel mode were calculated, and then GIS tools were used to calculate each travel distance based on mode
during one commuting travel. By multiplying emissions factors with travel distance of each travel mode separately,
emissions were acquired. Then the result of summarizing all emissions of different modes was commuting emissions
of one trip. For example, if an individual went to work by three modes, first by foot, then by bus and finally by rail,
therefore, his commuting emissions was the result of summarizing foot emissions factors multiplied by foot travel
distance, bus factors multiplied by bus distance and rail factors multiplied by rail distance.
Thirdly, the commuting emissions were analysed at the individual levels and aggregated to higher levels, like
subgroups described by individual socio-economic characteristics, transit accessibility and built environment.
Multivariate regression analysis was further developed to find out which factors could significantly influence
commuting emissions.
2.2. The survey sample
This paper chooses Shanghai as the study area, firstly because it’s a typical metropolitan city in China. Secondly,
it has a high level of social and economic development. Furthermore, there is a multi-mode transit system including
rail and bus, which is necessary to analyse influence of different public transport mode on commuting emissions.
As the paper focus on peri-urban area of metropolitan cities, two areas—Jinqiao and Xinzhuang, which can
represent two types of peri-urban areas—are selected. Jinqiao is where National Economic and Technological
Development Zone locates and thus has been promoted by the development of industries. On the other hand,
Xinzhuang is a representative outlying living area in Shanghai, which has been built for people unable to afford house
in downtown.
All the research data were collected in two travel questionnaire surveys undertaken in Jinqiao, in April 2011and
Xinzhuang, in December 2010 respectively. In order to guarantee all the questionnaires written completely and
effectively, both surveys were implemented by professional data collection companies. The survey in Jinqiao, covered
600 households locating at 12 communities, while in Xinzhuang, figures were 300households and 12 communities.
Moreover, the number of interviewed households was distributed according to total population of each community in
Jinqiao and Xinzhuang separately. All the households were randomly selected in each community. With regard to
selecting communities, both the surveys considered their location, transit accessibility and built environment
characteristics.
Each member aged above 6 years was asked to finish the questionnaire, which included two parts: first were
personal and household socio-economic characteristics, such as gender, occupation, annual income, household size,
housing tenure; second part was about travel behavior. Every respondent had to record his/her weekday’s travel time,
mode and purpose of all trips. In this paper, only data about commuters and their commuting travel behaviors were
selected and analysed.
Among the 600 households in Jinqiao, 992 individuals were commuters and 983 questionnaires were valid, and in
Xinzhuang, 419 respondents of 300 households were in work and 410 questionnaires were valid.
2.3. Calculation of co2 emissions
There are two main methods to calculate transport co2 emissions in the worldwide. One is multiplying individual
travel distance with co2 emissions factors of travel mode, while the other is based on energy consumption during
travelling and then multiplied by co2 emissions factors of that energy. The former method is relatively simple, distinct
and widely used. Furthermore, the key point is the calculation of co2 emissions factors of every travel mode. Although
much research (Fabio Grazi et al., 2008; Christian Brand et al., 2013; Becky P.Y.Loo et al., 2012) has already
calculated those factors, it’s not appropriate to directly adopt other city’s emissions factors calculated by other research.
Firstly, because the emissions factors are strongly associated with vehicle types, passenger loadings, engine size
and etc. (D.Stead, 1999), all of which are obviously different in different cities. Secondly, vehicle passenger loadings
of public transport are much more at peak hours than at peak-off hours in Chinese cities, which then making emissions
factors of commuting significantly different from travel at other times.
Therefore, it’s necessary to calculate the factors in this paper, when local co2 emissions factors of Shanghai could
not be acquired in public research.
Although the energy consumption method mentioned above is relatively complicated, it’s appropriate and accurate
to calculate emissions factors of each travel mode in Shanghai by adopting local data.
The detailed calculation process is as follows:
Mi=Di×Ei (1)
Ei= Ci×ρi×qi×ei/Pi (2)
Mi is individual commuting co2 emissions
Di is individual commuting distance
Ei is co2 emissions factor of travel mode
Ci is energy consumption per km (L/Km) of travel mode
ρi is energy density (Kg/L)
qi is energy calorific value
ei is co2 emissions factor of the energy consumed by individual travel mode
Pi is passenger loadings of travel mode
All the local data adopted in this research in the formulas (1) and (2) is listed in Appendix. A.
From above formulas, we can see that lowering emissions factors of travel mode and shortening travel distance can
obviously reduce emissions. To lowering emissions factors, we should encourage new technologies to increase energy
consuming efficiency and produce cleaner energies. Furthermore, car sharing is especially effective to obviously
reduce emissions since it can increase passenger loadings.
On the other hand, shortening commuting distance is a highly efficient way for emissions reduction. Therefore,
planning of mixed land use should be promoted.
The commuting co2 emissions factors of Shanghai calculated are displayed in table 1.
Table 1. Commuting co2 emissions factors of Shanghai compared with other research.
Travel mode co2 emissions factors (g/person*Km) Divided by emissions
factor of car
Lowest Highest Calculated
in other research in other research in this paper

