The relationship between urban form and mode choice in US and Mexican cities: A comparative analysis of workers’ commutes


  • Erick Guerra University of Pennsylvania
  • Meiqing Li



Transportation and urban form, mode choice


This paper examines empirical relationships among commuters’ mode choice, metropolitan urban form, and socioeconomic attributes in the 100 largest urban areas in the United States and Mexico. Fitting multinomial logit models to data for more than 5 million commuters and their home urban area, we find several consistent relationships and several important differences in relationships among urban form and travel behavior. In both countries, urban residents living in housing types associated with more centrally located housing in more densely populated urban areas with less roadway are less likely to commute by private vehicle than similar residents in other housing types and other urban areas. In addition to some differences in the strength, significance, and signs of several predictor variables, we find large differences in elasticity estimates across contexts. In particular, the US’s high rates of driving and generally car-friendly urban form mean that even dramatic shifts in urban form or income result in only small predicted changes in the probability of commuting by private vehicle. We conclude that land use and transportation policies likely have a more substantial role in shaping commute patterns in countries like Mexico than in countries like the US.


Babyak, M. A. (2004). What you see may not be what you get: A brief, nontechnical introduction to overfitting in regression-type models. Psychosomatic Medicine, 66(3), 411–421.

Begg, C. B., & Gray, R. (1984). Calculation of polychotomous logistic regression parameters using individualized regressions. Biometrika, 71(1), 11–18.

Bento, A. M., Cropper, M. L., Mobarak, A. M., & Vinha, K. (2005). The effects of urban spatial structure on travel demand in the United States. Review of Economics and Statistics, 87(3), 466–478.

Blumenberg, E., & Pierce, G. (2014). A driving factor in mobility? Transportation’s role in connecting subsidized housing and employment outcomes in the moving to opportunity (MTO) program. Journal of the American Planning Association, 80(1), 52–66.

Boarnet, M., & Crane, R. (2001). The influence of land use on travel behavior: Specification and estimation strategies. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 35(9), 823–845.

Boeing, G. (2017). OSMnx: New methods for acquiring, constructing, analyzing, and visualizing complex street networks. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 65, 126–139.

Cao, X., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Handy, S. (2009). Examining the impacts of residential self‐selection on travel behavior: A focus on empirical findings. Transport Reviews, 29(3), 359–395.

Cervero, R., & Kockelman, K. (1997). Travel demand and the 3Ds: Density, diversity, and design. Transportation Research Part D, 2(3), 199–219.

CONAPO. (2018). Sistema Urbano Nacional. Retrieved from

Croissant, Y. (2019). mlogit: Multinomial logit models. Retrieved from

de Vasconcellos, E. A. (2005). Transport metabolism, social diversity and equity: The case of São Paulo, Brazil. Journal of Transport Geography, 13(4), 329–339.

Ewing, R., & Cervero, R. (2010). Travel and the built environment: A meta-analysis. Journal of the American Planning Association, 76(3), 265–294.

Ewing, R., Hamidi, S., Gallivan, F., Nelson, A. C., & Grace, J. B. (2014). Structural equation models of VMT growth in US urbanized areas. Urban Studies, 51(14), 3079–3096.

Ewing, R., Tian, G., Goates, J., Zhang, M., Greenwald, M. J., Joyce, A., … & Greene, W. (2015). Varying influences of the built environment on household travel in 15 diverse regions of the United States. Urban Studies, 52(13), 2330–2348.

Feng, J., Dijst, M., Prillwitz, J., & Wissink, B. (2013). Travel time and distance in international perspective: A comparison between Nanjing (China) and the Randstad (The Netherlands). Urban Studies, 50(14), 2993–3010.

Giuliano, G., & Dargay, J. (2006). Car ownership, travel and land use: A comparison of the US and Great Britain. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 40(2), 106–124.

Giuliano, G., & Narayan, D. (2003). Another look at travel patterns and urban form: The US and Great Britain. Urban Studies, 40(11), 2295–2312.

Guerra, E. (2014a). Mexico City’s suburban land use and transit connection: The effects of the Line B Metro expansion. Transport Policy, 32, 105–114.

Guerra, E. (2014b). The built environment and car use in Mexico City: Is the relationship changing over time? Journal of Planning Education and Research, 34(4), 394–408.

Guerra, E., Caudillo, C., Monkkonen, P., & Montejano, J. (2018). Urban form, transit supply, and travel behavior in Latin America: Evidence from Mexico’s 100 largest urban areas. Transport Policy, 69, 98–105.

