Transport Reviews

ISSN: 0144-1647 (Print) 1464-5327 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ttrv20

Integrated models of land use and transportation

for the autonomous vehicle revolution

Jason Hawkins & Khandker Nurul Habib

To cite this article: Jason Hawkins & Khandker Nurul Habib (2019) Integrated models of land use
and transportation for the autonomous vehicle revolution, Transport Reviews, 39:1, 66-83, DOI:
10.1080/01441647.2018.1449033

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2018.1449033

Published online: 12 Mar 2018.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 2265

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 4 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ttrv20
TRANSPORT REVIEWS
2019, VOL. 39, NO. 1, 66–83
https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2018.1449033

Integrated models of land use and transportation for the

autonomous vehicle revolution
Jason Hawkins and Khandker Nurul Habib
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The advent of the autonomous vehicle (AV) will affect not only the Received 22 October 2017
transportation system, but also future patterns of land development. Accepted 2 March 2018
Integrated land use and transportation models will be critical tools
KEYWORDS
in assessing the path forward with this technology. Key questions Autonomous vehicles;
with respect to land use impacts of AVs arise from potential integrated land use and
changes in sensitivity to travel and reduced demand for parking. transportation models;
It is an open question whether AVs will induce urban sprawl, or spatial equilibrium; system
whether spatial economies of agglomeration will mitigate any evolution; regional economic
reductions in travel time sensitivity. The deployment of shared forecasting
fleets of AVs would likely reduce parking demand, producing yet
to be explored impacts on property development within existing
urban footprints. We perform a critical assessment of currently
operational models and their ability to represent the adoption of
AVs. We identify the representation of time in such models as a
vital component requiring additional development to model this
new technology. Existing model applications have focused on the
discrete addition of new infrastructure or policy at a fixed point in
time, whereas AV adoption will occur incrementally through time.
Stated adaptation surveys are recommended as tools to quantify
preferences and develop relevant model inputs. It is argued that
existing models that assume comparatively static equilibrium have
been convenient in the past, but are insufficient to model
technology adoption. In contrast, dynamic model frameworks lack
sufficient structure to maintain reasonability under large
perturbations from base conditions. The ongoing advancement of
computing has allowed models to move away from being
mechanistic aggregate tools, towards behaviourally rich depictions
of individual persons and firms. However, much work remains to
move from projections of existing conditions into the future, to
the evolution of the spatial economy as it evolves through time in
response to new technologies and exogenous stresses. Principles
from complex and evolutionary systems theory will be important
in the development of models with the capacity to consider such
dynamics.

Introduction
The last major revolution in urban mobility began in 1885 when Karl Friedrich Benz received
the first patent for an automobile powered by an internal-combustion engine (Encyclopedia

CONTACT Jason Hawkins jason.hawkins@mail.utoronto.ca Department of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto,

Toronto, ON, Canada
© 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 67

Britannica, 2015). Twenty three years later, the Long Island Motor Parkway opened as the
first road purpose-built for the automobile on October 10, 1908 (Patton, 2008). Since that
time, the private automobile has become a ubiquitous component of the urban fabric
and arguably influenced the development of the modern city in ways far beyond any
other single technology. It is difficult to decipher whether the net effect of the automobile
has been for the good or ill of the people. On the one hand, it has increased speed of travel
and opened economic opportunities to a larger segment of the population. However, the
private automobile has also stretched the city across the surrounding landscape, separated
communities by large roadways, and had deleterious effects on the natural environment. In
the first quarter of the twenty-first century, the autonomous vehicle (AV) appears to be a
beneficial advancement in mobility, with its removal of the driving task from human occu-
pants. The literature predicts decreased traffic collisions (Bertoncello & Wee, 2015; Fagnant &
Kockelman, 2015), increased comfort of travel (Hörl, Ciari, & Axhausen, 2016), and reduced
congestion (Fagnant & Kockelman, 2015) with AV adoption. These are all great sounding, but
eerily similar to conversations at the turn of the last century around the private automobile.
The introduction of AV is not simply an improvement of the current vehicle fleet to provide a
comfier, safer ride to work or school. It represents a fundamental shift in the mobility and,
perhaps more importantly, future development of cities.
The prediction of transportation demand, patterns of land use, and their interactions
are the realm of integrated land use-transportation (ILUT) models. These tools will be criti-
cal to the proper assessment of AV implementation on transportation demand, transpor-
tation supply, and property development. Currently, operational ILUT models were largely
developed during a period of relative uniformity in the available set of travel modes within
a region. The underlying theory was developed at a time when the private automobile
dominated urban transportation and sprawling, segregated land uses, were the
assumed form of development. As we shift into a new mobility regime, it is imperative
upon the profession to evaluate the capability of our existing tools to inform the deploy-
ment of these new forms of mobility.
The remainder of this paper is composed of three sections. The first will examine
current expectations for AV development and deployment in cities. This will include a
summary of the anticipated effects of AV on mobility and land development. The
second section will review several operational ILUT models, considering their theoretical
capacity to represent a structural change in patterns of urban development. Finally, rec-
ommendations will be made based on the identified shortcomings of existing models
and principles drawn from the fields of complex and evolutionary systems theory. Con-
clusions will be drawn as to the requirements to develop an ILUT model of AV deployment
and an outline provided for future research.

Prospects and challenges for AV

Method of deployment
We distinguish three basic structures for the implementation of AV:

(1) Private ownership of vehicles by individual households. This would be similar to the
current structure of private ownership of automobiles.
68 J. HAWKINS AND K. NURUL HABIB

(2) Private ownership of fleets of vehicles by operators. This would be similar to the Uber
and Lyft paradigm.
(3) Public ownership of fleets of vehicles by government agencies. This would be similar
to the current system of public transit, with features of demand-response.

Each of these systems of deployment has the potential to impact transportation and urban
form to varying degrees. There is currently no consensus in the literature as to the most
probable system of deployment. Ford has made statements that they intend to
produce cars for services such as Uber and Lyft (Neate, 2016). General Motors is providing
funding to Lyft (Solomon, 2016) while pursuing its own AV service agenda (Ramsey &
Nagesh, 2016). Similarly, in Europe, Volkswagen has invested $300M USD in the new trans-
portation service provider Gett Lunden, 2016). Lamotte, De Palma, and Geroliminis (2016)
see benefits in deployment as a public service because it would provide coherent, uniform
standards and simpler integration with infrastructure. Public agencies are adapting to
these changing trends by introducing demand-response services via smartphone apps
and partnering with ridesharing services to provide service to train stations (Geron,
2017). Research at ETH Zurich suggests private ownership of AV would not be attractive
in a future of sophisticated 24/7 mobility-on-demand (Hörl et al., 2016), but subsequent
cost–benefit analysis by the same group finds private ownership to be the cheaper
alternative (Bösch, Becker, Becker, & Axhausen, 2017). A theoretical complication with a
potential transition away from private ownership of the vehicle is termed the endowment
effect (Kahneman, Knetsch, & Thaler, 1990), which finds that people sometimes value own-
ership of a commodity more than their willingness-to-pay (WTP) for it. In the case of AV,
this means a shift to shared vehicles may require a utility benefit greater than expected
based solely on the characteristics of the alternative modes.

