IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/itsrrp/qt2gt23996.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Statewide Optimal Resource Allocation Tool Using Geographic Information Systems, Spatial Analysis, and Regression Methods

Author

Listed:
  • Goulias, Konstadinos G.
  • Golob, Thomas F.
  • Yoon, Seo Youn

Abstract

The overall objective of this project is to develop an optimal resource allocation tool for the entire state of California using Geographic Information Systems and widely available data sources. As this tool evolves it will be used to make investment decisions in transportation infrastructure while accounting for their spatial and social distribution of impacts. Tools of this type do not exist due to lack of suitable planning support tools, lack of efforts in assembling data and information from a variety of sources, and lack of coordination in assembling the data. Suitable planning support tools can be created with analytical experimentation to identify the best methods and the first steps are taken in this project. Assembly of widely available data is also demonstrated in this project. Coordination of fragmented jurisdictions remains an elusive task that is left outside the project. When this project begun we confronted some of these issues and embarked in a path of feasibility demonstration in the form of a pilot project that gave us very encouraging results. In spite of this pilot nature aiming at demonstration of technical feasibility, substantive conclusions and findings are also extracted from each analytical step. In this project we have two parallel analytical tracks that are a statewide macroanalysis (called the zonal based approach herein) and an individual and household based microanalysis (called the person based approach herein). In the statewide macroanalysis we study efficiency and equity in resource allocation. Resources are intended as infrastructure availability and access to activity participation offered by the combined effect of transportation infrastructure and land use measured by indicators of accessibility. Stochastic frontiers are used to study efficiency and a particular type of inequality measurement called the Theil fractal inequality index is used to study equity in the macroanalysis. The outcome of this analysis are maps identifying places in California that enjoy higher levels of service when compared to the entire state and places which succeeded in allocating resources in a relatively better way than others. In the individual microanalysis we use the accessibility indicators from the macronalysis and expand them by defining a new set of indicators at a second level of spatial (dis)aggregation. Then we use them as explanatory factors of travel behavior with focus on the use of different travel models (e.g., driving alone, use of public transportation and so forth). As expected infrastructure availability and accessibility to activity opportunities has a significant and substantive effect on the use of different modes. Many resource allocation decisions, then, will impact behavior, which in turn influences the optimality and equity conditions. This implies that decisions about where and when to allocate resources in public and private transportation needs to account for changes in behavior in a dynamic fashion, using scenarios of accessibility provision and assessing their impact by studying activity and travel behavior changes.

Suggested Citation

  • Goulias, Konstadinos G. & Golob, Thomas F. & Yoon, Seo Youn, 2008. "A Statewide Optimal Resource Allocation Tool Using Geographic Information Systems, Spatial Analysis, and Regression Methods," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt2gt23996, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdl:itsrrp:qt2gt23996
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/2gt23996.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Greene, William H., 1980. "Maximum likelihood estimation of econometric frontier functions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 27-56, May.
    2. Ajit K. Ghose, 2004. "Global inequality and international trade," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 28(2), pages 229-252, March.
    3. Konstantina Gkritza & Kumares Sinha & Samuel Labi & Fred Mannering, 2008. "Influence of highway construction projects on economic development: an empirical assessment," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 42(3), pages 545-563, September.
    4. Berechman, Joseph, 1994. "Urban and regional economic impacts of transportation investment: A critical assessment and proposed methodology," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 351-362, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Coelli, Tim J., 1995. "Recent Developments In Frontier Modelling And Efficiency Measurement," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 39(3), pages 1-27, December.
    2. B. E. Bravo‐Ureta & L. Rieger, 1990. "Alternative Production Frontier Methodologies And Dairy Farm Efficiency," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 215-226, May.
    3. Banker, Rajiv D. & Chang, Hsihui & Cooper, William W., 2004. "A simulation study of DEA and parametric frontier models in the presence of heteroscedasticity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 153(3), pages 624-640, March.
    4. Glass, Anthony J. & Kenjegalieva, Karligash & Weyman-Jones, Thomas, 2020. "The effect of monetary policy on bank competition using the Boone index," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 282(3), pages 1070-1087.
    5. Mehdi Farsi & Aurelio Fetz & Massimo Filippini, 2007. "Benchmarking and Regulation in the Electricity Distribution Sector," CEPE Working paper series 07-54, CEPE Center for Energy Policy and Economics, ETH Zurich.
    6. Edward Ebo ONUMAH & Bernhard BRÜMMER & Gabriele HÖRSTGEN-SCHWARK, 2010. "Productivity of the hired and family labour and determinants of technical inefficiency in Ghana's fish farms," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 56(2), pages 79-88.
    7. Xavier Ramos, 2008. "Using Efficiency Analysis to Measure Individual Well-being with an Illustration for Catalonia," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Nanak Kakwani & Jacques Silber (ed.), Quantitative Approaches to Multidimensional Poverty Measurement, chapter 9, pages 155-175, Palgrave Macmillan.
    8. Joe Kerkvliet & William Nebesky & Carol Tremblay & Victor Tremblay, 1998. "Efficiency and Technological Change in the U.S. Brewing Industry," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 271-288, November.
    9. Bravo-Ureta, Boris E. & Pinheiro, Antonio E., 1993. "Efficiency Analysis Of Developing Country Agriculture: A Review Of The Frontier Function Literature," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 22(01), pages 1-14, April.
    10. Frenda, Antonio & Sepe, Enrica & Scippacercola, Sergio, 2021. "Efficiency analysis of social protection expenditure in the Italian Regions," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    11. Kutlu, Levent & Mamatzakis, Emmanuel & Tsionas, Mike G., 2022. "A principal–agent approach for estimating firm efficiency: Revealing bank managerial behavior," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    12. Mohamed Salah Matoussi & Mounir Belloumi, 2007. "Impacts de la salinité sur l'efficience technique de l'agriculture irriguée : application au cas des Oasis de Nefzaoua en Tunisie," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 177(1), pages 77-89.
    13. Peter Nero, 2001. "Relative Salary Efficiency of Pga Tour Golfers," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 45(2), pages 51-56, October.
    14. Jara-Rojas, Roberto & Bravo-Ureta, Boris E. & Moreira, Victor H. & Diaz, Jose, 2012. "Natural Resource Conservation and Technical Efficiency from Small-scale Farmers in Central Chile," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126227, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge, 1994. "Nonradial Technical Efficiency And Chemical Input Use In Agriculture," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 23(01), pages 1-11, April.
    16. Mustafa U. Karakaplan & Levent Kutlu, 2019. "School district consolidation policies: endogenous cost inefficiency and saving reversals," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 56(5), pages 1729-1768, May.
    17. Smith, Andrew S.J., 2012. "The application of stochastic frontier panel models in economic regulation: Experience from the European rail sector," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 503-515.
    18. Schalk Hans Joachim & Untiedt Gerhard & Lüschow Jörg, 1995. "Technische Effizienz, Wachstum und Konvergenz in den Arbeitsmarktregionen der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (West). Eine ökonometrische Analyse für die Verarbeitende Industrie mit einem „Frontier Product," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 214(1), pages 25-49, February.
    19. Julien Prat, 2010. "The rate of learning-by-doing: estimates from a search-matching model," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(6), pages 929-962.
    20. Shamsa Kanwal & Abdul Hameed Pitafi & Muhammad Yousaf Malik & Naseer Abbas Khan & Rao Muhammad Rashid, 2020. "Local Pakistani Citizens’ Benefits and Attitudes Toward China–Pakistan Economic Corridor Projects," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(3), pages 21582440209, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Engineering;

    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:qt2gt23996. 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.