Car 37 178.6 163.2 1
Bus 15 104 21.3 0.13
rail 4.7 9.1 7.3 0.04
Taxi 104 388 222.6 1.36
Motorcycle 54 113.6 66.8 0.41
E-bike — — 15.3 0.09
Company bus — — 38.0 0.23
Shopping mall bus — — 26.6 0.16
Non-motorized transport
0 0 0 0
(foot and bicycle)
Data source: Becky P. Y. Loo et al. 2012; Fabio Grazi et al. 2008; Su Chengyuan et al, 2012.
3. Commuting co2 emissions of individuals with different socio-economic characteristics, transit accessibility
and built environment
3.1. Distribution of co2 emissions among the populations in Jinqiao and Xinzhuang.
• Individual average co2 emissions
As shown in the below figure, the average co2 emissions of personal commuting (referring to one single journey,
all the bellowing commuting emissions are the same) in Jinqiao were much higher than Xinzhuang, which were
517.60g and 348.83g respectively. There was also a huge emissions gap in median values, which in Jinqiao
(348.83g) was 1.76 times of Xinzhuang (100.86g).
600 517,6
500
400 348,83
300
177,77
200
100,86
100
0
average median
Jinqiao Xinzhuang
Fig.2. individual average and median co2 emissions in Jinqiao and Xinzhuang.
Table 2. Average co2 emissions intensity of all travel modes.

Area Average co2 emissions Travel distance Average co2 emissions intensity
(g/p) (km) (g/p*km)
Jinqiao 517.60 9.33 55.48

Xinzhuang 348.83 9.81 35.56
Table 2 shows that although co2 emissions in Jinqiao were much higher than Xinzhuang, travel distance was
quite the opposite. Furthermore, average co2 emissions intensity of all travel modes in Jinqiao and Xinzhuang--the
result of average co2 emissions divided by travel distance--which were 55.48g/p*km and 35.56g/p*km respectively,
reflects the fact that high-carbon-emissions travel mode accounting for a larger share in Jinqiao was the reason why
individual produced much more emissions at average in Jinqiao.
Further analysis of modal split in the two areas displays that in Jinqiao (Fig.3), the percentage of car, which is
obviously high-carbon-emissions travel mode (Table 1) , was 7.0% more than in Xinzhuang. On the other hand,
zero-carbon-emissions travel mode (non-motorized transport) in Jinqiao accounted for 7.5% less than in Xinzhuang.
Therefore, the average carbon emissions were much higher in Jinqiao.
Xinzhuang 12,93% 25,85%
Jinqiao 19,94% 18,31%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
car bus rail (including transfer)

taxi company bus shopping bus
motorcycle or e-bike non-motorized
Fig.3. modal split of respondents in Jinqiao and Xinzhuang
• Distribution of co2 emissions among the populations
According to the research by Christian Brand et al.in 2009, emissions among the populations distributed strongly
unequally. His research represented that a ‘60-20’ rule based on an empirical study of personal non-business travel
in the UK, i.e. top fifth emitters were responsible for 60% emissions. Similarly, research in Beijing by Xiao
Zuopeng also obtained such conclusions.
In order to analyse the unequal distribution of co2 emissions in Shanghai, this paper adopted similar analysis
method like the above mentioned research. First, all the samples in Jinqiao/Xinzhuang according to their own
emissions were divided into 5 equal groups. Each group made up 20% of the total samples in Jinqiao/Xinzhuang.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Jinqiao Xinzhuang
top 20% second top20% middle 20%
second bottom 20% bottom 20%
Fig.4. distribution of co2 emissions among the populations.
The figure above shows that in peri-urban areas of Shanghai, individual commuting co2 emissions were more
unequally distributed than in the UK and Beijing. In Jinqiao, the top 20% individuals produced up to 77% emissions,
while the bottom 20% commuters only 0.05%. The emissions gap between the top and bottom was even much larger
in Xinzhuang, i.e. the top fifth was responsible for 81% emissions and the bottom fifth 0%.
The reason why individual emissions in this paper is much more unequally distributed than in other above research
is the difference of travel behaviour between commuting and other purposes of travel. For example, shopping and
leisure travel usually occurs at places where are near home, and thus travel distance of different people is not greatly
different. However, individuals choose employment because of income levels, promotion opportunities, etc. instead
of nearing home, therefore, unlike shopping and leisure travel, commuting distance is quite different in different
populations. That can help to understand why personal emissions distributed more unequally in this paper (focusing
on commuting) than in other research (focusing on all purposes of travel).
3.2. Socio-economic characteristics
Individual socio-economic characteristics include gender, age, occupation, income, household size, housing tenure,
house area, car and bicycle ownerships, etc. this paper aggregated emissions of different groups described by above
characteristics.
Aggregated results displayed that high emitters were more likely to be: male (600.2 and 464.3 g/p*trip vs 398.2
and 209.7 g/p* trip of female in Jinqiao and Xinzhuang respectively), middle-age between 25-54 years old (Jinqiao:
580.7 vs 223.4 of other ages; Xinzhuang:372.1 vs 195.7 of other ages), entrepreneur or manager (Jinqiao:1235.4 vs
586.3;Xinzhuang:882.3 vs 394.3), high income (Jinqiao: 1401.3 vs 257.9 of others; Xinzhuang:1013.1 vs 275.4 of
others), married (Jinqiao:521.8 vs 410.3 of others; Xinzhuang:391.4 vs 139.3 of others), having commercial house
(Jinqiao:744.3vs 317.5of others; Xinzhuang:) and owing at least one car (Jinqiao:1551.5 vs 186.3 of others;
Xinzhuang:1125.7vs148.0 of others).
Among these, income levels and car ownerships seem to have a strong relationship with emissions, as figures below
shows.
2000 2500
1500 2000
1000 1500
500 1000 Jinqiao
0 500 Xinzhuang
less 20-40 40-60 60-80 80- more
than than 0
20 100 100
no car one car two cars
Fig.5. (left) co2 emissions with individual income (thousands yuan) ; (right) co2 emissions with household car ownership
To further analyse which factors have direct and strongest relationship with commuting emissions, this paper has
built multivariable linear regression model, the independent variables and their categorical and ordinal values are as
followings:
Table 3. Independent variables.

