公共交通运输系统外文翻译文献Word格式.docx

1、在三步旅行者行为仿真模型中，使用了广义运输成本的概念。它提出各类交通以及对居民的出行选择和郊区住宅社区形态量化的建议，并使用了源自于中国北京一个典型走廊的数据。仿真结果表明：票价降低，增加公共交通的综合能力，以及对私家车的惩罚是很有必要的，以此来提高系统效率和郊区的吸引力，特别是对那些低收入的人；没有公路定价，将鼓励中等收入居民转向私人轿车，同时,高收入者可能因为道路拥挤离开郊区；然而公共交通的改善可以吸引更多短距离和中距离的旅客，但轿车用户对于旅行距离并不敏感。关键词：广义成本，公共交通，拥挤定价，运输服务，北京从上世纪90年代，中国大中城市已经历郊区化，而且这些城市的空间结构逐步形成，在很

2、大程度上依赖于交通运输的进步。由于人口爆炸和改造中心城市，许多郊区城镇发展为住宅区，这些新发展城镇的大部分居民受雇于中心城市或附近的工业区。例如，80%多回龙关郊区社区的居民在北京或发达地区中心城市工作，几乎有一半的北京社区居民受雇于朝阳区中央商务区。这些领域在交通系统规划与提供经营效率方面对交通政策制定者和城市规划设计师提出了新的挑战。在许多情况下，边沿城镇通过高速公路和城市轨道连接中心城市或工业园区。相比传统的城市，郊区展览更稳定的运输使用模式，更加依赖公共交通，私人汽车，较少使用机动模式（自行车，步行）。工作距离比任何单一因素对人们的交通方式的影响都大。这样的特点，可以深刻影响的人口郊区

3、化，并限制一些人移民到郊区。本文利用西北地区的北京作为一个测试案例，分析了运输服务的政策，主要是费用和服务质量，将影响整体运输系统与城市空间结构。本文的组织如下：第二节简要回顾最近一些有关运输方式选择的文献，并与海城市海城走廊案件，特别是中国的现状进行比较。第三部分讨论广义运输成本的概念，并建立了新的概念，包括利用广义成本和转移成本预算的障碍。第四节在公共运输和驾驶之间介绍旅客运输方式选择行为仿真模型，然后转向注意中国经验运输服务政策与海城市海城出行方式选择。在第五节中，特别提到的情况是，利用北京的轻轨和高速公路，西北地区迅速郊区化。在第六节中，得出主要研究结果和政策启示。大量的研究机构在研究

4、运输方式和个体出行方式的选择。一般来说，有三种常见的方法来确定这个问题。第一部分着重研究影响选择决策的每个模式的特点，所采用的实证研究状况用于改变结果，研究人与旅游目的等。例如，travel-to-work行为在阿克拉（加纳）主要由知觉服务品质、商业通勤车以及员工的个人情况决定，而不是通过访问，等待时间或车载。在英国，为了走亲访友而决定行程，经济因素在很大程度上解释模式的选择，使用私人交通工具时定性的理由往往是次要的（科恩、哈里斯，1998）。约翰松等使用瑞典上班者的图片案例表明了灵活性和舒适性这两个感觉影响个人的选择模式。根据在法兰克福，德国的实验领域研究和统计分析，认为有四类人。一类人很少

5、重视金钱和时间因素，第二种人非常重视金钱但很不重视时间，第三种人都重视，第四种人很少重视金钱但很重视时间。林坦库等人选自来自1998年的数据，即荷兰国家旅游调查组确认空间配置，土地利用和交通基础设施，对长途旅行模式比如通勤，商务和休闲旅行具有重大影响。广义运输成本的概念经常用于评估和解释的旅游行为。广义旅行成本包括旅行时间，超过时间，金钱成本，停车收费，和一些令人忽视的小费。然而，这一概念在不同的文献因为不同的研究目的是不同的。例如，广义骑自行车费用如下：旅行时间，物理需要，舒适，交通安全，自行车被盗的风险，停放自行车的费用以及维护费用，个人安全。货币化的广义概念通常是将旅行时间转换成货币费用