Transportation effects
The thrust of this research will be focused on effects of AV adoption on land use patterns.
Nonetheless, a short summary should be provided of the expected impacts on transpor-
tation. AV is anticipated to reduce traffic collisions, with estimates in the literature in the
range of a 90% reduction with complete adoption (Bertoncello & Wee, 2015; Fagnant &
Kockelman, 2015) and 50% reduction with a 10% adoption of AV (Fagnant & Kockelman,
2015). A study by Tientrakool, Ho, and Maxemchuk (2011) finds a 100% market penetration
of vehicles with automated braking and acceleration (Level 2 automation) might increase
the capacity of highways by fourfold, on average. Research suggests about 25% of conges-
tion is attributable to traffic incidents (Fagnant & Kockelman, 2015), meaning any
reduction in collisions would increase the capacity of the roadway. Fagnant and Kockel-
man (2015), provide a summary of the relevant literature on congestion effects of AV
and determine the magnitude of the capacity gain is dependent upon assumptions
made in the simulation model. Traffic flow could increase by anywhere from 1% to
80%, depending upon the level of AV adoption and a range of other input parameters
(Fagnant & Kockelman, 2015). They further predict a 37% increase in total vehicle miles
travelled (VMT) with 90% adoption of AV (Fagnant & Kockelman, 2015). Despite this
increase in capacity and travel, several studies predict decreases in the overall vehicle
fleet, with the decrease being partially dependent upon existing reliance on automobiles
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 69

for travel. An OECD study (OECD & ITF, 2015b) finds 10 cars could be replaced with 1 AV in
Lisbon, Portugal; whereas, a similar study of the less automobile-reliant Singapore finds a
ratio of 3:1 (Spieser et al., 2014).

Land use effects

Most studies expect AV to produce increased urban sprawl (Axhausen, Meyer, Becker, &
Patrick, 2017; Fagnant & Kockelman, 2015; Hörl et al., 2016). This is premised on decreased
headways and more efficient driving by computers leading to higher capacities on existing
roads. The prevailing wisdom is that the associated decrease in travel disutility will cause
people to travel more frequently and across greater distances. However, many of the exist-
ing studies are based on exogenous assumptions and not any rigorous empirical justifica-
tion. For example, one of the few ILUT applications to AV was conducted by Erdogan,
Engelberg, Knaap, and Ducca (2017) and assumes a doubling of trip distances and
halving of access costs, without any reference to empirical evidence. There is little
doubt the removal of the driving task will decrease travel time disutility, but it will
remain a cramped space for conducting work or enjoying leisure activities. Such predic-
tions seem reminiscent of statements made at the time of the introduction of Skype
and other video conferencing software on the obsolescence of in-person meetings
(Forbes, 2009). This has not been the case, as people continue to find physical interaction
a productive means of collaboration.
Among the most significant land use impacts of AV cited in the literature is its effect on
parking requirements. A study by Skinner and Bidwell (2016) in the UK finds AV adoption
would mean the removal of most traffic signals and land devoted to parking would
undergo redevelopment for commercial or residential use. The magnitude of impacts is,
again, contingent upon the method of AV deployment. Bertoncello and Wee (2015) cite
a 15% reduction in parking needs with private ownership of vehicles based simply on
the ability to park vehicles more tightly. However, this implementation would mean
more trips being made by empty vehicles (Hörl et al., 2016). In the case of shared AV, a
study by the OECD and ITF (2015b) places the reduction in the range of 80%. Neglecting
parking reductions, Ambühl, Ciari, and Menendez (2016) conclude road needs would
decrease by 12%, freeing land for other uses. Ultimately, we agree with the conclusion
of Kim et al. that our understanding is incomplete and based on “analytic framework repre-
senting the travel behavior of the present generation and current land use patterns” (2015,
p. 26). The introduction of AV will bring revolutionary change and require significant modi-
fications to our analytic toolbox.

Review of existing ILUT models

There is a wealth of reviews available to the interested reader on ILUT models and the fea-
tures of various models (Acheampong & Silva, 2015; EPA, 2000; Hunt, Kriger, & Miller, 2005;
Iacono, Levinson, & El-Geneidy, 2008; Kii, Nakanishi, Nakamura, & Doi, 2016; Mackett, 1985;
Sivakumar, 2007; Wegener, 1995, among others). Rather than repeat this process, the aim
of this review is to focus on a subset of representative models and their ability to represent
changes on the scale of AV deployment. Wegener (2004) provides a useful classification of
urban systems by their speed of change, which has become a standard means of analysis
70 J. HAWKINS AND K. NURUL HABIB

(Table 1). A model must include at least two of these systems to be considered an inte-
grated framework (Wegener, 2004).
These temporal considerations are critical in urban systems models (i.e. ILUT) and a
hypothetical situation of full AV adoption within a single day is considered for illustration.
The transport of goods and persons will create traffic on the network, which will generally
fluctuate depending upon the day of the week, weather conditions, the existence of a
special event on the day, and any number of other factors. Replacement of the vehicle
fleet by AV would rapidly change the trip generation and mode choice in the day;
people would try out the new mode and the number of trips in the day would likely
rise. Over the course of the first year of adoption, the population and employment
would rise as a function of natural rates of population growth. Within the first few
years, residents of the region may decide they are willing to travel a greater distance to
reach work. They might change their residence location to a larger home on the edge
of the city or change jobs to a more appealing employment location – perhaps located
at a greater distance from their current residence. Despite this hypothetical immediate
introduction of AV as a mode of travel, the transportation network and land use for the
region are incapable of rapid adaptation. The process of planning, approval, and construc-
tion takes place of the order of years to decades and only occurs in response to population
and employment growth or relocation. Wegener makes explicit consideration of these dis-
parate speeds of change in his IRPUD model, as well as its descendant ILUMASS and SILO
models. This makes these important models to explore when considering theoretical struc-
tures capable of representing long-term changes like AV adoption.
There are many ways of classifying ILUT models, but we embrace that of Iacono et al.
(2008) because it is structured about the theoretical foundation of each model. Table 2
provides an adaptation of their summary, with the addition of several models developed
in recent years, felt to be important when considering AV scenarios. Iacono et al. (2008)
identify three fundamental model typologies: (1) spatial interaction or gravity models,
(2) econometric models, and (3) microsimulation models. Each typology will be summar-
ised in the context of operational models and detailed analysis provided for several
models representing the most recent developments in the field.
The gravity model is the earliest class of models. It arose from research on spatial inter-
action in the fields of regional science and geography in the 1950s and 1960s. The prin-
ciple is based on the definition of gravity in Newtonian physics. The region is broken
into zones, typically taken as the transportation analysis zones of the regional transpor-
tation model. The magnitude of interaction between two zones was initially considered

Table 1. Summary of urban systems (adapted from Wegener,

2004).
System Speed of change
Transport networks Very slow
Land use Very slow
Workplace location Slow
Residential location Slow
Total employment in area Fast
Total population in area Fast
Goods transport Immediate
Person transport Immediate
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 71

Table 2. Summary of ILUT models (adapted from Iacono et al., 2008).

