Socioeconomic GIS Analysis

How does the diversity of housing choice affect individuals’ means of transportation in California? To answer this question, I created a housing diversity index, ran OLS regressions, and produced bivariate maps.

Background and Problem Formulation

  • Different types of housing are often located in distinct neighborhoods with varying levels of access to transportation infrastructure (Tian et al. 2019)

  • Housing diversity reflects the mix of land use and zoning regulations within a community (mixed-use development and higher-density housing can create more walkable, bikeable, and well-connected environments)

  • More varieties of housing choices may be associated with socioeconomic diversity and affordability, attracting residents with varying income levels (Clark et al. 2022)

  • Wider ranges of housing options can have implications for environmental sustainability and transportation emissions

Data Assembly: OLS Regression

  • Census Data from the American Community Survey: 2022

    • Median Household Income in the Past 12 months

      • B19013_001: Total Income (Scaled using Min-Max Method)

    • Commuting Characteristics

      • S0801_C01_003E: Drove alone

      • S0801_C01_004E: Carpooled

      • S0801_C01_009E: Public transportation (excluding taxicab) 

      • S0801_C01_010E: Walked

      • S0801_C01_011E: Bicycle

      • S0801_C01_012E: Taxicab, motorcycle, or other means

      • S0801_C01_013E: Worked from home

      • DP04_0058PE: No vehicles available

Conclusions

This study found evidence of a relationship between housing diversity and transportation modes in California, with areas with more diversity of housing choice possibly leading to more bicycle usage (especially in urban settings and college towns with intentional bicycle infrastructure)

  • Limitations include data availability, choice of variables related to home values, lack of transportation index

  • A further study on the impacts of green gentrification would be beneficial

  • Due to high heteroskedasticity, other spatial regression models may be more successful in future research that could explore additional factors of influence 

  • The findings suggest the importance of promoting bicycle-friendly infrastructure and policies to enhance quality of life

References

City of Santa Monica. (n.d.). Santamonica.gov - Bike Action Plan Amendment. https://www.santamonica.gov/mobility-projects/bike-action-plan-amendment

Clark, W. a. V., ViforJ, R. O., & Truong, N. K. (2021). Neighbourhood selection and neighbourhood matching: Choices, outcomes and social distance. Urban Studies59(5), 937–955. https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980211044029

SFMTA. (2023) Bicycle Ridership data. SFMTA. https://www.sfmta.com/bicycle-ridership-data

Tian, G., Park, K., & Ewing, R. (2018). Trip and parking generation rates for different housing types: Effects of compact development. Urban Studies56(8), 1554–1575. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098018770075

U.S. Census Bureau, Median Household Income, https://data.census.gov/table/ACSDT1Y2022.B19013?q=B19013_001

U.S. Census Bureau, Commuting Characteristics by Sex, https://data.census.gov/table/ACSST1Y2022.S0801?q=S0801

U.S. Census Bureau, TIGER/Line Shapefile, 2021, State, California, Census Tracts, https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/tiger-line-shapefile-2021-state-california-census-tracts

Previous
Previous

ULI Hines Cleveland 2025: Union

Next
Next

Airport-Oriented Development for Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport