Modelling propensity to move house after job change using event history analysis and GIS Marie-Hélène Vandersmissen (CRAD, Laval University), Anne-Marie Séguin (INRS-UCS), Marius Thériault (CRAD, Laval University) and Christophe Claramunt (Naval Academy Research Institute, France) 2nd MCRI/GEOIDE PROCESSUS Colloquium on the Foundations of Integrated Land-Use and Transportation Models Toronto, June 12-15 2005 Introduction Transportation land-use modelling must consider decision-making behaviour of urban actors using disaggregate data in order to relate – Activity location, home choice, commuting and travel decision – Household, individual and professional profiles of persons Probabilistic discrete choice theory is becoming the central issue of urban and transport modelling research – Implemented using logistic and Cox regression techniques – Aimed at modelling individual’s and household’s behaviour Need for spatio-temporal GIS for analysing urban and transport systems where – Uncertainties exist in the system (aggregation is not straightforward) • Emergent behaviour occurs – Decision rules for individuals and households are intricate – System processes are time-path and location dependent • Future system state depends partly on past and current states 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 Our project in the MCRI programme 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 Purpose Emergent residential behaviours of individual actors in context of profound social changes in the work sphere Long term-view in the analysis of the relationship between social changes in the work sphere and these behaviours Social changes Long-term dynamics of residential location behaviour 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 Travel behaviour Objective and Research Issues Estimate the propensity for professional workers to move house after a change of workplace – How many will move house during the following job episode? – For how long will they delay that decision? – What are the factors significantly influencing that move house decision? 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 Data: The 1996 Retrospective Survey for Quebec City Survey collecting, in one interview, information about all changes occurred over a long period of time, since their departure of the respondent’s parental home Spatially stratified sample of two cohorts of professional workers – 418 respondents living in Quebec CMA in 1995 – Two cohorts (mid-thirty and mid-forty) • 224 women; 194 men • 112 women and 100 men in their mid-thirty • 112 women and 94 men in their mid-forty – Reporting on significant events occurred during their life time describing • Residential trajectory (every home occupied with their location) • Household trajectory (each change in the household’s composition) • Professional trajectory (each change in employer, each workplace) – Collecting dates of every change 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 Complex mix of Personal Biography real world phenomena Complex Evolution Processes Marital status HOUSEHOLD TRAJECTORY SINGLE SINGLE IN COUPLE MARRIED Leading to SPOUSE SPOUSE at least one episode UNCLE SON Room Room Change in mate mate status 3 7 9 10Combining 12 21 facts17 1 4 6 describing a specific RESIDENTIALTRAJECTORY aspect of life STUDIO FLAT APARTMENT 2 Family MOTHER Others persons 23 24 26 Main home APARTMENT STUDIO FLAT ROOM ROOM DIVORCED TOWN HOUSE Secondary house Set of relatedCHALET lifelines using application-specific14 semantic relationships 16 22 CAREER TRAJECTORY STUDENT CONSULTANT UNEMPLOYED PROFESSIONAL UNEMPLOYED Occupation TECHNICIAN TECHNICIAN CONSULTANT 19 3 5 Leaving Parent's Home 8 11 13 MOTHER 18 20 25 Survey date Time Line Event Episode 3 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 CONSULTANT 15 Lifeline Location Management of Evolution in Trajectories We developped a generic spatio-temporal data model to handle historical orderings and querying patterns of facts in order to produce flat files needed for event-history analysis Generic part of the ST data model HistoricalOrdering PK TrajectId PK U2,U1 TrajectName HistoryId Application semantics TrajectoryStates Trajectories defines PK LifeDimId FK1,I1 FK2,I2 LifeStateId TrajectId FK1,I1 FBeforeId FK2,I2 FAfterId Historical ordering of facts uses is after Facts PK is before FactOwners PK OwnerId I1 I1 BirthDate Survey Time belongs to FK2 FK3,I2 FK1,I1 I3 I4 I5 LifeStates FactId OwnerId SpatialId LifeStateId PeriodBeg PeriodEnd ObsTime belongs to