IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/itsrrp/qt1z01h8ts.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Public Transportation and Industrial Location Patterns in California

Author

Listed:
  • Chatman , Daniel
  • Xu, Ruoying
  • Park , Janice
  • Le, Kim

Abstract

Public transit investments are a large and growing share of all transportation investments in the state of California, and such critical investments should be evaluated partly on their economic benefits. Taking such benefits into account could alter investment, service, and service restructuring decisions taken by transit agencies in the state. The relationship of public transportation to economic productivity, and spatial patterns of industrial location, is understudied. This project investigated how changes in rail transit service in California metropolitan areas (Los Angeles, the San Francisco Bay Area, and San Diego) are associated with firm clustering by industry and with commercial property values. A mixed methods approach was used. One strand of the research involved first, describing location patterns by industry according to transit access, and second, quantitatively modeling the relationship between transit access and (a) employment densification by industry and (b) commercial property values, using instrumental variables techniques with dynamic panel modeling in order to better infer causal relationships. The second strand consisted of interviews and other qualitative research aimed at finding possible explanations for firm location and expansion, and firm productivity. The quantitative research found that rail development generally promotes employment agglomeration and increased land value, but the magnitude of such effects differs across regions. San Francisco County had the highest employment densification and land value associated with rail proximity, while the LA region also had a relatively strong relationship between rail access and both employment density and property value. Rail access in the southern part of the San Francisco Bay Area, where Silicon Valley is situated, had a small relationship with employment densification but a positive effect on land values. On the contrary, rail development in the San Diego region was positively associated with employment density, but negatively associated with land value appreciation. Our interviews were consistent with these quantitative findings, and suggested that the differences between regions are due to differences in historical land development and use patterns as well as urban land regulations. In the San Francisco Bay Area, developers and real estate brokers report that rail transit plays the greatest role in the City of San Francisco, with relatively weak importance in Silicon Valley due to higher parking provisions and employer-provided transportation amenities such as shuttles. In the Los Angeles metropolitan area, rail transit is most highly valued in the dense downtown Los Angeles area, and is perceived to be playing an increasingly important role across the region as in places where traffic congestion is high and increasing.

Suggested Citation

  • Chatman , Daniel & Xu, Ruoying & Park , Janice & Le, Kim, 2016. "Public Transportation and Industrial Location Patterns in California," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt1z01h8ts, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdl:itsrrp:qt1z01h8ts
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/1z01h8ts.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Waldfogel, Joel, 2003. "Preference Externalities: An Empirical Study of Who Benefits Whom in Differentiated-Product Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(3), pages 557-568, Autumn.
    2. Duranton, Gilles & Puga, Diego, 2004. "Micro-foundations of urban agglomeration economies," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: J. V. Henderson & J. F. Thisse (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 48, pages 2063-2117, Elsevier.
    3. Daniel Chatman & Robert Noland, 2011. "Do Public Transport Improvements Increase Agglomeration Economies? A Review of Literature and an Agenda for Research," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(6), pages 725-742.
    4. Daniel J. Graham, 2007. "Agglomeration, Productivity and Transport Investment," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 41(3), pages 317-343, September.
    5. Graham, Daniel J., 2007. "Variable returns to agglomeration and the effect of road traffic congestion," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 103-120, July.
    6. Taotao Deng, 2013. "Impacts of Transport Infrastructure on Productivity and Economic Growth: Recent Advances and Research Challenges," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(6), pages 686-699, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Meckling, Jonas & Nahm, Jonas, 2019. "The politics of technology bans: Industrial policy competition and green goals for the auto industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 470-479.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andersson, Matts & Dehlin, Fredrik & Jörgensen, Peter & Pädam, Sirje, 2015. "Wider economic impacts of accessibility: a literature survey," Working papers in Transport Economics 2015:14, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    2. Riukula, Krista & Väänänen, Touko, 2024. "Estimating the Labour Market Impacts of Transport Projects in Finland," ETLA Working Papers 120, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    3. Zhou, You & Zhang, Lingzhu & JF Chiaradia, Alain, 2022. "Estimating wider economic impacts of transport infrastructure Investment: Evidence from accessibility disparity in Hong Kong," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 220-235.
    4. Kanemoto, Yoshitsugu, 2013. "Second-best cost–benefit analysis in monopolistic competition models of urban agglomeration," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 83-92.
    5. Konno, Akio & Kato, Hironori & Takeuchi, Wataru & Kiguchi, Riku, 2021. "Global evidence on productivity effects of road infrastructure incorporating spatial spillover effects," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 167-182.
    6. Graham, Daniel J. & Gibbons, Stephen, 2019. "Quantifying Wider Economic Impacts of agglomeration for transport appraisal: Existing evidence and future directions," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 1-1.
    7. Daniel G. Chatman & Robert B. Noland, 2014. "Transit Service, Physical Agglomeration and Productivity in US Metropolitan Areas," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(5), pages 917-937, April.
    8. Yu, Haitao & Jiao, Junfeng & Houston, Eric & Peng, Zhong-Ren, 2018. "Evaluating the relationship between rail transit and industrial agglomeration: An observation from the Dallas-fort worth region, TX," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 33-52.
    9. Hörcher, Daniel & De Borger, Bruno & Seifu, Woubit & Graham, Daniel J., 2020. "Public transport provision under agglomeration economies," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    10. Rosa M. González-Marrero & Rosa M. Lorenzo-Alegría & Gustavo A. Marrero, 2011. "Los Efectos Territoriales de las Infraestructuras: La inversión en redes de alta velocidad ferroviaria," Economic Reports 05-2011, FEDEA.
    11. Laird, James J. & Venables, Anthony J., 2017. "Transport investment and economic performance: A framework for project appraisal," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 1-11.
    12. Beltrán Tapia, Francisco J. & Díez-Minguela, Alfonso & Martinez-Galarraga, Julio, 2018. "Tracing the Evolution of Agglomeration Economies: Spain, 1860–1991," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 78(1), pages 81-117, March.
    13. Anas, Alex & Chang, Huibin, 2023. "Productivity benefits of urban transportation megaprojects: A general equilibrium analysis of «Grand Paris Express»," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    14. Bernstein, Shai & Colonnelli, Emanuele & Giroud, Xavier & Iverson, Benjamin, 2019. "Bankruptcy spillovers," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(3), pages 608-633.
    15. Ahlfeldt, Gabriel M. & Pietrostefani, Elisabetta, 2019. "The economic effects of density: A synthesis," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 93-107.
    16. Gibbons, Stephen & Lyytikäinen, Teemu & Overman, Henry G. & Sanchis-Guarner, Rosa, 2019. "New road infrastructure: The effects on firms," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 35-50.
    17. Holl, Adelheid, 2016. "Highways and productivity in manufacturing firms," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 131-151.
    18. Zhang, Wenjia & Kockelman, Kara M., 2016. "Optimal policies in cities with congestion and agglomeration externalities: Congestion tolls, labor subsidies, and place-based strategies," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 64-86.
    19. Tania Paola Torres-Gutiérrez & Ronny Correa-Quezada & María de la Cruz del Río-Rama & José Álvarez-García, 2020. "Location Decisions of New Manufacturing Firms in Ecuador. Agglomeration Mechanisms," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-24, August.
    20. Patricia C. Melo & Daniel J. Graham, 2018. "Transport‐induced agglomeration effects: Evidence for US metropolitan areas," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(1), pages 37-47, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Engineering; public transportation; firm cluster; agglomeration; commercial property values; economic development;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdl:itsrrp:qt1z01h8ts. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/itucbus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.