Type Model Reference Primary feature
Spatial interaction/ Model of Lowry (1964) Generally considered first operational land use
gravity Metropolis model
Spatial interaction/ ITLUP Putman (1974) First integration ILUT software package
gravity
Spatial interaction/ IRPUD Wegener (1982) Composed of 7 submodels defined at different
gravity Wegener (2011) spatial scales. Microsimulation of land use
Spatial interaction/ Simulacra Batty et al. (2013) Simulation time of less than one minute
gravity
Econometric MEPLAN Echenique, Crowther, and Incorporates spatial input-output model. Trip
Lindsay (1969) generation determined as derived demand of
Echenique et al. (1990) economic activity.
Econometric TRANUS de la Barra (1989) Sophisticated travel model with the combined
mode-route choice.
Econometric MUSSA Martínez (1992) Incorporates bid-rent framework for land and
Martínez and Donoso (2010) floor space markets. Detailed representation of
households by type.
Econometric DELTA Simmonds (1999) Microsimulation of demographic transition.
Specifies quality of space in the market.
Econometric PECAS Hunt and Abraham (2009) Regional econometric model with
microsimulation of land development at parcel
level
Econometric RELU-TRAN Anas and Liu (2007) Dynamic general equilibrium of floor space, land
and labour markets, and products of industry
Microsimulation Ramblas Veldhuisen, Timmermans, and Rule-based model framework designed to
Kapoen (2000) simulate large populations
Microsimulation UrbanSim Waddell (2002) Land use model incorporating microsimulation of
demographic transition and land development
at parcel level
Microsimulation ILUMASS Moeckel, Spiekermann, Extends IRPUD framework to incorporate
Schürmann, and Wegener microsimulation and environmental evaluation
(2003) submodel
Moeckel, Schwarze,
Spierkermann, and Wegener
(2007)
Microsimulation ILUTE Farooq, Salvini, and Miller Comprehensive microsimulation of urban system.
(2008) Includes an activity-based travel model.
Microsimulation SILO Moeckel (2014) Simplified model with emphasis on budget
constraints over utility maximisation

a function of the total size (i.e. population and employment) of each zone and their sep-
aration distance. This was a highly intuitive framework because one would expect more
people in a zone to correlate with more trips and more proximate zones to have a
higher probability of trips between them. Wilson (1970) subsequently expanded the
theory to include the concept of entropy from statistical mechanics. He replaced the dis-
tance term with a generalised cost function and specified the distribution of trips between
zones as occurring at the point where system entropy was a maximum. A recently devel-
oped spatial interaction model is SIMULACRA (Batty et al., 2013). Its purpose is to provide
rapid cross-sectional static models of a wide range of scenarios in the short-term and long-
term. Each scenario can be run in a matter of minutes, making it a tool capable of inform-
ing policy discussions in real-time. Batty et al. (2013) distinguish their model by its modular
framework and ability to be manipulated into a range of generic model structures. Entropy
maximisation is the basis for the model, rather than the random utility theory (RUT) logit
models typical of the field, and the model seeks a comparative-static equilibrium. They
propose the introduction of system dynamics via the definition of activities as either (1)
capable of change (movers) or (2) passive (stayers).
72 J. HAWKINS AND K. NURUL HABIB

Econometric models developed to address shortcomings in the spatial interaction rep-

resentation of transportation and land development. Initial models, such as the Lowry
Model of Metropolis (Lowry, 1964), considered the urban environment as a physical
system and were largely insensitive to behaviour and the human element. The develop-
ment of RUT in economics was found to be highly applicable to ILUT models. Researchers
could employ discrete choice models to develop detailed representations of mode and
residential location choice, making their ILUT models sensitive to changes in the relative
utility of travel modes and various drivers of residential location choice. A second major
development in economics with direct bearing on ILUT models was the development of
input-output models by Leontief (1951), which represent the economy as a series of finan-
cial flows between industry sectors and households.
The MEPLAN model of Echenique uses a regional input-output model as its basis for
transportation generation and distribution (Echenique et al., 1990). This model was
extended to include elements of discrete choice in TRANUS and PECAS (de la Barra,
1989; Hunt & Abraham, 2009), which also consider land use change through development
modules. Each of these models assumes equilibrium in the transportation network and
market clearance of land. PECAS seeks equilibrium of commodity supply and demand
in each zone (Hunt & Abraham, 2009). The PECAS land use model comprises two com-
ponents: activity allocation (AA) and spatial development (SD). The AA module is respon-
sible for the allocation of activities, according to a regional input-output model, and drives
transportation generation at the level of land use zones. SD is a microsimulation of land
development events at the parcel level. The AA module is comparative-static because it
seeks an equilibrium of supply and demand in each model year, without consideration
for path dependence. However, several reviews (Iacono et al., 2008; Kii et al., 2016) classify
the model as quasi-dynamic because the AA module passes space prices to the next year
SD module and thus introduces an element of dynamic behaviour.
The second class of econometric models explicitly represent land markets, rather than
being based on regional economic models. The core of these models are markets for resi-
dential and commercial real estate. Anas was a pioneer in this field with his CATLAS model
in the 1980s (Wegener, 2004) and continues this work in RELU-TRAN (Anas & Liu, 2007).
The model is unique in that it determines a dynamic general equilibrium of the entire
regional economy. Equilibrium congestion on highways is determined by linking the
RELU (Regional Economy Land Use) model with the stochastic equilibrium transportation
model TRAN. The model has been tested with a 4 building, 4 industry, 4 labour type, 15
land use zone, 68 link network representation of the Chicago MSA (Anas & Liu, 2007).
This representation is attractive in that it can be solved as a system of 656 equations
and is consistently based on microeconomic theory. The use of a general equilibrium fra-
mework is unique among the models considered and means economic benefits can be
determined for industrial sectors and not simply real estate markets. The use of a static
equilibrium means intermediate year results are not required, which significantly
reduces the computational burden of the model. However, it remains a highly aggregate
model structure that lacks the behavioural heterogeneity of other operational models.
The most recent developments in ILUT models have focused on microsimulation of
urban systems using agent-based modelling techniques. This recognises the complex
relationships between urban agents, acting through time at different rates of change.
UrbanSim was initially developed as a highly disaggregate econometric model, but has
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 73

been updated to represent decisions using microsimulation (Timmermans, 2003). It differs