Independent variable Values
Gender Male 1= male, 0= female
Age Less than 24 years old 1= less than 24 years old, 0= others
24-54 years old 1= 24-54 years old, 0= others
Residence Having residence registration of 1=having residence registration of Shanghai, 0= others
registration Shanghai
Occupation Entrepreneur or manager 1= entrepreneur or manager, 0= others
Worker or waiter/waitress 1= worker or waiter/waitress, 0= others
Civil servant, teacher or doctor 1= civil servant, teacher or doctor, 0= others

Office staff 1= office staff, 0= others
Special technician 1= special technician, 0= others
Individual business operator 1= individual business operator, 0= others
Income Annual income 1= no income, 2= less than 20 thousands yuan, 3= 20-40 thousands yuan,
4=40-60 thousands yuan, 5= 60-80 thousands yuan, 6= 80-100 thousands
yuan, 7= more than 100 thousands yuan
Household size Household size 1= 1person 2= 2persons, 3=3 persons, etc.
Moving time Moving time 1= moving after year of 2005, 2= between 2001-2005, 3= between 1996-
2000, 4= before 1996
House area House area 1= less than 60m2,2=60-90m2,3=90-120m2,4=120-160m2,5=more than
160m2
Household car Household car ownership 0= none, 1= 1car,2= 2cars,etc.
ownership
Bicycle ownership Bicycle ownership 0= none, 1= 1bicycle,2= 2bicycles,etc.
Table 4. The results of multivariable regression models of the link between individual socio-economic characteristics and co2 emissions.
Jinqiao Xinzhuang
Unstandardized Standardized Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients Sig. Coefficients Coefficients Sig.
B Beta B Beta
Gender Male 129.591 0.065 0.019* 142.530 0.095 0.028*
Age Less than 24 years

19.261 0.005 0.886 142.271 0.043 0.373
old
24-54 years old 157.533 0.062 0.054 187.467 0.099 0.044*
Residence Whether has

123.806 0.037 0.205 430.137 0.182 0.000**
registration residence registration
Occupation Entrepreneur or
156.850 0.060 0.699 306.789 0.144 0.336
manager
Worker or waiter 31.955 0.013 0.937 78.009 0.042 0.805
Civil servant, teacher

-195.072 -0.054 0.633 115.841 0.027 0.743
or docter
Office staff 5.594 0.003 0.989 107.519 0.072 0.729
Special technician 627.757 0.064 0.185 254.516 0.109 0.427
Individual business
-43.773 0-.008 0.917 150.878 0.045 0.655
operator
Annual
185.307 0.240 0.000*** 148.073 0.250 0.000***
income
Household
0.306 0.000 0.990 -26.111 -0.036 0.417
size
Moving time 18.079 0.016 0.596 -51.688 -0.068 0.154
House area 58.858 0.059 0.072 -31.905 -0.037 0.424
Car
658.422 0.365 0.000*** 564.471 0.391 0.000***
ownership
Bicycle
-6.199 -0.005 0.860 -29.544 -0.029 0.513
ownership
* p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001
As shown in the above table, the link between gender, income, car ownership and commuting emissions was
significant in both models. Furthermore, residence registration and age were moderately significant only in model of
Xinzhuang.
Male gender respondents produced more emissions than female, confirming results in other studies (e.g. Christian
Brand et al, 2013; Huang Xiaoyan et al, 2015). That’s partly because male respondents had higher income (average
annual income was between vs of female).