6、，增加的费用，收取的费用，在这项研究中，模拟通勤出行行为，三个运输关于概念费用是相通的。第一个可以被定义为预算障碍，包括经营费用，养路费以及停车场收费。第二个是货币化的广义成本和时间成本，包括经营费用，以及停车费用。用户被假定为尽量减少个人的货币化成本，把自己的出行方有别于旅行时间和费用成本。广义货币化成本的公共交通是计算访问到火车站的时间，等候时间，这是计算的基础上的进展，等车时间，以及票价。货币化费用包括旅行时间，收费，汽车运行成本和在工作地方的停车场收费。第三个概念是确定模式转移成本即拥挤造成不适的成本。据推测，如果乘客在车辆已远远超过容量，新来的旅客会转移到其他负担得起的运输方式。贯穿

7、城市及乡村的公路通常是不仅仅可以通私人轿车，也可以通公共汽车。介于以前的经验，道路定价可以大大提高用户的剩余地区，公共交通的费用可以大大减少因长时间的旅行而造成的拥挤，特别是，如果用户很大程度上钟情于公共交通。方案2表明高收入的旅客不得不放弃定期迁移到郊区的计划，主要由于免费使用的情况下所造成的严重挤塞。另一组是深深影响了中等收入的旅客，她他们从公共运输方式换成了私家车驾驶。公共汽车票价降低和公交线路的增加使得许多中等收入居民转移去坐公交车，同时小汽车用户转移到轻轨，特别是那些短距离旅行。此外，研究发现，一个综合改善公共交通服务和一些私人汽车惩罚措施的政策，有利于提高系统效率和郊区社区的吸引力

8、。这种综合系统包括轻轨、公共汽车票价的降低，服务质量的提高和公路通行费的征收。应该指出，轻轨已旨在增加公交扶手使公共交通更吸引用户，从而，减少道路拥挤。根据模拟结果，轻铁及巴士票价减少以及客容量的增加，使这一模式对于那些中低收入旅行者更有吸引力。最后的结果是，越来越多的人移民到郊区，不论是低收入到高收入阶层。当然，公共交通服务的改善需要政府补贴，这也是一个世界性的现象。每个模式的经济旅行距离几乎不受不同的运输服务的政策影响。公共汽车是用于短距离的旅行，而中、长距离者喜欢轻铁。反之，小汽车用户则是无所谓。结果表明，这些低收入公民因现有运输服务的政策限制迁移到郊区的经济房屋，包括相对高收费的公共交

9、通和公路，以及有限的轻轨和公交线路。当然，所有运输模式对于在家工作的人在一定程度上都有影响。城市交通在整个世界中都是是政府政策的一个主要领域。运输政策也会影响城市形态，尤其是郊区化。在北京，许多经济公寓是专为那些低收入居民建造准备的。在重大问题的决策之前有两个主要的问题。首先，从过去的经验，大量在郊区社区中的永久居民都是中等或更高收入的人。而且很多的业主仍然居住在城市中心，郊区房子只用来去度假。此外，居民不断投诉交通拥堵和相对高的收费公路，特别是在繁忙时间。本研究的模拟结果解释了这些现象并尝试给出了相应的政策含义。原文:Transport systemAbstractTransport sys

10、tems offer substantially different services in city-suburb areas; this usually leads to different assumptions about user behavior in transport mode choice. In this paper a simulation model is proposed to assess the effect of transport service policies on mode choice. The transport modes considered a

11、re public transport, including light rail transit （LRT） and bus, together with the private auto.In the three step traveler behaviour simulation model, the concept of generalised transport costs is used. Various transit incentives are proposed and their impacts on residents travel choice and suburban

12、 residential community form are quantified, using data on a typical city-suburb corridor in Beijing, China.The simulation results show that: the fare reduction and capacity increase of public transport integrated with private car disincentives is necessary to improve system efficiency and suburb com

13、munity attractiveness, particularly for those low income people; without highway pricing, medium income residents will be encouraged to shift to private car while more high income persons might leave the suburb because of road congestion; public transport improvement can attract more short and mediu

14、m distance travelers, but the car users are not sensitive to travel distance.Keywords: generalised cost, public transport, congestion pricing, transport service, BeijingFrom the middle of 1990s, metropolitans in China have been experiencing suburbanization, and the spatial structures of these cities