from the previously discussed models in that it assumes disequilibrium of land markets for
annual time increments. Building stock demand develops as a function of household and
firm WTP and buyers seek to maximise their surplus as represented by (WTP) less purchase
price (Waddell, 2002). On the supply side, sellers seek to maximise profit based on demand
perceived in the market. Agglomeration effects exist in the commercial property market in
UrbanSim, so that development by similar industries tends to cluster in specific locations
(Iacono et al., 2008).
Among the most comprehensive models of urban system, dynamics is ILUTE. This
model is structured around the interactions of four key urban systems: (1) land use, (2)
location choice, (3) auto ownership and, (4) activity and travel patterns (Farooq et al.,
2008). ILUTE utilises a variety of modelling techniques including state transitions, RUT,
rule-based models, and learning models (Iacono et al., 2008). There is no market clearing
mechanism in ILUTE as individual decisions are simulated independently, resulting in a
constant state of disequilibrium (Timmermans, 2003). ILUTE was developed with explicit
integration and co-development of a sophisticated transportation model. It can, therefore,
represent feedbacks between land use and transport more seamlessly than other land use
models, such as PECAS and UrbanSim, which are typically integrated with the existing
transportation model of the region. However, with increasing model complexity comes
increasing data requirements and run times. A typical run of the full ILUTE system may
take between 10 to 20 h for a 20-year simulation (Farooq et al., 2008) and requires a
wide range of data inputs, which may be expensive to obtain.
The final microsimulation model to be discussed is SILO, which emerged from the
IRPUD and ILUMASS models developed in Germany. ILUMASS was developed as a micro-
simulation of IRPUD, but run times were found to be prohibitively long (Moeckel et al.,
2007). SILO introduces simplifications to the ILUMASS methodology to decrease run
times, but maintains many of its attractive features. A key feature is the explicit represen-
tation of time and monetary budget constraints. In a 1982 article, Burnett and Hanson
argued the assumption, still maintained in most ILUT models, that location and travel
decisions are the outcomes of rational choice was unconvincing. They cited increasing evi-
dence of such decisions being habituated stable routines, often constrained by prejudice
and avoidance behaviour (Burnett & Hanson, 1982). SILO assumes equilibrium but main-
tains the population of agents between years, rather than reproducing the population
each time step. Unlike most models, it does not assume complete knowledge by
agents. Decisions are made under uncertainty with limited time and monetary budgets
and utilities are not necessarily maximised. Rather, agents seek to satisfy requirements
and are biased by perceptions arising from constraints and habit formation. SILO has
only been operational for a few years but has already been applied in Minneapolis, Mary-
land, and Munich. The Munich application includes integration with the transportation
model MatSim at the level of agents, rather than traffic zones (Ziemke, Nagel, &
Moeckel, 2016). Run times are in the range of a few hours, in contrast with the multi-
day run times of many operational models.
A typical application of ILUT models is an assessment of transportation infrastructure
investments. In such an application, a new bridge across a river might be considered
based on its ability to alleviate congestion and shift traffic from existing river crossings.
The new infrastructure is added to the model as an exogenous input and analysis is
74 J. HAWKINS AND K. NURUL HABIB

based on changes in transportation demand. In the case of AV, there is a distinct temporal
component that brings back the discussion of three implementation trajectories discussed
above. We cannot simply add AV as a new mode of travel to existing ILUT models. The
change will occur incrementally over several years, with initial adoption being partial
and by any of private households, private firms, or public transit agencies. This will
require methods for modelling the evolution of the adoption through time. A 10% adop-
tion of AV by private households in a given year will influence patterns of adoption in sub-
sequent years. Equilibrium-based models that ignore path dependence through time are
not suitable for this type of change. Of equal importance, AV is expected to replace the
mode of travel – automobiles – which largely govern the direction of transportation infra-
structure development. It is expected shorter headways and removal of the driving task
from occupants will significantly reduce infrastructure requirements; road widths could
be reduced and interchanges could be replaced by communication between vehicles as
they merge onto the highway. Endogenous representation of transportation supply is
not well represented in operational ILUT models (Iacono et al., 2008). Limited literature
exists on the evolution of transportation networks (Levinson, Xie, & Zhu, 2006; Yamins, Ras-
mussen, & Fogel, 2003), but it is likely to become an important topic of study as AV devel-
ops, at least in aggregate terms.
A final consideration in reviewing ILUT models for analysis of AV adoption is of a prac-
tical nature. Private firms develop many of these models and the code is not publicly avail-
able. UrbanSim and SILO are available for modification through open-source software
distribution system, e.g. GitHub, but the other packages are proprietary or require a
formal request to the model developer.

Equilibrium or disequilibrium?
Early models were restricted in their representation of behavioural heterogeneity by com-
puting power. They were forced to rely upon physical distance as the explanation for travel
behaviour and equilibrium of supply and demand in each year. Equilibrium is a common
assumption in the analysis of economic markets and was adopted during early develop-
ment of ILUT models to represent markets of land and transportation. However, it has
become increasingly evident this assumption does not hold strong in these markets,
with their long periods of transition. Timmermans (2003, p. 21) is correct when he says
of ILUT models the “behavioural, theoretical underpinnings are still weak, that theory
has been largely borrowed rather than specifically developed for the problem at hand”.
Equilibrium in ILUT removes any notion of path dependence and most models redistribute
activities in each time period from scratch, without memory of their previous state. Equili-
brium assumes that socio-technical structures persist through time. A small perturbation
may occur because of a new land use policy or addition of a new highway, but the
system will eventually return to its previous state – or a very similar one.
The prevailing view among the Transportation Engineering and Planning professions is
that changes induced by AV will be substantial, but occur over the course of many years as
the technology is developed and integrated into the existing system. The conventional
forecasts of comparative-static equilibrium models run up against a wall of uncertainty
under such conditions of technology and state transition through time. The role of
models is progressively becoming one of exploring multiple scenarios, requiring robust
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 75