Car ownership had the most strongest and positive (beta values were 0.365 and 0.391 in Jinqiao and Xinzhuang
models respectively ) influence on emissions, which meant that once people bought a car, their commuting emissions
could probably dramatically rising up.
The association between income and emissions was relatively weaker than car ownership, but also very strong,
with the beta value were 0.240 and 0.250 in models of Jinqiao and Xinzhuang respectively.
From above analysis, we can conclude that targeting individuals with high income and car ownership, providing
viable alternatives to commuting by car and supporting other polies that restrict high emitters to use car may provide
an efficient approach to reduce carbon emissions.
3.3. Transit accessibility
Improving transit accessibility is an important strategy to develop a perfect public transport system. On the other
hand, whether it is an effective way to reduce urban transport emissions? In this section, the relationship between
transit accessibility and personal commuting co2 emissions has been testified.
Among all the socio-economic characteristics, income and car ownership had the strongest influence on co2
emissions. In order to research on the link between transit accessibility and emissions and at the same time to prevent
the influence of income and car ownership, this paper aggregates emissions of individuals living in different transit
accessibility areas with the same income levels (divided into three levels based on Shanghai Statistical Yearbook in
2011: low-income, less than 20 thousand yuan; middle-income, between 20 and 40 thousands; high-income, more
than 60 thousands).
• Rail accessibility
2000,00
1500,00
1000,00
500,00
0,00
Jinqiao Xinzhuang Jinqiao Xinzhuang Jinqiao Xinzhuang
low income middle income high income
good accessibility poor accessibility
Fig.6 individual co2 emissions of different income levels with good/poor rail accessibility.
Fig.6 shows that in Jinqiao, no matter to which income level, individuals with good transit accessibility (distance
to nearby rail station was no more than 2000m) produced less co2 than the others. This meets our expectations because
rail is regarded as a green and low-carbon travel mode. However, this phenomenon didn’t exist in Xinzhuang. Why
to the same income level, good transit accessibility couldn’t help to reduce co2 emissions? Research on travel distance
and travel mode split are undertaken as bellows.
(1) Travel distance
In Jinqiao, to the same income level, average commuting distance of good rail accessibility areas was obviously
shorter than poor accessibility areas, which was on a par with trend of co2 emissions. Conversely, in Xinzhuang,
commuting emissions and distance were both more in good accessibility areas. That means in Xinzhuang longer
distance in good rail accessibility areas is part of the reason why there individual didn’t produce fewer emissions.
15,00
10,00
5,00
0,00
Jinqiao Xinzhuang Jinqiao Xinzhuang Jinqiao Xinzhuang
low income middle income high income
good accessibility poor accessibility
Fig.7. individual commuting distance of different income levels with good/poor rail accessibility.
The difference of travel distance between Jinqiao and Xinzhuang can be partly explained by the current land use.
As seen in fig.7, the main land in Jinqiao is used for industries. That’s because Jinqiao is a Chinese National Economic
and Technological Development Zone, where a large number of jobs concentrate and therefore, people living nearby
can relatively easily find a job there. Whether living with or without rail station can’t affect personal choice on where
to find job.
Fig.8. (left) land use in Jinqiao; (right) land use in Xinzhuang.
While on the other hand, Xinzhuang is where residential land use takes a main share and thus working opportunities
are not sufficient. Because of good motility, people living near rail station are more easily to find a job in downtown
where employment concentrates but far away from Xinzhuang. As a result, commuting distance of good rail
accessibility areas is obviously longer in Xinzhuang.
In a word, the difference of land use and number of employment are part of the reasons why improving rail
accessibility doesn’t ensure the reduction of commuting emissions.
(2) Travel modal split
Table 5. Travel modal split of different accessibility areas with different income levels.
Rail (including Bus Car Non- Others
transfer) motorized
Low- Jinqiao Good rail 3.33% 3.33% 0.00% 70.00% 23.33%
income accessibility
Poor rail accessibility 3.95% 10.53% 0.00% 53.95% 31.58%
Xinzhuang Good rail 16.92% 15.38% 0.00% 41.54% 26.15%

accessibility
Middle- Jinqiao Good rail 18.41% 25.63% 12.64% 15.16% 28.16%
accessibility
High- Jinqiao Good rail 24.00% 12.00% 38.00% 8.00% 18.00%
accessibility
The number of high-income respondents in Xinzhuang was only 6, thus not analysed in the bellowing.
From the modal split of the middle and high income levels, we can see that, respondents living with good rail
accessibility were more likely to commute by rail both in Jinqiao and Xinzhuang.
For middle-income-level both in Jinqiao and Xinzhuang, the share of commuting by rail (including transfer)
obviously increased when rail was available. However, people who switched to rail were not from automobile users,
but instead of bus and non-motorized users. For example, in Xinzhuang, the middle income who commuting by rail
in good accessibility areas (48.05%) accounted for 22.49 percent more than who living with poor accessibility
(25.56%). On the other hand, the percentage of people commuting by non-motorized mode decreased 26.74% when
rail accessibility improved. This reflects the fact that rail attracts people who used to commute by “zero-emission”
mode before, not “high-emission” travel mode, which echoes the result of studies by Zhou Xuemei (2007) and Pascal
Poudenx (2011). Therefore, although rail is a green and low-carbon transport, it doesn’t ensure to reduce commuters’
emissions.
100%
80% 11,04%
60% 37,78%
40%
48,05%
20%
25,56%
0%
Good rail accessibility Poor rail accessibility
Rail (including transfer) Bus Car Non-motorized Others
Fig.9. modal split of middle income levels with good/poor rail accessibility.
• Bus accessibility
Bus accessibility can be represented by the number of bus stations and lines within a certain range of areas near
home. Furthermore, the former means how convenient for people to access bus service and the latter how many
destinations people can reach by bus. Thus, this paper adopted the number of bus stations (within 300m from
respondent’s community gate) and bus lines (two types: bus passing downtown and others) as the indices of bus
accessibility.
This paper firstly divided the number of bus stations and lines into three types: less than 2, between 2 and 4 and
more than 4. Secondly, this paper undertook descriptive statistical analysis of co2 emissions from different income
levels with different number of bus stations/lines, however, the result of which didn’t display any regular trend of co2
emissions. Therefore, bus accessibility indices in this paper were only used as independent variables in the following
multiple linear regression model.
As analysed above, personal annual income and household car ownership are the two most strongly significant
variables among socio-economic characteristics, and thus they were adopted as controlled variables to analyse the
influence of transit accessibility on individual commuting co2 emissions with the same income and car ownership.

