I have been observing the discussion of the past week, and it leads me to
wonder: does the long form (and presumably the upcoming ACS) provide enough
adequate information on mode of journey to work to make the data useful for
transportation planning, including transit planning?
I know this is heretical, but this list seems to be the appropriate place
to discuss it. Many of you are saying that the question doesn't work
because it doesn't handle multi-modal trips well. Very true. The
discussion below says that the long form misses too many poor people, who
are more likely to use transit. Also very true. (Changes need to be made
in the ACS follow-up methods to make sure that the same thing doesn't
happen there. Meanwhile, the problem does exist in the C2SS and its
follow-ups.) Neither the current form of the question on the long form nor
the ACS will handle the problem of people who were not at work 'last week.'
All the comments about problems with the transit data results also apply to
carpooling. Multi-modal, etc. No wonder the data come out showing
"everyone" drives alone to work!
It seems to me that the long form does do a good job of providing the
characteristics of the work trip for the large group of auto users. So, we
don't want to throw out the baby with the bath water. It may be necessary,
AFTER the ACS is reasonably institutionalized--assuming we get that far--to
try to get a couple more questions about the mode on to the questionnaire
in order to at least pick up multi-modal. Or, perhaps a multi-checkoff
question: which of the following modes did you use (mark all that
apply). This would improve the count of all the non-drive alone responses
(actually in a way similar to how the multi-checkoff for race improved the
counts of American Indians, etc.).
I'm just brainstorming here. But it does appear clear that the question
needs to be changed, and this is the group to work toward doing it.
Patty Becker
At 05:18 PM 07/12/2002 -0400, you wrote:
Here is a colleague of mine challenging the validity
of the 2000
Census data on transit ridership. I am not a statistician and have no
way of assessing the soundness of his claims. Can anybody help me?
Ken Orski
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: "The Truth About Transit", Baltimore Sun, July 12, 2002
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 15:48:00 -0400
From:"Tom Downs" <tdowns(a)ursp.umd.edu>
To: <korski(a)erols.com>
C Kenneth Orski wrote:
You should read this... and ponder
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.transit12jul12.story?c…
=======================
I would be glad to ponder the following:The survey data, census long
form, is increasingly viewed as biased in its results (response rates of
less than 20% in many regions, language biased in an age of immigrants,
poverty biased, and generally reflective of a white middle class data
set)The data does not reflect the fact that journey to work is about 20%
of trips and declining. Do we care about the explosion in "other trips"
and transit's role in them? We also have no clue as to what is happening
to pedestrian trips...Tom Downs
#################################################################
#################################################################
#################################################################
#####
#####
#####
#################################################################
#################################################################
#################################################################
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Patricia C. (Patty) Becker 248/354-6520
APB Associates/SEMCC FAX 248/354-6645
28300 Franklin Road Home 248/355-2428
Southfield, MI 48034 pbecker(a)umich.edu