Show simple item record

contributor authorP. R. Stopher
date accessioned2017-05-08T21:02:59Z
date available2017-05-08T21:02:59Z
date copyrightSeptember 1993
date issued1993
identifier other%28asce%290733-947x%281993%29119%3A5%28723%29.pdf
identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/36728
description abstractThis paper examines the ability of conventional travel‐forecasting models to respond to forecasting needs created by the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990 and the air‐quality lawsuit brought against the Metropolitian Transportation Commission, San Francisco. Initially, the probable response of travel behavior to the various transportation control measures of the CAAA are reviewed. The ability of the travel‐forecasting models to reflect each of the various responses is examined, concluding that only those transportation‐control measures (TCMs) resulting in a change in travel mode, auto occupancy, or destination can be modeled. Most remaining TCMs require significant model changes. Similarly, with capacity changes, three of the seven potential changes in travel behavior can be modeled, if the models are run through a series of feedback loops. For emissions modeling, the inputs cannot be obtained with the required specificity. Short‐run and longer‐run changes are identified that should be made to current modeling procedures to add further to the abilities of the models to produce good travel forecasts.
publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
titleDeficiencies of Travel‐Forecasting Methods Relative to Mobile Emissions
typeJournal Paper
journal volume119
journal issue5
journal titleJournal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems
identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1993)119:5(723)
treeJournal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems:;1993:;Volume ( 119 ):;issue: 005
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record