Type Independent variable values
Socio-economic characteristics Individual annual income 1= no income, 2= less than 20 thousands yuan, 3= 20-40
thousands yuan, 4=40-60 thousands yuan, 5= 60-80 thousands
yuan, 6= 80-100 thousands yuan, 7= more than 100 thousands
yuan
Household car ownership 0=none, 1= 1car,2= 2cars,etc.
Transit Rail Rail accessibility 1= good rail accessibility (distance to nearby rail station was no
accessibility accessibility more than 2000m), 0= poor rail accessibility (distance to nearby
rail station was more than 2000m)
Bus The number of bus stations 0= none, 1=1 station, 2= 2stations, etc.
accessibility within 300m
The number of bus lines 0=none, 1=1 line, 2= 2 lines, etc
within 300m and passing
through downtown
The number of bus lines 0=none, 1=1 line, 2= 2 lines, etc
within 300m and not passing
through downtown
The number of bus stations 0= none, 1=1 station, 2= 2stations, etc
out of 300m
The number of bus lines out 0=none, 1=1 line, 2= 2 lines, etc
of 300m and passing through
downtown
The number of bus lines out 0=none, 1=1 line, 2= 2 lines, etc
of 300 and not passing
through downtown
In order to prevent the problem of collinearity, the variables of rail accessibility, bus accessibility within 300m and
bus accessibility out of 300 were separately entered into models. The results are displayed as below.
Table 7. Results of multivariable regression model of link between transit accessibility and co2 emissions in Jinqiao.
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
2
R (adjusted)
0.335 0.340 0.342
F-test value
124.832 (Sig=0.000) 102.050 (Sig=0.000) 103.035 (Sig=0.000)
Variable Beta Sig Beta Sig Beta Sig
Annual income
0.295 0.000** 0.289 0.000** 0.265 0.000**
Car ownership
0.378 0.000** 0.368 0.000** 0.355 0.000**
Rail accessibility
-0.056 0.073
Bus stations within 300m

-0.052 0.051
Bus lines through
downtown within 300m 0.077 0.024*
Bus lines not through
downtown within 300m -0.033 0.330
Bus stations out of 300m
-0.162 0.000***
Bus lines through
downtown out of 300m 0.202 0.001**
downtown out of 300m -0.038 0.342
* p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001
Table 8. Results of multivariable regression model of link between transit accessibility and co2 emissions in Xinzhuang.
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
R2 (adjusted)
0.309 0.307 0.311
F-test value
46.698(Sig=0.000) 37.229(Sig=0.000) 37.838(Sig=0.000)
Variable Beta Sig Beta Sig Beta Sig
Annual income
0.294 0.000** 0.300 0.000** 0.294 0.000**
Car ownership
0.388 0.000** 0.388 0.000** 0.385 0.000**
Rail accessibility
-0.003 0.952
Bus stations within 300m
0.020 0.683
Bus lines through
downtown within 300m -0.014 0.757
downtown within 300m 0.004 0.929
Bus stations out of 300m
-0.014 0.817
Bus lines through
downtown out of 300m 0.055 0.216
downtown out of 300m 0.038 0.494
* p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001
The multivariable regression model results show that rail accessibility could not significantly influence individual
commuting co2 emissions. It means that building rail stations and lines doesn’t absolutely reduce people’s emissions.
Xinzhuang’s story tells us that if an area wants to reduce commuting emissions from persons living near rail stations,
it should take good use of lands around these stations. For example, the government should focus on providing
concentrated and sufficient employment there.
Bus accessibility was significant in Jinqiao’s model while not in model of Xinzhuang, which means increasing bus
stations or bus lines probably is not helpful to reduce commuting emissions.
3.4. Built environment
Analysis of individual emissions in different urban density areas (represented by floor area ratio—FAR—in this
paper) displays that individuals in low FAR area (FAR is no more than 1.0) produced 1934.42g /person* trip on
average, which were much more than middle (between 1.0-2.0) and high (more than 2.0) FAR areas (emissions in
middle and high FAR areas were 405.37 g /person* trip and 414.02g /person* trip respectively). As the low FAR area
surveyed is where the most majority are townhouse, which only the rich families can afford, thus the great gap in
emissions may be caused by their income levels. Therefore, this paper compared individual co2 emissions from the
same income level in low FAR area to the other two areas.
Because of limitation of the number of respondents in low and high density areas in Xinzhuang, in this section,
samples of Jinqiao and Xinzhuang were analysed as one whole. As represented in Fig.10, for the low and middle
income levels, average emissions in each FAR area were almost the same. By contrast, for the high income
respondents, emissions decreased when the density increased.
2500,00
2000,00
1500,00 low FAR
1000,00
middle FAR
500,00
0,00 high FAR
low income middle high income
income
Fig.10. individual co2 emissions of different income levels in different density areas.
Related research on the link between urban density and travel mode confirms that density can affect individual’s
choice on mode. Persons living in high density areas incline to travel by transit and non-motorized transport, while
others in low density areas are more likely to choose car (Cevero, 1966; Schimek, 1966; Pushkarev et al, 1977; Parsons
Brinkerhoff et al, 1996; Messenger et al, 1996; Cevero et al, 1997).
To further analyse whether FAR affected emissions from high income levels by influencing on their travel mode,
this paper made statistical analysis on car use of different income levels in different FAR areas. The results are
displayed in Fig.11.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
low FAR middle FAR high FAR low FAR middle FAR high FAR
middle income high income
commuting by car not commuting by car
Fig.11. the share of commuting by car of middle and high income levels in different density areas
As we can see from above figure, for middle and high income respondents (none of low income respondents had a
car.), especially high income, car use in low FAR area was obviously more than middle and high FAR areas. For high
income, the share of car use in low, middle and high FAR areas were 77.27%, 42.77% and 31.03% respectively.
Empirical research in this paper represents that for high income levels, commuting co2 emissions get decreased
when building density increases, and the reason is the influence of density on car use, which coincides with results of
related research mentioned above.
For high income persons living in high density areas, the reason they don’t travel by car is not because they can’t
afford it, but probably because it’s not convenient to use a car in a high-density environment accompanied with
problems like insufficient car parking and crowded roads. Therefore, it is more likely for them to abandon traveling
by car when living in high density areas.
On the other hand, for low and middle income levels, because of economic restrictions, they can’t afford to travel
by car and thus transit and non-motorized transport account for the main proportion. As a result, density almost takes
no effect on their choice of travel mode.
4. Multivariate regression model of associations between individual socio-economic characteristics, transit

accessibility, built environment and commuting co2 emissions
In this section, a multivariable regression model was built, in order to analyse which factors among individual
socio-economic characteristics, transit accessibility and urban built environment can affect commuting co2 emissions,
and how strong the effect is. To prevent the collinearity problem, factors insignificant in previous models didn’t enter
into this model, except rail accessibility.