Handy, S., Cao, X., & Mokhtarian, P. L. (2005). Correlation or causality between the built environment and travel behavior? Evidence from Northern California. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 10(6), 427–444.

Handy, S., Cao, X., & Mokhtarian, P. L. (2006). Self-selection in the relationship between the built environment and walking: Empirical evidence from Northern California. Journal of the American Planning Association, 72(1), 55–74.

Hu, L. (2014). Changing job access of the poor: Effects of spatial and socioeconomic transformations in Chicago, 1990–2010. Urban Studies, 51(4), 675–692.

INEGI. (2015). Encuesta intercensal 2015. Retrieved from

Ingram, G. K., & Liu, Z. (1999). Determinants of motorization and road provision. In J. Gomez-Ibanez, W. B. Tye, & C. Winston (Eds.), Transportation economics and policy handbook (pp. 325–356). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

ITDP (first). (2017). Invertir para movernos: Diagnóstico de inversión en movilidad 2011—2015. Versión revisada 2017. ITDP. Retrieved from

Jaramillo, C., Lizárraga, C., & Grindlay, A. L. (2012). Spatial disparity in transport social needs and public transport provision in Santiago de Cali (Colombia). Journal of Transport Geography, 24, 340–357.

Liang, K.-Y., & Zeger, S. L. (1986). Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika, 73(1), 13–22.

McIntosh, J., Trubka, R., Kenworthy, J., & Newman, P. (2014). The role of urban form and transit in city car dependence: Analysis of 26 global cities from 1960 to 2000. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 33, 95–110.

Mokhtarian, P. L., & Cao, X. (2008). Examining the impacts of residential self-selection on travel behavior: A focus on methodologies. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 42(3), 204–228.

Monkkonen, P. (2011). The Housing transition in Mexico expanding access to housing finance. Urban Affairs Review, 47(5), 672–695.

Newman, P., & Kenworthy, J. (1989). Cities and automobile dependence: A sourcebook. Aldershot, UK: Gower Technical.

Pucher, J., Dill, J., & Handy, S. (2010). Infrastructure, programs, and policies to increase bicycling: An international review. Preventive Medicine, 50 (Supplement), S106–S125.

R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from

Reis, J. P., Silva, E. A., & Pinho, P. (2016). Spatial metrics to study urban patterns in growing and shrinking cities. Urban Geography, 37(2), 246–271.

Stevens, M. R. (2017). Does compact development make people drive less? Journal of the American Planning Association, 83(1), 7–18.

Suárez, M., & Delgado, J. (2009). Is Mexico City polycentric? A trip attraction capacity approach. Urban Studies, 46(10), 2187–2211.

Suárez, M., Murata, M., & Delgado, J. (2016). Why do the poor travel less? Urban structure, commuting and economic informality in Mexico City. Urban Studies, 53(12), 2548–2566.

Sun, B., He, Z., Zhang, T., & Wang, R. (2016). Urban spatial structure and commute duration: An empirical study of China. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 10(7), 638–644.

Sun, B., Zhang, T., He, Z., & Wang, R. (2017). Urban spatial structure and motorization in China. Journal of Regional Science, 57(3), 470–486.

Tana, Kwan, M.-P., & Chai, Y. (2016). Urban form, car ownership and activity space in inner suburbs: A comparison between Beijing (China) and Chicago (United States). Urban Studies, 53(9), 1784–1802.

Train, K. (2009). Discrete choice methods with simulation (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Yang, J., French, S., Holt, J., & Zhang, X. (2012). Measuring the structure of US metropolitan areas, 1970–2000: Spatial statistical metrics and an application to commuting behavior. Journal of the American Planning Association, 78(2), 197–209.

Yang, L., Wang, Y., Bai, Q., & Han, S. (2017). Urban form and travel patterns by commuters: Comparative case study of Wuhan and Xi’an, China. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 144(1), 05017014.

Zegras, C. (2010). The built environment and motor vehicle ownership and use: Evidence from Santiago de Chile. Urban Studies, 47(8), 1793–1817.

Zhang, M. (2004). The role of land use in travel mode choice: Evidence from Boston and Hong Kong. Journal of the American Planning Association, 70(3), 344–360.

Zhu, Z., Li, Z., Liu, Y., Chen, H., & Zeng, J. (2017). The impact of urban characteristics and residents’ income on commuting in China. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 57, 474–483.




How to Cite

Guerra, E., & Li, M. (2021). The relationship between urban form and mode choice in US and Mexican cities: A comparative analysis of workers’ commutes. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 14(1), 441–462.