MADUMETJA MOSELAKGOMO SATC, 11 JULY 2017

1. The relationship between urban neighbourhood type and commuting distance in Gauteng City Region, South Africa.A preliminary analysis MADUMETJA MOSELAKGOMO SATC, 11 JULY 2017

2. contents • INTRODUCTION • BACKGROUND • THE AIM OF THE PAPER • LITERATURE REVIEW • METHODOLOGY • FINDINGS • CONCLUSIONS • RECOMMENDATIONS

3. INTRODUCTION • The paper emanates from a research study that is aimed at establishing a framework to empirically measure or evaluate the impact of spatial policies that are meant to effect travel behavior, in Gauteng. • What is policy impact evaluation? • Assessing changes in behavior (outcome) that can be attributed to a certain policy, • Why do we need to measure policy impact? • Improve, inform and guide policy decision making, • Verify and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of policies (provides knowledge about what actually works and what doesn’t), • Improve government accountability, and • Allocation of public funds appropriately.

4. Background • South Africa’s historic urban spatial planning • Apartheid spatial planning (Group Areas Act (Act No.41 of 1950) • Segregation by race (some communities located far away from economic activities) Manifested into spatial imbalances: • Long distance commuting • Increased traffic congestion Increased generalised cost of travelling • Increased commuting time • The problem is intensified by • City urban growth • Seemingly widening gap between urban land use policy and transport system performance. • A problem for many growing cities across the world

5. Background • Spatial planning in post-apartheid era (post-1994) • The Development Facilitation Act (Act 67 of 1995) Section 3(1)(c)(iii) of the DFA in particular stated one of the principles for land development as to: “promote the availability of residential and employment opportunities in close proximity to or integrated with each other”, for all South Africans. • Reducing travel distances between residential and employment areas through the promotion of mixed-use developments • The recently promulgated Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (Act 16 of 2013) makes similar pronunciations.

6. Background • Since the promulgation of the DFA, the Gauteng City Region has seen development growth. • Mubiwa & Annegarn (2013) found that between 1991 and 2009 • Residential and commercial developments (particularly in the area between Johannesburg and Pretoria) • Low cost housing developing in the periphery • Evidence of urban sprawl • Evidence of corridor development and infill development • Still reflecting apartheid urban spatial structure • In 2013 the commuting distances reflected those of apartheid spatial planning (Culwicket al ,2015)

7. THE AIM OF THE research • The paper seeks to answer the following questions using an empirical approach: • To what extent does urban structure influence commuting distances? • What are the trends in commuting distances for different neighbourhood types in Gauteng since the promulgation of the DFA?

8. Literature review • Relationship between city spatial structure and commuting distance • City urban growth monocentric polycentric form change in travel behavior (Bertaud, 2001)

9. Literature review • Relationship between city spatial structure and commuting distance • Influence of polycentricity of commuting: • Two conflicting views from empirical studies elsewhere in the world • Average commuting distance in polycentric cities is shorter than in monocentric cities (Gordon et al., 1989; Guth et al., 2009; Veneri, 2010) • Used cross-sectional comparison of citiess • As cities develops from a monocentric to polycentric form the commuting distances increased (Aguilera, 2005; Yang, 2005) • Longitudinal analysis of average commuting distance in the same city

10. Literature review • Relationship between land use and commuting distance • Most common finding: • Higher diversity of land use and job-housing balance are associated with shorter commuting distance (Etminani– Ghasrodashti & Ardeshiri, 2016; Manoj & Verna, 2016; Litman, 1995; Zhou et al., 2011) • Inner city or urban core dwellers in most cities made shorter commuting trips than suburbs and villages/rural dwellers (Nielson, 2004). • non-transferability of findings • Area specific studies are important

11. Methodology • Both Cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of the average commuting distance of commuters from different urban neighbourhood types in Gauteng City Region, South Africa. • Data • 2001 household travel survey • 2013 household travel survey • Focused on mandatory home-work trips • Analysis tool • Gauteng Transport Model, (EMME4 model) • SPSS (Statistical analysis tool)

12. Methodology • The TAZs in the household travel survey were categorized in terms of: • Historical CBD (Urban Core) • Suburban area • Township and/or informal settlement

13. findings • Commuting distance calculation for a TAZ • Road based is distance (2001 and 2013), using EMME4 model • Most commuting trips are road based • Weighted average distance of all commuting trips made from that TAZ • Measured from centroid of origin TAZ to centroid of destination TAZ • Limitation • Distances are measured at aggregate level • Influence of intra-zonal trips

14. findings • Average commuting distance for the city region (2001 vs 2013) • Increased marginally by 1.7km

15. findings • Average commuting distance for the city region (2001 vs 2013) • Proportion of shorter trips was less in 2013

16. findings • Average commuting distance by urban neighbourhood type (2001 vs 2013) • %Difference • Urban core (40%) • Suburban (6%) • Township (0%)

17. findings • Intra-zonal commuting trips by urban neighbourhood type (2001 vs 2013) • A drop for Urban core • Indicative of longer commuting trips • Employers moving out of the CBDs? • Still high compared to others (land use diversity) • Very low for townships

18. findings • Comparison of commuting distance between neighbourhood types (2001 and 2013) • In both 2001 and 2013 township dwellers had the longest commuting time • Reflective of the apartheid spatial structure

19. Summary and conclusions • Commuters made relatively longer trips in 2013 than in 2001 • is this a concern? • Caused by polycentricity as suggested by literature? And improved transport systems? • Urban core commuting distances seem to be rising (surprisingly) • Employers moving out of the city? • Caused by polycentricity? And improved transport systems? • Township commuting distance remained the same • Intra-zonal commuting trips for township very low compared to others • Perhaps not enough labour absorbing developments with the townships?

20. Summary and conclusions • At this stage of the research the differences in commuting distance have not been attributed to policy inputs • This is challenging task • There are many confounders • However, • Commuting distances my continue to reflect apartheid spatial planning • Urban growth • Increased land prices as activities fight for land • Polycentricity (choice) • Improved transport systems (enabler)

21. Recommendations • Impact of polycentricitycould be managed (Yang, 2005) • Urban growth management tools (e.g. Urban Edge Delineation Policy, 2009) • land use policies (implemented for example through town planning schemes) • Promote mixed use infill development at a neighbourhood level (not only at single stand level) • To be closely monitored • New mega-housing projects should be accompanied or supported by labourabsorbing land uses.

22. Recommendations for further studies • Further studies • Use aggregated trip analysis approaches • Explore the use of more disaggregate trip analysis tools, especially with regard to overcoming the limitation of intra-zonal trips.

23. Thank You!