variable values
Whether in Jinqiao 1= respondents of Jinqiao, 0= respondents of Xinzhuang
Commuting distance The number of distance

Socio-economic Male gender 1= male, 0= female
characteristics Middle-age (24-54 years old) 1= 24-54 years,0= others
Residence registration 1=having residence registration of Shanghai, 0= others

Annual income 1= no income, 2= less than 20 thousands yuan, 3= 20-40
thousands yuan, 4=40-60 thousands yuan, 5= 60-80
thousands yuan, 6= 80-100 thousands yuan, 7= more than
100 thousands yuan
Car ownership 0= none, 1= 1car,2= 2cars,etc.
Transit accessibility Rail accessibility 1= good rail accessibility (distance to nearby rail station was
no more than 2000m), 0= poor rail accessibility (distance to
nearby rail station was more than 2000m)
The number of bus stations 0= none, 1=1 station, 2= 2stations, etc.

within 300m
Urban built environment FAR The number of FAR
Table 10. Results of multivariable regression model of the link between socio-economic characteristics, transit accessibility, built
environment and commuting co2 emissions.
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients

Sig.
B Beta
Whether in Jinqiao 34.722 0.012 0.654
Commuting distance 51.349 0.464 0.000***
Male gender 123.777 0.064 0.003**
Middle-age (24-54 years old) 89.084 0.035 0.096
Residence registration 30.246 0.014 0.499
Annual income 98.423 0.135 0.000***
Car ownership 790.500 0.382 0.000***
Rail accessibility 4.341 0.002 0.929
The number of bus stations within 300m -35.668 -.038 0.146
FAR -78.986 -.052 0.033*

