Mixed Logit을 利用한 立地와 圈域別 住居, 雇傭 및 通勤의 結合選擇 模型에 관한 硏究 = (The) Study on combination choice model of residence, employment and commuting by location and community employing the mixed logit

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The aim of this paper is to identify the stated preference(SP) on the combination choice model for residence, employment and commuting by location and community in Busan metropolitan city. The mixed logit as well as conditional logit are employed as the empirical analysis for this study.
The SP part for the survey is designed as a conjoint choice experiment to obtain as much relevant and reliable information as possible from the household. The SP experiment is subdivided into two hypothetical scenarios. ScenarioⅠ is the combination choice model of residence, employment and commuting by housing characteristics and ScenarioⅡ is by characteristics of neighborhood and working conditions.
The major findings are as follows; The likelihood ratio is even more improved using the mixed logit in comparison with the conditional logit. It proves that the mixed logit is more statistically suitable and the heterogeneity among respondents play an important role.
In the combination choice of residence, employment and commuting, respondents preferred strongly the residential location in non-center areas and the employment location in urban centers. Most of them would likely to prefer the areas which has been perceived as generally better place in residential locations. But, some families are apt to prefer the same location of residence and employment because of reducing a commuting time. Part of the households living and working in urban centers prefer the combination location of residence and employment in urban centers. And the some decision makers in non-centers areas also choice the same areas, who living in and working in.
In the combination choice model of residence, employment and commuting, households prefer large house over 60% of them and apartment and owing houses over 80% of them. Apartments are preferred by 75% of the households in urban centers, but by 62% of the households in non-centers. the households dislike long distance commuting.
The ranking for the choice probability of neighborhood characteristicsis "good education condition", "possibility of future developing" and "near by park and green areas". In other word, non-physical value such as a level of education or a benefit for lands is more important than physical value like public facilities in neighborhood. In the case of employment characteristics, "comfortable surroundings" and "monthly wage", which are short-term benefits, are preferred more than "possibility of future growth", which is a long-term benefit.
As the result, households seems to endure long distance commute for better residential location or prefer choice attribute although they are reluctant long commuting time. But not all households prefer non-centers for residential location, which present privacy, amenities, silence and so on. If centers is developed desirable environment for residence, it can be preferred as residential location. For more effective urban policy, such as residential location and choice, etc., household preference heterogeneity will be fully taken into consideration.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 제1장 서 론 1
• 제1절 연구의 배경 및 목적 1
• 제2절 연구의 범위 4
• 제3절 연구의 방법 7
• 제2장 주거, 고용 및 통근의 결합선택 모형에 관한 이론적 고찰 및 선행연구 8
• 제1절 이론적 고찰 8
• 1. 도시경제이론 8
• 2. 확률선택이론 12
• 제2절 선행연구 16
• 1. 주거 선호 및 이주에 관한 선행연구 16
• 2. 주거입지 선택에 관한 선행연구 18
• 3. 주거, 고용 및 통근의 결합선택에 관한 선행연구 22
• 제3장 분석모형 및 SP자료의 구성과 접근방법 26
• 제1절 분석모형 26
• 1. 이산선택모형 27
• 2. Conditional Logit 30
• 3. Mixed Logit 34
• 제2절 SP자료의 구성과 Experimental Design 43
• 1. SP자료의 개념 및 특징 43
• 2. SP자료의 구성을 위한 Experimental Design 45
• 3. Experimental Design의 효율성 49
• 제3절 분석자료의 Experimental Design 53
• 1. 분석자료의 구성 53
• 2. SP설문의 시나리오 54
• 3. SP설문의 Experimental Design 60
• 4. SP설문의 표본조사 62
• 제4장 주택특성에 대한 주거, 고용 및 통근의 결합선택 모형 66
• 제1절 변수의 정의 66
• 제2절 주거입지별 주거, 고용 및 통근의 결합선택 모형 68
• 1. 도심 주거입지 추정결과 68
• 2. 비도심 주거입지 추정결과 71
• 제3절 고용입지별 주거, 고용 및 통근의 결합선택 모형 75
• 1. 도심 고용입지 추정결과 75
• 2. 비도심 고용입지 추정결과 77
• 제4절 도시권역별 주거, 고용 및 통근의 결합선택 모형 80
• 1. 동부산권 추정결과 80
• 2. 중부산권 추정결과 82
• 3. 서부산권 추정결과 84
• 제5절 소 결 86
• 제5장 근린․고용환경특성에 대한 주거, 고용 및 통근의 결합선택 모형 90
• 제1절 변수의 정의 90
• 제2절 주거입지별 주거, 고용 및 통근의 결합선택 모형 92
• 1. 도심 주거입지 추정결과 92
• 2. 비도심 주거입지 추정결과 94
• 제3절 고용입지별 주거, 고용 및 통근의 결합선택 모형 97
• 1. 도심 고용입지 추정결과 97
• 2. 비도심 고용입지 추정결과 99
• 제4절 도시권역별 주거, 고용 및 통근의 결합선택 모형 101
• 1. 동부산권 추정결과 101
• 2. 중부산권 추정결과 103
• 3. 서부산권 추정결과 103
• 제5절 소 결 107
• 제6장 결 론 110
• 참고문헌 113
• 부록(설문지) 122
• Abstract 140