US metropolitan spatial structure and labour accessibility

Miwa Matsuo

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Metropolitan areas vary widely in employment distribution and labour accessibility. Comparing four US metropolitan areas-Atlanta, Boston, Phoenix and Washington, DC-it is found that Atlanta and Washington, DC suffer from low labour accessibility compared with Boston and Phoenix. Moreover, large suburban employment centres in Atlanta and Washington, DC suffer from even lower accessibility than other employment centres within the same metropolitan areas or their counterparts in Boston and Phoenix. Their low labour accessibility is mainly explained by slower commuting speeds. Even though their residential and employment densities are modest, congestion in these employment centres is severe enough to undermine accessibility. The results raise questions about the effectiveness of creating large sub-centres in metropolitan areas, particularly creating auto-oriented edge-city-style employment centres at highway nodes.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2283-2302
Number of pages20
JournalUrban Studies
Volume48
Issue number11
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011 Aug
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

accessibility
labor
metropolitan area
agglomeration area
edge city
commuting
congestion
road

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
  • Urban Studies

Cite this

US metropolitan spatial structure and labour accessibility. / Matsuo, Miwa.

In: Urban Studies, Vol. 48, No. 11, 08.2011, p. 2283-2302.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Matsuo, Miwa. / US metropolitan spatial structure and labour accessibility. In: Urban Studies. 2011 ; Vol. 48, No. 11. pp. 2283-2302.
@article{b8d8d8c241734917a68087ce65fe3300,
title = "US metropolitan spatial structure and labour accessibility",
abstract = "Metropolitan areas vary widely in employment distribution and labour accessibility. Comparing four US metropolitan areas-Atlanta, Boston, Phoenix and Washington, DC-it is found that Atlanta and Washington, DC suffer from low labour accessibility compared with Boston and Phoenix. Moreover, large suburban employment centres in Atlanta and Washington, DC suffer from even lower accessibility than other employment centres within the same metropolitan areas or their counterparts in Boston and Phoenix. Their low labour accessibility is mainly explained by slower commuting speeds. Even though their residential and employment densities are modest, congestion in these employment centres is severe enough to undermine accessibility. The results raise questions about the effectiveness of creating large sub-centres in metropolitan areas, particularly creating auto-oriented edge-city-style employment centres at highway nodes.",
author = "Miwa Matsuo",
year = "2011",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1177/0042098010380954",
language = "English",
volume = "48",
pages = "2283--2302",
journal = "Urban Studies",
issn = "0042-0980",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - US metropolitan spatial structure and labour accessibility

AU - Matsuo, Miwa

PY - 2011/8

Y1 - 2011/8

N2 - Metropolitan areas vary widely in employment distribution and labour accessibility. Comparing four US metropolitan areas-Atlanta, Boston, Phoenix and Washington, DC-it is found that Atlanta and Washington, DC suffer from low labour accessibility compared with Boston and Phoenix. Moreover, large suburban employment centres in Atlanta and Washington, DC suffer from even lower accessibility than other employment centres within the same metropolitan areas or their counterparts in Boston and Phoenix. Their low labour accessibility is mainly explained by slower commuting speeds. Even though their residential and employment densities are modest, congestion in these employment centres is severe enough to undermine accessibility. The results raise questions about the effectiveness of creating large sub-centres in metropolitan areas, particularly creating auto-oriented edge-city-style employment centres at highway nodes.

AB - Metropolitan areas vary widely in employment distribution and labour accessibility. Comparing four US metropolitan areas-Atlanta, Boston, Phoenix and Washington, DC-it is found that Atlanta and Washington, DC suffer from low labour accessibility compared with Boston and Phoenix. Moreover, large suburban employment centres in Atlanta and Washington, DC suffer from even lower accessibility than other employment centres within the same metropolitan areas or their counterparts in Boston and Phoenix. Their low labour accessibility is mainly explained by slower commuting speeds. Even though their residential and employment densities are modest, congestion in these employment centres is severe enough to undermine accessibility. The results raise questions about the effectiveness of creating large sub-centres in metropolitan areas, particularly creating auto-oriented edge-city-style employment centres at highway nodes.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79961035104&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79961035104&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0042098010380954

DO - 10.1177/0042098010380954

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:79961035104

VL - 48

SP - 2283

EP - 2302

JO - Urban Studies

JF - Urban Studies

SN - 0042-0980

IS - 11

ER -