15、 are shaped, in large measure, by the advances of transportation. Many suburban towns were development only for residential areas because of the population explosion and renovation in central cities. Most of the residents in these new development towns are employed in the central city or near indust

16、rial parks. For example, more than 80% residents of Hui long guan suburban community in Beijing have jobs in central city or developed CBD areas. And almost half of the residents in Wangjing community are employed in CBD in Chaoyang District. These areas present new challenges for transport policy m

17、akers and urban planning designers to plan and operate efficient transportation systems. In many cases the edge towns are connected to the central city or industrial parks by high-speed highways and urban rails. Compared to traditional urban areas, the suburban towns exhibit more stable transport mo

18、de use, more reliance on public transport and private automobile, less use of non-motorized modes （bicycle, walking）. Home to work distances have a stronger bearing on peoples transport mode to work than any single factor. Such characteristics can deeply influence the population suburbanization, and

19、 restrict some people from immigrating to the suburb.This paper analyses how the transport service policy, mainly fare and service quality, will impact the overall transport system performance and urban spatial structure, using the North-west area of Beijing as a test case. The paper is organized as

20、 follows. Section II briefly reviews some of the recent literatures on transport mode choice, and compares these studies with the city-suburban corrid or cases, especially the current conditions in China. Section III discusses the concept of generalised transport costs, and establishes the new conce

21、pts including budget barrier, monetized generalised cost and shift cost. Section IV presents the traveler behaviour simulation model of transport mode choice between public transport and driving. Attention is then turned to the Chinese experience of transport service policy and city-suburban travel

22、mode choice in section V, with special reference to the case of North-west area which is a rapidly suburbanized region served by light rail and highway in Beijing. Major findings of the research and the policy implications are concluded and discussed in section .A substantial body of research exists

23、 on transport mode and individual travel mode choice. In general, there are three common approaches to identify this issue. The first part of researches focuses on determining the characteristics of each mode which influence the choice decision. The results change with the adopted empirical case con

24、dition, studied person and travel purpose, etc. For example, travel-to-work behavior in Accra （Ghana） is influenced mainly by perceived service quality of the commercial commuter vehicles as well as employees personal circumstances rather than by access, waiting or in-vehicle times （Abane, 1993）. Fo

25、r trips made to visit friends and relatives in Britain, the economic reasons largely explain mode choice, and qualitative reasons for using private transport are often secondary （Cohen and Harris, 1998）. Vredin Johansson et el. used a sample of Swedish commuters to prove that both attitudes towards

26、flexibility and comfort influencing the individuals choice of mode （Vredin Johansson, Heldt et al., 2006）. Based on an experimental field study and statistical analysis conducted in Frankfurt Main, Germany, four classes of individuals were identifed. One class allocates a low importance to both mone

27、tary and time considerations, the second allocates high importance to money and low importance to time, the third allocates high importance to both, and the fourth allocates a low importance to money and a high importance to time （Davidov, Yang-Hansen etal., 2006）. And Limtanakool etel. employed dat

28、a from the 1998 Netherlands National Travel Survey to confirm the spatial configuration of land use and transport infrastructure has a significant impact on mode choice processes for medium and long distance trips for all purposes: commute, business, and leisure trips Generalised transport costs is

29、a concept frequently used forassessing and explaining travel behaviour. The generalised costs of travel include the travel time, excess time, money cost, parking charge, and the discomfort and lesser connivance. However, this concept is diverse in different literatures for varying research purposes.

30、 For example, the generalised costs of cycling are the following: travel time, physical needs, comfort, traffic safety, risk of bicycle theft, costs of parking bicycles and maintenance costs, personal security. And the concept of monetized generalised cost is usually calculated by converting travel

31、time into monetary cost, and adding the cost of the fare charged In this study, for simulating the commuters travel behaviour, three transport costs related concepts are adopted in order. The first can be defined as budget barrier, including the fare or toll charged together with parking cost which

32、all means cash payment in the trip. The second one is monetized generalized cost including fare, parking and time cost. Users are assumed to minimize individual monetized generalized trip cost and divide themselves among the travel modes that are differentiated in travel time and fare cost. The monetized generalized costs of public transport is computed as a function of the access time to the station, the waiting time which is calculated based on the