PK LifeStateId U2,U1 U2,U1 LifeStateName Episode Spatial Individuals Respondents PK,FK1,FK2,U1 RespondId I1 I1 Gender Cohort PK PersonId I1 I1 I1 Name SurName Gender is 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 ActingIndividuals is PK ActingId FK2,I2 FK1,I1 PersonId FactId PK SpatialId I1 I2 Longitude Latitude MapInfo_MapCatalog I1 U1 I1 I1 I1 I1 SpatialType TableName CoordinateSystem Symbol XColumnName YColumnName Link to Spatialware is located at is involved in is Facts : events and episodes Location of facts Spatio-temporal Query of Patterns of Facts within Trajectories We developped a query interface combining georelational GIS capabilities and temporal historical ordering of facts using ODBC links Specifying spatial distance condition Specifying target fact Specifying duration condition Specifying time ordering Specifying temporal conditions Specifying spatial location patterns of factscondition Specifying other status condition 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 Methodology: Event History Analysis Ordinary multiple regression is ill-suited to the analysis of biographies – Censoring: refers to the fact that the value of a variable may be unknown at the time of survey – Considering time varying explanatory factors • Need to consider time-varying information to study the effect of job change on house moving Event history analysis can handle such a problem (survival tables and logistic regression) – The query interface enhance data restructuring needed for this kind of statistical analysis 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 Event History Analysis (Cox Regression) Survival tables are using conditional probabilities to estimate the mean proportion of people experiencing some change in their life after a significant event occurs, computing the time delay after a specified enabling event Specific conditions may influence propensity to change Requires a combination of survival tables and logistic regression to estimate the marginal effect of other personal attributes on the probability that an event occurs Event History Analysis to model specific variations of the probability of state transition through time for individuals considering independent variables describing their personal situation on other lifelines 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 Probability to move home after a job change: probabilit y(MoveHome) 1 survival( NotMoveHome)* propensity (MoveHome) propensity ( MoveHome) odds( MoveHome) odds(MoveHome) e 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 1 odds(MoveHome) b1 gender b2 age b3cohort bn X e e e Basic statistics 380 respondents (on 418) had a change of job or workplace at least once during during their career 411 respondents moved their home at least once after departure from parent’s home 1056 changes of job or workplace within or towards the Quebec CMA (321 persons) – 458 of those changes of workplace were followed by at least one move house during the subsequent employment episodestability of job and workplace – 598 of those changes of workplace were not followed by any move house during the subsequent employment episode (231 persons) Number of pair of events (change of job-workplace versus moving house or not) Cohort Gender Moving House Not Moving House Mid-Thirty Men Mid-Forty Women 122 129 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 Men 117 170 97 136 Women 122 163 Basic variables for the Event History analysis Gender Cohort ChWPL_Type ChWPL_Order 1 (Male); 2 (Female) 1 (Mid-Thirty); 2 (Mid-Forty) 1 (New Job); 2 (Change of Workplace keeping the same job) Ordering of this change of work place among those of the same respondent (E.g. 2 means that it is the second change of workplace for this respondent) ChWPL_Age Age of the respondent when the change of workplace was occurring (Years) ChWPL_Marital Marital status when changing of workplace (1: Single; 2: Couple – marriage or free union; 3: Separated, divorced or widow) ChWPL_Persons Total number of persons living in the household when changing of workplace ChWPL_Children Number of children living at home when changing of workplace Move_House The respondent was effectively moving house after the change of work place (1: Yes; 0: No) --- CENSORING VARIABLE Elapsed_Time Time elapsed between change of work place and moving house (Weeks) ---DEPENDENT VARIABLE – time elapsed at the end of the new job episode if not moving house MoveH_Marital Marital status when moving home (1: Single; 2: Couple – marriage or free