foundations in theories of non-linear dynamics and evolution over long time horizons
(Wilson, 2016). Taking the example of residential location choice, Timmerman finds the
accessibility term used in conventional models “at best plays a marginal role” (2003,
p. 25) in this decision. This tends to be a long-term decision that is not necessarily affected
by a change in work location. The conventional equilibrium model will evaluate this
decision each simulation period and may move a household closer to a new work location
based on abstract concepts of system equilibrium and utility maximisation, irrespective of
other constraints on household location.
Many of the operational equilibrium-based models appear to recognise the case
against this assumption in long-run simulation scenarios but rely upon patches rather
than theoretical restructuring, to satisfy this discord. For example, PECAS includes a dam-
pening adjustment that can reduce the reliance upon equilibrium by dampening the
requirement of matching commodity targets for each zone (Hunt & Abraham, 2009).
Such patches do not account for path dependence and non-linearity of change in
urban systems.
The above considerations have spurred the development of dynamic models that are
not bounded by the assumption of equilibrium, such as UrbanSim and ILUTE. However,
these models heavily rely on simulation methods, which demand additional data and
computing time. In order to illustrate the countervailing forces of equilibrium and disequi-
librium in urban systems, we draw from an example by Batty (2017). Taking the example of
London, the essential physical form of the central city has been maintained for the past
100 years. It is only when one considers the changing use of each building that the
dynamic nature of the city emerges. At the turn of the twentieth century, “there were
75,000 manufacturing jobs in the City of London” (Batty, 2017, p. 3) and it was populated
by roughly 27,000 people. Fast-forward to 2015 and “there were hardly any such jobs and
the City’s population had fallen to 8100” (Batty, 2017, p. 3). The buildings remained largely
intact, but to say the city had not challenged would be false. This suggests models should
have the flexibility to consider systematic variation and dynamics, but also recognise the
persistence of physical and social structures.
We do not suggest there is not a place for equilibrium in ILUT models, far from it.
Assumptions of equilibrium provide a framework for comparative analysis and stability
in the model. Rather, we suggest a stronger link across simulation steps than presently uti-
lised in most models. The incremental introduction of AV necessitates a strong emphasis
on the behaviour of the urban system through time. The example of London, suggests
thought should be given in modelling as to the classification of components of the
urban system as mutable or immutable relative to changes in available mobility alterna-
tives through time. The dimensions of roads may change, but will the hierarchy of
roads into freeways, arterials, and collectors persist? How will residential location choice
be influenced by changes in available mobility alternatives and what portion is ingrained
within cultural factors of income and racial segregation.
Ultimately, a combination of equilibrium and dynamics will be necessary for ongoing
model development. Dynamic models recognise the evolving nature of the urban
system; however, as the system moves further from its current state, the lack of equili-
brium in dynamic microsimulation models may introduce changes that ignore structural
features of the system. Equilibrium provides a stabilisation force for the model and recog-
nition of patterns of development identified in the economic and regional sciences. The
76 J. HAWKINS AND K. NURUL HABIB

field is moving towards this type of balance, as evidenced by the work of Hurtubia et al. in
which they modify the MUSSA framework to employ a quasi-equilibrium framework
(2017). The standard MUSSA model obtains a fixed-point equilibrium solution for residen-
tial locations and market clearing prices. The modified model maintains an equilibrium in
market clearing prices but uses a dynamic microsimulation approach to obtain residential
locations (Hurtubia, Martinez, & Bierlaire, 2017). In the following sections we consider (1)
the data requirements to model AV in ILUT models and (2) applications of complex
systems theory and synergetics to model patterns of AV adoption.

Data requirements for ILUT models of AV

These types of models are data hungry. To accurately represent a wide range of dynamics in
the urban environment, a wide range of data are required as inputs. Of particular interest
are data on the behaviour of persons in terms of their travel and location choices. This is
typically gleaned from revealed preference (RP) data in household travel surveys. A
major challenge for accurate modelling of AV adoption arises from the lack of good data
on the behaviour of persons in response to this technology. RP data is clearly unavailable
as the technology has yet to be deployed in any wide-scale manner. In instances of a tech-
nology not being available in a local context, the modeller may conduct a stated preference
(SP) survey to obtain preferences for technology options and urban conditions not pre-
sently available to the local population. However, this presents additional challenges in
the case of AV due to its incipient nature. Having not been exposed to the technology,
survey respondents may not provide accurate responses as to their preferences with
respect to the technology. The ultimate features of the technology remain sufficiently
ambiguous as to make survey-based data acquisition an important, but difficult, com-
ponent of the model. We suggest a stated adaption (SA) approach be taken in which
respondents are presented with a set of intermediate options, leading to the ultimate adop-
tion of AV. Rather than the standard SP method of presenting respondents with AV mode
alternates to compare against existing travel modes, an SA approach would present
alternative pathways towards a higher level of automation in mode alternatives. This
would mitigate the limitation of SP in representing future technologies and more accu-
rately capture adoption of AV as a vector, rather than a discrete change. SA surveys are
not unknown in the field of Transportation Planning (Khademi, Arentze, & Timmermans,
2012; Parvaneh, Arentze, & Timmermans, 2014), but we are not aware of any applications
to the incremental adoption of a new technology in ILUT models. This will be critical to the
assessment of incremental adoption of AV. Obtaining this data is plausible given that com-
ponents of the possible implementation futures exist in the form of most persons owning a
private automobile and having experience with public transit, while a smaller (but not insig-
nificant) portion have experience with mobility-as-a-service (MaaS) through taxis, Uber, and
Lyft. Finally, innovative survey methods are being developed, including the use of virtual
environments to simulate conditions of autonomous travel (Farooq & Cherchi, 2017).

Cities as dynamic-evolutionary systems

Cities are often referenced as dynamic centres of growth and development by urban the-
orists like Florida (2012), but this dynamism is largely absent from the modelling field. AV
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 77

is not an isolated change, divorced from other advances in technology. The develop-
ment of shared mobility and wider application of IT to the transportation system are
likely to induce changes in travel behaviour and activity location choice. Together
these new technologies will induce shocks to the urban fabric. The economist Joseph
Schumpeter aptly termed such change creative destruction (1969) for its ability to
induce dramatic upheaval in socioeconomic structures, but to also contain the seeds
of new structures.
The theory describing how cities might evolve with radical discontinuities in travel and
location choice has been sparse and largely conceptual. This section provides a brief over-
view with emphasis on prospects for modelling AV adoption. No illusions are held that a
silver bullet solution exists for accurately forecasting the effects of AV. Rather, the emphasis
is placed on the applicability of a variety of methods to ILUT models. We agree with Wilson
(2016) that conventional forecasting will play a diminished role in long-range models, to
be replaced by scenario explorations that consider non-linear dynamics, path depen-
dence, and the potential for discontinuous change.
In considering the future of ILUT models, it is clear their role increasingly will be one of
the forecasting pathways through time, rather than traditional applications to infrastruc-
ture investment. In lieu of a new interchange being introduced to the transportation
network and traffic volumes compared with a base case, applications will be focused on
the adoption of new technologies and adaptation to changing climates and energy pro-
spects. This will require the incorporation of evolutionary properties to models, which
account for the emergent properties of cities. Complex systems theory states that increas-
ing complexity will mean increasing divergence from equilibrium as the dominant state.
The importance of path dependence and continuous nature of the change implicit in
modelling AV suggest the application of evolutionary algorithms. This is the realm of
synergetics, the study of the relationships between interacting components of complex
systems. It considers the evolution of macroscopic changes in the system via the identifi-
cation of universal principles of dynamics. These principles are applied to the urban
context by Allen and others of the “Brussels School” (Allen & Sanglier, 1978). Applications
focus on redistribution of population and employment and are based on mathematical
formulations from the fields of chemistry and physics (Allen & Sanglier, 2010). Urban
form is viewed as the emergent result of the actions of individual persons and firms,
with much of the mathematics being adopted from the physical sciences. They introduce
concepts of bifurcations and catastrophes from complex systems theory (Allen & Sanglier,
2010). These are representations of the instability of a system and suggest instances of
rapid structural change.
Wilson (1970) completes similar work for travel mode choice and retail development.
He first examines the mode choice problem by considering an increase in transit fares, fol-
lowed by a decrease in transit fares a short time later. Wilson (1970) develops a theoretical
model based on the notion of a cusp catastrophe existing in the system. This produces a
hysteresis effect and suggests the number of persons moving away from transit with a fare
increase does not necessarily equal the number of persons returning to transit after the
fare returns to its initial state. In the case of retail changes, Wilson and Oulton (1983)
are able to model the shift in the UK from corner stores to super-markets as analogous
to a phase change in physical chemistry – a sudden shift in the composition of individual
retail establishments. These models are typically mathematically complex and rigid in their
78 J. HAWKINS AND K. NURUL HABIB

structures. They have provided useful qualitative results of macroscopic behaviour, but
have not seen widespread adoption in the applied modelling field.
As noted by Miller (2006), complexity does not necessarily mean complicated. Microsi-
mulation models attempt to represent the complex emergent behaviour of the urban
system from the varied actions of relatively simple individual agents. Faster computer pro-
cessing has increased the viability of such models, but developments-to-date lack a con-
sistent foundation for evolution through time. As we consider new technologies and their
effects on the urban system, it is perhaps time to again consider elements of complexity
and synergetics in our models. The adoption of AV will push the system progressively
further from its current state in ways that are difficult to represent solely based upon
the actions of individual agents. It is suggested that research from complex systems
theory could provide the macroscopic structures for emergent behaviour. For example,
initial AV adoption may be dominated by private ownership of vehicles as Maas infrastruc-
ture continues to develop. This would match the current pattern of high vehicle ownership
and emerging nature of MaaS. However, a discontinuous cusp may exist at a point of
increased acceptance of MaaS, beyond which the method of AV adoption switches
fairly rapidly away from private ownership of the vehicle. This requires recognition of
path dependence because agents will maintain AV usage through time, but also identifi-
cation of macroscopic thresholds.

Conclusions and future research

The adoption of AV as a form of mobility will have wide-ranging effects on, not only the
transportation system but many other aspects of the urban system. Existing ILUT models,
developed during a time of relative stability in urban form, represent a strong foundation
for the prediction of these effects. However, our modelling tools will need to change with
the reality “on the road” to inform policy around these new technologies. One of the basic
questions to be answered by our models regarding AV will be: who will win in the battle
between spatial agglomerations and dispersion induced by increased accessibility? This
has important ramifications for the consumption of land and energy by our cities. Its
answer will require continued integration of the latest research from spatial economics
to consider the role of agglomeration in firm location going forward. It will require contin-
ued development of survey methods to provide better inputs to our models regarding
willingness to travel further for work and leisure. Finally, it will require an increasing rec-
ognition that these changes will not be instantaneous, and that time places a crucial
role in the evolution of urban space.
The future of AV is unclear in terms of its means of deployment and influence on the
evolution of cities. Three general scenarios were identified in this paper for AV implemen-
tation, but no conclusions can be drawn based on the available evidence. We believe
transportation and land use models will be important tools to ascertain the most likely
pathway for development of AV; however, none of the existing ILUT model frameworks
is found to be wholly capable of modelling this development in its present form. The inter-
temporal nature of AV adoption has seen the minimal application in this field of modelling.
Dynamic microsimulation models are the present state-of-the-art and have appealing
properties in terms of their ability to represent emergent properties of the urban
system and include path dependencies. These benefits must be weighed against a lack
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 79

of theoretical underpinnings, which brings into question the validity of results for a change
on the scale of AV adoption. Additional research is required as to the structural character-
istics of urban systems and how best to incorporate these insights into ILUT models. Stated
adaptation surveys hold promise as inputs to model scenarios of AV, replacing SP inputs in
standard mode choice scenarios, but care must be taken interpreting survey responses
about as yet unavailable mode alternatives. The main research needs we see as desirable
prerequisites for examining AV adoption in ILUT models are:

(1) Survey results as inputs to the model that include AV as a developing pathway and not
a fully formed mode alternative;
(2) A specification in the model structure of the inter-temporal nature of AV adoption;
(3) A model structure that recognises the dynamic, non-equilibrium, nature of the urban
system and the fact that AV adoption will move the system away from its present equi-
librium state;
(4) An ability to forecast one of the three implementations of AV, but include the com-
plexity of the system as a cusp, or threshold, beyond which implementation may
deviate towards a different path; and
(5) A model structure that provides a means of an endogenous change of transportation
infrastructure, in response to the changing needs of AV mobility.

Acknowledgements
We are grateful to our colleagues in UTTRI for interesting discussions on the potential impacts of AV
and other forms of emerging technology on urban development.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Funding
This work was supported by an Ontario Graduate Scholarship and an NSERC Discover Grant.

ORCID
Jason Hawkins http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9655-4846
Khandker Nurul Habib http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1007-6706

References
Acheampong, R. A., & Silva, E. A. (2015). Land use – transport interaction modeling : A review of
the literature and future research directions. The Journal of Transport and Land Use, 8(3), 11–38.
doi:10.5198/jtlu.2015.806
Allen, P. M., & Sanglier, M. (1978). Dynamic models of urban growth. Journal of Social and Biological
Systems, 1, 265–280. Retrieved from https://journals-scholarsportal-info.myaccess.library.utoronto.
ca/pdf/01401750/v01i0003/265_dmoug.xml
80 J. HAWKINS AND K. NURUL HABIB

Allen, P. M., & Sanglier, M. (2010). A dynamic model of growth in a central place system. Geographical
Analysis, 11(3), 256–272. doi:10.1111/j.1538-4632.1979.tb00693.x
Ambühl, L., Ciari, F., & Menendez, M. (2016). What about space? A simulation based assessment of AVs
impact on road space in urban areas. 16th Swiss Transport Research Conference, Monte Verità.
Retrieved from http://www.strc.ch/2016/Ambuehl_EtAl.pdf
Anas, A., & Liu, Y. (2007). A regional economy, land use, and transportation model (RELU-TRAN):
Formulation, algorithm design, and testing. Journal of Regional Science, 47(3), 415–455. doi:10.
1111/j.1467-9787.2007.00515.x
Axhausen, K. W., Meyer, J., Becker, H., & Patrick, M. B. (2017). Research in transportation economics
autonomous vehicles : The next jump in accessibilities ? Research in Transportation Economics,
1–12. doi:10.1016/j.retrec.2017.03.005
Batty, M. (2017). Cities in disequilibrium. In J. Johnson, A. Nowak, P. Ormerod, B. Rosewell, & Y.-C.
Zhang (Eds.), Non-Equilibrium social science and policy (pp. 81–96). Cham, Switzerland: Springer
International Publishing AG. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.78.016110
Batty, M., Vargas, C., Smith, D., Serras, J., Reades, J., & Johansson, A. (2013). SIMULACRA: Fast land-use-
transportation models for the rapid assessment of urban futures. Environment and Planning B:
Planning and Design, 40(6), 987–1002. doi:10.1068/b4006mb
Bertoncello, M., & Wee, D. (2015). Ten ways autonomous driving could redefine the automotive
world. McKinsey&Company. Retrieved from http://www.mckinsey.com/industries/automotive-
and-assembly/our-insights/ten-ways-autonomous-driving-could-redefine-the-automotive-world
Bösch, P., Becker, F., Becker, H., & Axhausen, K. W. (2017). Cost-based analysis of autonomous vehicle
services. IVT Seminar. doi:10.3929/ethz-b-000166674
Burnett, P., & Hanson, S. (1982). The analysis of travel as an example of complex human behavior in
spatially-constrained situations: Definition and measurement issues. Transportation Research Part
A: General, 16(2), 87–102.
de la Barra, T. (1989). Integrated land use and transport modelling: Decision chains and hierarchies.
Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from www.cambridge.org
Echenique, M., Crowther, D., & Lindsay, W. (1969). A spatial model of urban stock and activity.
Regional Studies, 3(3), 281–312. doi:10.1080/09595236900185291
Echenique, M. H., Flowerdew, A. D. J., Hunt, J. D., Mayo, T. R., Skidmore, I. J., & Simmonds, D. C. (1990).
The MEPLAN models of Bilbao, Leeds and Dortmund. Transport Reviews, 10(4), 309–322. doi:10.
1080/01441649008716764
Encyclopedia Britannica. (2015). Karl Benz | German engineer | Britannica.com. Encyclopedia
Britannica. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/biography/Karl-Benz
EPA. (2000). Projecting land-use change: A summary of models for assessing the effects of commu-
nity growth and change in land-use patterns. Columbus Laboratories. Retrieved from https://nepis.
epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/30002FDC.TXT?ZyActionD=ZyDocument&Client=EPA&Index=2000+Thru
+2005&Docs=&Query=&Time=&EndTime=&SearchMethod=1&TocRestrict=n&Toc=&TocEntry=
&QField=&QFieldYear=&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDay=&IntQFieldOp=0&ExtQFieldOp=
0&XmlQuery=
Erdogan, S., Engelberg, D., Knaap, G., & Ducca, F. (2017). An integrated land use and transportation
model for anticipating impacts of autonomous behicles on location choices. TRB National
Planning Applications Conference. Retrieved from https://www.trbappcon.org/2017conf/
PresentationDetails.aspx?abstractid=317
Fagnant, D. J., & Kockelman, K. (2015). Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: Opportunities,
barriers, and policy recommendations for capitalizing on self-driving vehicles. Transportation
Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 77, 167–181. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2008.09.001
Farooq, B., & Cherchi, E. (2017). Virtual immersive reality environment (VIRE) for disruptive vehicular
technology choice experiments. International Choice Modelling Conference 2017. Retrieved from
http://www.icmconference.org.uk/index.php/icmc/ICMC2017/paper/view/1337
Farooq, B., Salvini, P. A., & Miller, E. J. (2008). Development of an operational integrated urban model
system. Volume X: ILUTE Software Documentation (Vol. X).
Florida, R. (2012). The rise of the creative class (2nd ed.). New York: Basic Books.
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 81

Forbes. (2009). Business meetings: the case for face-to-face. Retrieved from https://i.forbesimg.com/
forbesinsights/StudyPDFs/Business_Meetings_FaceToFace.pdf
Geron, T. (2017, July 11). Cities adapt to Uber with on-demand public transportation. Wallstreet
Journal. Retrieved from http://www.marketwatch.com/story/cities-adapt-to-uber-with-on-
demand-public-transportation-2017-07-11?siteid=rss&rss=1
Hörl, S., Ciari, F., & Axhausen, K. W. (2016). Recent perspectives on the impact of autonomous vehicles.
Arbeitsberichte Verkehrs- Und Raumplanung, 1216. doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.26690.17609
Hunt, J., & Abraham, J. (2009). PECAS - for spatial economic modelling theoretical formulation system
documentation. Retrieved from http://www.hbaspecto.com/pecas/downloads/files/PECASTheore
ticalFormulation.pdf
Hunt, J. D., Kriger, D. S., & Miller, E. J. (2005). Current operational urban land-use–transport modelling
frameworks: A review. Transport Reviews, 25(3), 329–376. doi:10.1080/0144164052000336470
Hurtubia, R., Martinez, F. J., & Bierlaire, M. (2017). A quasi-equilibrium approach for market clearing in
land use microimulations. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science, 1–24.
doi:10.1177/2399808317719071
Iacono, M., Levinson, D., & El-Geneidy, A. (2008). Models of transportation and land use change: A
guide to the territory. Journal of Planning Literature, 22(4), 323–340. doi:10.1177/
0885412207314010
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1990). Experimental tests of the endowment effect and
the Coase Theorem. Journal of Political Economy, 98(6), 1325–1348. Retrieved from http://www.
jstor.org/stable/2937761
Khademi, E., Arentze, T., & Timmermans, H. (2012). Designing stated adaptation experiments for
changes to activity-travel repertoires: Approach in the context of pricing policies. European
Transport Conference (ETC) (pp. 1–20). Retrieved from https://abstracts.aetransport.org/paper/
index/id/4030/confid/18
Kii, M., Nakanishi, H., Nakamura, K., & Doi, K. (2016). Transportation and spatial development: An over-
view and a future direction. Transport Policy, 49, 148–158. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.04.015
Kim, K., Yook, D.-H., Ko, Y.-S., & Kim, D.-H. (2015). An analysis of expected effects of the autonomous
vehicles on transport and land use in Korea. Working Paper (pp. 1–29). Retrieved from http://
marroninstitute.nyu.edu/uploads/content/Kim,YookDevelopment_of_Autonomous_Driving_
SystemMarron.pdf
Lamotte, R., De Palma, A., & Geroliminis, N. (2016). Sharing the road: the economics of autonomous
vehicles. Retrieved from https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01281425
Leontief, W. (1951). Input-output economics. Scientific American (2nd ed., Vol. 185). Oxford University
Press. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican1051-15
Levinson, D., Xie, F., & Zhu, S. (2006). The co-evolution of land use and road networks. In R. E. Allsop,
M. G. H. Bell, & B. Heydecker (Eds.), 53rd North American conference of Regional Science Association
International (pp. 1–26). Emerald Group Publishing Ltd. Retrieved from https://pdfs.
semanticscholar.org/300a/daf36cb48db44c047c06e1bd6d0c5df7f8cb.pdf
Lowry, I. S. (1964). A model of metropolis. Retrieved from https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/
pubs/research_memoranda/2006/RM4035.pdf
Lunden, I. (2016, May 24). VW invests $300M in Uber rival Gett in new ride-sharing partnership. Tech
Crunch. Retrieved from https://techcrunch.com/2016/05/24/vw-invests-300m-in-uber-rival-gett-
in-new-ride-sharing-partnership/
Mackett, R. L. (1985). Integrated land use — transport models. Transport Reviews, 5(4), 325–343.
doi:10.1080/01441648508716610
Martínez, F. J. (1992). The bid—choice land-use model: An integrated economic framework.
Environment and Planning A, 24(6), 871–885. doi.org/10.1068/a240871
Martínez, F. J., & Donoso, P. (2010). The MUSSA II land use auction equilibrium model. In F. Pagliara, J.
Preston, & D. Simmonds (Eds.), Residential location choice: Models and applications (pp. 99–113).
Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-12788-5
Miller, E. (2006). Integrated Urban Models: Theoretical Prospects. Proceedings of the 11th
International Conference on Travel Behaviour Research. Kyoto, Japan.
82 J. HAWKINS AND K. NURUL HABIB