* p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001
As seen on table 10, the factor that whether respondents living in Jinqiao was not significant. It means that when
other factors like travel distance, income, car ownership were the same, emissions form Jinqiao and Xinzhuang would
not significantly different. Travel distance was a strongly significant factor influencing commuting co2 emissions,
which could be easily understood because travel emissions is the result of travel distance multiplied by emissions
factors. The beta coefficients of travel distance (0.464) was the highest, much more than the second factor (car
ownership, beta coefficients was 0.382), which reminds us that shortening individual commuting distance, by focusing
on planning mixed land use and providing sufficient and various kinds of employments, will be an efficient way to
reduce commuting emissions.
The association between Male gender, annual income, car ownership and co2 emissions were still significant. On
the other hand, rail accessibility could not significantly reduce emissions, which was the same with other models in
previous section.
Furthermore, although compared with other factors, the influence of FAR—representing urban density--was weak
(beta was -0.052), it still negatively affected commuting emissions. That can partly be explained by inconvenience for
people to use a car in a high density environment, where there are insufficient car parking and crowded roads.
5. Conclusions
This paper has found some interesting and meaningful results, based on the analysis of commuting co2 emissions
from 1393 respondents in two peri-urban areas in Shanghai.
• Lowering emissions factors of travel mode and shortening travel distance can obviously reduce emissions.
From the formula of co2 emissions computation, we can see that emissions factors and travel distance can directly
reduce emissions. In order to lowering emissions factors, there are various ways to meet this goal, which includes new
technologies increasing energy consuming efficiency and cleaner energies. Moreover, encouraging car sharing is an
effective way to increase passenger loadings of car and thus can obviously reduce emissions.
On the other hand, shortening commuting distance is a highly efficient way for emissions reduction. Therefore,
planning of mixed land use should be encouraged.
• The distribution of commuting co2 emissions among the populations are sharply unequal.
The unequal distribution of commuting co2 emissions in Shanghai becomes more highlighted compared with
research on other cities, the latter largely following a 60-20 rule, i.e. 60% of emissions are produced by 20% of the
population. On the other hand, this paper finds in Shanghai, top fifth of commuters almost are responsible for 80% of
total co2 emissions. The sharply unequal distribution represents the fact that policy making should be particularly
targeted at high emitters in order to be effective.
• High emitters are typically male gender, high income levels and having at least one car in household.
According to research in this paper, individual income and household car ownership are factors which have the
strongest impact on co2 emissions. Moreover, male are likely to produce more emissions than female. Socio-economic
characteristics of high emitters give us an insight into who should be responsible for problems like traffic pollution.
Therefore, it is highly necessary to undertake further analysis on the spatial location of their employment and their
preference to living areas, in order to make their commuting distance shorter, which as mentioned above is a highly
efficient way to reduce commuting emissions.
On the other hand, future research should focus on the analysis of demands of high producers for travel mode. By
providing high-quality transit service which satisfy their requirements, urban commuting emissions will be probably
mitigated.
• Although rail is a relatively green and low-carbon travel mode, it doesn’t ensure to reduce commuting co2
emissions.
Improving rail accessibility is usually considered to be an effective way to meet the goal of reducing transport co2
emissions. However, the result shows that it’s not a significant factor that influences commuting co2 emissions. The
reason is that although rail takes a larger share in modal split when rail accessibility gets promoted, the increasing
passengers are mainly from non-motorized transport (zero-carbon emissions) commuters. Thus the average
commuting emissions conversely increase.
As a punctual and convenient transport mode, it provides a good alternative to commuting by car. In the
background of car ownership rapidly increasing, rail may help to prevent individuals largely to switch to cars. In this
way, rail is still meaningful to emissions reduction.
• High urban density can slightly and negatively affect co2 emissions, by influencing travel mode of high income
levels.
The decrease of commuting co2 emissions in high density areas suggests that government should make effective
polies to prevent urban sprawl, which is usually associated with low-rise buildings.
Empirical research in this paper provides a relatively detailed and comprehensive analysis on the relationship
between individual socio-economic characteristics, transit accessibility, urban built environment and commuting co2
emissions. This analysis displays which group of populations are responsible for the high emissions and gives
suggestions what the governments can do in the future with the purpose of reducing commuting co2 emissions.
In terms of future work, efforts of striving to reduce commuting emissions will benefit from analysis on the spatial
distribution features of high emitters’ employment and home. As regard to modal split, it is also necessary to analyse
the probability of car users switching to high-quality transit. Finally, polies directly pointed to high emissions
producers should be further analysed in order to be more effective.
Acknowledgements
The authors are greatly thankful to Mingcai Xu for his help with the calculation of individual commuting distance
in GIS.
Appendix A. An example appendix
The data and data source of Formula (1) ,(2) are listed as shown in table 11.
Table 11. The local data of Shanghai adopted in formula (1) and formula (2)
Travel mode Energy Energy density Energy calorific co2 emissions Passenger loadings
consumption per value (Tj/Kg) factors of
Km energy(Kg/Tj)
Car 0.088 (L/Km) 0.725 (Kg/L) 44.3*10-6 69,300 1.2
(Li Yongfang, (93#gas) (IPCC,2006) (IPCC,2006) (SCCTPI,2010;D.Stead,1999 )
2008)
Bus 0.4 (L/Km) 0.835 (Kg/L) 43*10-6 74,100 50
(Zhao Min,2009) (0#diesel) (IPCC,2006) (IPCC,2006)
Rail 1.27 25.8*10-6 94,600 425 (carriage)
Kg/carriage*Km
(IPCC,2006) (IPCC,2006) (rail carriage in Shanghai has
(raw coal)
two types: type A and C. the
(Shang Shentong number of 425 passenger per
Metro carriage is calculated
Group,2009;Su according to the passenger
Chengyuan,2012 ) loadings of each type at
commuting time and the share
of rail lines with type A/C
carriages in the total lines )
Taxi 0.1 (L/Km) 0.725 (Kg/L) 44.3*10-6 69,300 1.0
(Li Yongfang, (93#gas) (IPCC,2006) (IPCC,2006) (SCCTPI,2010)
2008)
Motorcycle 0.03(L/Km) 0.725 (Kg/L) 44.3*10-6 69,300 1.0
(93#gas) (IPCC,2006) (IPCC,2006)
E-bike 0.0063Kg/Km 25.8*10-6 94,600 1.1
(raw coal) (IPCC,2006) (IPCC,2006)
Company bus 0.4 (L/Km) 0.835 (Kg/L) 43*10-6 74,100 28
(0#diesel) (IPCC,2006) (IPCC,2006)
Shopping mall 0.4 (L/Km) 0.835 (Kg/L) 43*10-6 74,100 40
bus
(0#diesel) (IPCC,2006) (IPCC,2006) (SCCTPI,2010)
Non-motorized 0 0 0 0 1
transport
References
Becky P.Y.Loo, Linna Li., 2012. Carbon dioxide emissions from passenger transport in China since 1949: Implications for developing sustainable
transport. Energy Policy 50, 464-476.
Brownstone D, Golob T F., 2009. The impact of residential density on vehicle usage and energy consumption. Journal of Urban Economics 65, 91-
98.
Cervero, R., 1966. Mixed land-uses and commuting: evidence from the American housing survey. Transportation Research A 5,361-377.
Cevero,R.,Kockelman, K.,1997 Travel demand and the 3D’s:density, diversity, and design. Transportation Research D 3,199-219.
Christian Brand, John M. Preston., 2009. ‘60-20 emission’- The unequal distribution of greenhouse gas emissions from personal, non-business
travel in the UK. Transport Policy 17, 9-19.
Christian Brand, Anna Goodman, Harry Rutter, Yena Song, David Ogilvie., 2013. Associations of individual, household and environmental
characteristics with carbon dioxide emissions from motorized passenger travel. Applied Energy 104,158-169.
CICERO., 2008. Carbon emissions from transport has been rapidly increasing. Xinhua net.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/2008-01/11/content_7402098.htm
D.Stead., 1999. Relationships between transport emissions and travel patterns in Britain. Transport Policy 6, 247-258.
Fabio Grazi & Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh & Jos N. van Ommeren., 2008. "An Empirical Analysis of Urban Form, Transport, and Global
Warming," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics 29(4), 97-122.
Huang Xiaoyan, Liu Xiaqiong, Cao Xiaoshu.,2015. Individual commuting co2 emissions of Guangzhou. Geographical Research 4, 751-761.
IPCC., 2006. 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories.
http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/pdf/2_Volume2/V2_3_Ch3_Mobile_Combustion.pdf.
Jean-Pierre Nicolas, Damien David., 2009. Passenger transport and co2 emissions: What does the French transport survey tell us? Atmospheric
Environment 43, 1015-1020.
Messenger, T.,Ewing,R. ,1996. Transit-oriented development in the sun belt. Transportation Research Record 1552, 145-153.
Parons Brinkerhoff, Quade and Douglas Inc., 1996. Transit and urban form: mode of access and catchment areas of rail transit. Transportation
Research Board.
Pascal Poudenx., 2008. The effect of transportation polies on energy consumption and greenhouse gas emission from urban passenger transportation.
Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 42,901-909.
Petter Naess., 2010. Residential location, travel and energy use in the Hangzhou metropolitan area. The Journal of Transport and Land Use 3(3),
27-59.
Pushkarev, B.,Zupan,J.,1977. Public transportation and land use policy. Indiana University Press.
SCCTPI., 2010. The report of the fourth comprehensive transport survey in Shanghai.
Shang Shentong Metro Group Co., Ltd., 2003. Annual development report.
http://app.finance.ifeng.com/data/stock/ggzw/600834/11739753
Sharpe R., 1982. Energy efficiency and equity of various urban land use patterns. Urban Ecology 7, 1-18.
Shen Manhong, Chi Xiongwei. , 2012. The driving factors of Chinese carbon emissions increase. Jianghuai Tribune 1.
Schimek,P.,1966. Land-use, transit, and mode split in Boston and Toronto. Association of Collegiate School of Planning and Association of
European School of Planning Joint International Congress, Toronto, Canada.
Su Chengyuan, Lu Jian, Xu Ping., 2012. The analysis of urban transport co2 emissions and low-carbon development of transport. Journal of
Highway and Transportation Research and Development 29, 142-148.
Xiao Zuopeng, Chai Yanwei, Liu Zhilin., 2011. The distribution and influencing factors of household daily travel in Beijing. Urban Studies 18,
104-112.
Xu Xibao., 2014. The features and influencing mechanism of individual travel co2 emissions in Yangtze River Delta region. Resources and
Environment in the Yangtze Basin 08.
Xu Yanan, Du Zhiping. , 2011. Measurement of carbon emissions from Chinese transport sector. Logistics Technology 6.
Zhang Taoxin., 2012. Analysis of urban road transport in the development of Chinese urbanization. China Population, Resources and Environmen
8.
Zhao Min, Zhang Weiguo, Yu Lizhong., 2009. Individual travel mode, urban transport co2 emissions and reduction polies. Research of
Environmental Sciences 22, 747-752.
Zhou Xuemei, Zhang Xianzun, Yang Xiaoguang. , 2007. Estimation of transit share based on the choice of travel mode. Journal of Tongji University:
National Science 35,1627-1631.

