MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768211887 · doi:10.1177/2399808317740355

The impact of urban proximity, transport accessibility and policy on urban growth: A longitudinal analysis over five decades

2017· article· en· W2768211887 on OpenAlexaff
Dena Kasraian, Kees Maat, Bert van Wee

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning B Urban Analytics and City Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrbanizationMetropolitan areaEconomic geographyGeographyPopulationTransport networkUrban planningRegional scienceTransport engineeringEnvironmental planningEconomic growthCivil engineeringEconomicsDemographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transport accessibility is assumed to be a main driver of urbanisation. Like many other metropolitan regions, the Randstad, the population and economic core of the Netherlands has experienced significant urbanisation, transport network expansion and spatial policies aimed to channel urban growth. This paper investigates the long-term relationships between the development of railway and motorway networks, urbanisation, and spatial policies, by using a panel dataset consisting of grid cells measured at six time points from 1960 to 2010. Generalised Estimating Equations analysis was applied to model the built-up area. Predictors include proximity to and accessibility by transport infrastructure, vicinity of urban areas, and spatial policies. Results indicate that road and rail accessibility alike, stably influenced urbanisation, but less than proximity to urban areas. Spatial policies played a significant role in channelling new urbanisation, while preserving the centrally located green and mainly rural area. Remarkably, the legacy of earlier policies is still significant despite shifts in predominant Dutch spatial policies. The findings are expected to be relevant for comparable poly-nuclear areas.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.304 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations74
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Planning B Urban Analytics and City ScienceSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207