Moeckel, R. (2014). Modeling constraints versus modeling utility maximization: Improving policy sen-
sitivity for integrated land-use/transportation models. Transportation Research Record, 1–18.
Retrieved from http://silo.zone/doc/2015_moeckel_trb.pdf
Moeckel, R., Schwarze, B., Spierkermann, K., & Wegener, M. (2007). Simulating interactions between
land use, transport and environment. 11th World Conference on Transport Research (pp. 1–20).
Moeckel, R., Spiekermann, K., Schürmann, C., & Wegener, M. (2003). Microsimulation of land use.
International Journal of Urban Sciences, 7(1), 14–31. Retrieved from http://www.spiekermann-
wegener.com/pub/pdf/ILUMASS_IJUS.pdf
Neate, R. (2016, August 16). Ford to build “high volume” of driverless cars for ride-sharing services.
The Guardian. New York. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/aug/
16/ford-self-driving-cars-ride-sharing-uber-lyft
OECD, & ITF. (2015). Urban Mobility System Upgrade. Retrieved from www.
internationaltransportforum.org.
Parvaneh, Z., Arentze, T., & Timmermans, H. (2014). A stated adaptation approach to assess changes
in individuals’ activity-travel behavior in presence of personalized travel information. In
Transportation research procedia (Vol. 3, pp. 21–30). doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2014.10.087
Patton, P. (2008). A 100-year-old dream: A road just for cars. The New York Times (pp. 1–5). Retrieved
from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/automobiles/12LIMP.html?mcubz=2
Putman, S. H. (1974). Preliminary results from an integrated transportation and land use models
package. Transportation, 3(3), 193–224. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00165487
Ramsey, M., & Nagesh, G. (2016, May 5). GM, lyft to test self-driving electric taxis. Wall Street Journal.
Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/gm-lyft-to-test-self-driving-electric-taxis-146246
0094
Schumpeter, J. (1969). Essays on economic topics of J. A. Schumpeter.
Simmonds, D. C. (1999). The design of the delta land-use modelling package. Environment and
Planning B: Planning and Design, 26(5), 665–684. doi:10.1068/b260665
Sivakumar, A. (2007). Modelling transport: a synthesis of transport modelling methodologies. Imperial
College of London.
Skinner, R., & Bidwell, N. (2016). Making better places: Autonomous vehicles and future opportunities.
Retrieved from http://www.wsp-pb.com/Globaln/UK/WSPPB-Farrells-AV-whitepaper.pdf
Solomon, B. (2016, January). GM invests $500 million in lyft for self-driving car race with Uber, Tesla
and Google. Forbes, 4. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/briansolomon/2016/01/04/
gm-invests-500-million-in-lyft-for-self-driving-car-race-with-uber-tesla-and-google/
#9110f7e75b01
Spieser, K., Treleaven, K. B., Zhang, R., Frazzoli, E., Morton, D., & Pavone, M. (2014). Toward a systema-
tic approach to the design and evaluation of automated mobility-on-demand systems: A case
study in Singapore. Lecture Notes in Mobility. Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-05990-7_20
Tientrakool, P., Ho, Y. C., & Maxemchuk, N. F. (2011). Highway capacity benefits from using vehicle-to-
vehicle communication and sensors for collision avoidance. IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference
(pp. 1–5). IEEE. doi:10.1109/VETECF.2011.6093130
Timmermans, H. (2003). The saga of integrated land use-transport modeling: How many more dreams
before we wake up?10th International Conference on Travel Behaviour Research (pp. 10–15).
Lucerne. Retrieved from https://edit.ethz.ch/ivt/news/archive/20030810_IATBR/timmermans.pdf
Veldhuisen, J., Timmermans, H., & Kapoen, L. (2000). RAMBLAS: A regional planning model based on
the microsimulation of daily activity travel patterns. Environment and Planning A, 32(3), 427–443.
doi:10.1068/a325
Waddell, P. (2002). Urbansim: Modeling urban development for land use, transportation, and
environmental planning. Journal of the American Planning Association , 68(3), 297–314.
Wegener, M. (1982). Modeling urban decline: A multilevel economic-demographic model for the
dortmund region. International Regional Science Review, 7(2), 217–241. doi:10.1177/
016001768200700207
Wegener, M. (1995). Current and future land use models. Current and future land use models (p. 25).
Retrieved from http://spiekermann-wegener.de/pub/pdf/MW_Dallas.pdf
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 83

Wegener, M. (2004). Overview of land-use transport models. Transport Geography and Spatial
Systems, 5, 127–146. doi:10.1007/s10654-011-9614-1
Wegener, M. (2011). The IRPUD model.
Wilson, A. (2016). New roles for urban models: Planning for the long term. Regional Studies, Regional
Science, 3(1), 48–57. doi:10.1080/21681376.2015.1109474
Wilson, A. G. (1970). Entropy in urban and regional model. Routledge. Retrieved from https://www.
amazon.com/Entropy-Regional-Modelling-Routledge-Revivals/dp/0415696313
Wilson, A., & Oulton, M. J. (1983). The cornershop to supermarket transition in retailing: The begin-
nings of empirical evidence. Environment and Planning A, 15, 265–274.
Yamins, D., Rasmussen, S., & Fogel, D. (2003). Growing urban roads. Networks and Spatial Economics, 3
(1), 69–85. doi:10.1023/A:1022001117715
Ziemke, D., Nagel, K., & Moeckel, R. (2016). Towards an agent-based, integrated land-use transport
modeling system. In Procedia computer science (Vol. 83, pp. 958–963). doi:10.1016/j.procs.2016.
04.192