1 s2.0 S2352146517305604 Main

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 s2.0 S2352146517305604 Main

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Available online at www.sciencedirect.

1. Research background and aims

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +86-27-18571500475; fax: +86-27-82788745.

2352-1465 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

2.1. Overall approach

Fig.1. the location of Jinqiao and Xinzhuang in Shanghai.

2.2. The survey sample

2.3. Calculation of co2 emissions

in other research in other research in this paper

• Individual average co2 emissions

Table 2. Average co2 emissions intensity of all travel modes.

Jinqiao 517.60 9.33 55.48

Xinzhuang 12,93% 25,85%

Jinqiao 19,94% 18,31%

car bus rail (including transfer)

Fig.3. modal split of respondents in Jinqiao and Xinzhuang

• Distribution of co2 emissions among the populations

top 20% second top20% middle 20%

second bottom 20% bottom 20%

Fig.4. distribution of co2 emissions among the populations.

3.2. Socio-economic characteristics

Table 3. Independent variables.

Civil servant, teacher or doctor 1= civil servant, teacher or doctor, 0= others

Unstandardized Standardized Unstandardized Standardized

Coefficients Coefficients Sig. Coefficients Coefficients Sig.

Gender Male 129.591 0.065 0.019* 142.530 0.095 0.028*

Age Less than 24 years

24-54 years old 157.533 0.062 0.054 187.467 0.099 0.044*

Residence Whether has

Worker or waiter 31.955 0.013 0.937 78.009 0.042 0.805

Civil servant, teacher

Office staff 5.594 0.003 0.989 107.519 0.072 0.729

Special technician 627.757 0.064 0.185 254.516 0.109 0.427

Moving time 18.079 0.016 0.596 -51.688 -0.068 0.154

House area 58.858 0.059 0.072 -31.905 -0.037 0.424

annual income was between vs of female).

3.3. Transit accessibility

(1) Travel distance

good accessibility poor accessibility

Fig.8. (left) land use in Jinqiao; (right) land use in Xinzhuang.

(2) Travel modal split

Xinzhuang Good rail 16.92% 15.38% 0.00% 41.54% 26.15%

Rail (including transfer) Bus Car Non-motorized Others

Table 6. Independent variables.

Bus stations within 300m

3.4. Built environment

commuting by car not commuting by car

4. Multivariate regression model of associations between individual socio-economic characteristics, transit

Table 9. Independent variables.

Commuting distance The number of distance

Residence registration 1=having residence registration of Shanghai, 0= others

The number of bus stations 0= none, 1=1 station, 2= 2stations, etc.

Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients

Whether in Jinqiao 34.722 0.012 0.654

Commuting distance 51.349 0.464 0.000***

Male gender 123.777 0.064 0.003**

Middle-age (24-54 years old) 89.084 0.035 0.096

Residence registration 30.246 0.014 0.499

Annual income 98.423 0.135 0.000***

Car ownership 790.500 0.382 0.000***

Rail accessibility 4.341 0.002 0.929

The number of bus stations within 300m -35.668 -.038 0.146

FAR -78.986 -.052 0.033*