union; 3: Separated, divorced or widow) – at end of new job episode if not moving home during that period MoveH_Persons Total number of persons living in the household when moving home – at end of new job episode if not moving home during that period MoveH_Children Number of children living at home when moving home – at end of new job episode if not moving home during that period ChWPL_Neig Location of the new work place (1: city core; 2 old suburbs; 3: new suburbs; 4: urban fringe) 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 PJob_Neig Location of the previous job (1: city core; 2 old suburbs; 3: new suburbs; 4: urban fringe; 5: outside the Quebec CMA) PJob_Durat Duration of the previous job episode (Years) PJob_Regime Employment regime at previous job location (1: Full time, >30 hours per week; 0: Part time) PJob_Stability Perceived stability of employment at previous job location (1: Very stable; 2: Mostly stable; 3: Mostly unstable; 4: Precarious) NJob_Regime Employment regime at new job location (1: Full time, >30 hours per week; 0: Part time) NJob_Stability Perceived stability of employment at new job location (1: Very stable; 2: Mostly stable; 3: Mostly unstable; 4: Precarious) PHome_Tenure Tenure of previous home (1: owner; 2: tenant; 3: co-tenant) NHome_Tenure Tenure of new home if any; otherwise previous tenure (1: owner; 2: tenant; 3: cotenant) PHome_Durat Duration of previous residential episode (Years) PHome_Neig Location of the previous home (1: city core; 2 old suburbs; 3: new suburbs; 4: urban fringe; 5: outside the Quebec CMA) NHome_Neig Location of the new home if any; otherwise location of the old one (1: city core; 2 old suburbs; 3: new suburbs; 4: urban fringe) MoveH_Dist Euclidean Distance between the old and the new residential locations (Km) PHomeNJob_Dist Euclidean Distance between the previous home and the new job locations (Km) NHomeNJob_Dist Euclidean Distance between the new home (if any; otherwise previous home) and the new job locations (Km) PJobNJob_Dist Euclidean Distance between the old and the new job locations (Km) 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 Descriptive Statistics Change of workplace order in the respondent career Change 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Total Frequency 183 197 192 144 105 83 55 36 25 16 9 6 3 1 1 1056 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 % Cumulative % 17,3 17,3 18,7 36,0 18,2 54,2 13,6 67,8 9,9 77,7 7,9 85,6 5,2 90,8 3,4 94,2 2,4 96,6 1,5 98,1 0,9 99,0 0,6 99,5 0,3 99,8 0,1 99,9 0,1 100 100 Location of the previous job episode (PJE) workplace Frequency City Core 316 Old Suburbs 386 New Suburbs 39 Urban Fringe 9 Outside the Quebec CMA 306 Total 1056 % Cumulative % 29,9 29,9 36,6 66,5 3,7 70,2 0,9 71,0 29,0 100 100 Location of the new workplace (NWP) Frequency City Core 449 Old Suburbs 515 New Suburbs 76 Urban Fringe 16 Total 1056 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 % Cum. % 42,5 42,5 48,8 91,3 7,2 98,5 1,5 100 100,0 Change of home Neighbourhood From or To Outside of the Quebec CMA Core Core --> Suburbs Suburbs --> Core Old Suburbs Old Suburbs --> New Suburbs New Suburbs --> Old Suburbs New Subs + Fringe Total Frequency 100 223 41 29 484 26 14 139 1056 % Cum. % 9,47 9,4697 21,12 30,5871 3,883 34,4697 2,746 37,2159 45,83 83,0492 2,462 85,5114 1,326 86,8371 13,16 100 100 Change of tenure Frequency Owner --> Owner 431 Owner --> Tenant 31 Tenant --> Owner 125 Tenant --> Tenant 396 Co-tenant --> Tenant 12 Being Co-tenant 61 Total 1056 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 % Cum. % 40,8 40,8 2,9 43,8 11,8 55,6 37,5 93,1 1,1 94,2 5,8 100 100,0 Empirical Results: 1. Cross-tables 100 90 80 X2: 1,281 ddl:1 P: 0,258 70 60 100 50 90 % 40 X2: 0,495 ddl:1 P: 0,482 80 30 70 Move home 20 60 10 1 0 0 50 Woman Gender 40 % Man 30 Move home 20 1 10 0 0 Mid-thirty Cohort 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 Mid_Forty 100 90 80 70 X2: 19,192 ddl:2 P< 0,000 C= 0,134 60 50 40 100 30 Move home 90 20 1 10 80 0 0 Single X2: 89,601 ddl:4 P< 0,000 C= 0,280 70 Separated, divorced, Married or free unio 60 Marital Status when CWP occurs 50 % 40 30 Move home 20 10 1 0 0 0 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 1 2 3 4 Number of children living at home when CWP occ 100 X2=152,63 ddl: 2 P< 0,000 C= 0,355 90 80 70 60 50 40 100 30 X2: 131,327 ddl: 4 P< 0,000 C= 0,333 90 Move home 20 10 1 0 0 Tenant 70 60 50 Co-tenant % Ow ner 80 40 Tenure during the Previous Home Episode (PHE) Move home 30 20 O 0 S e th ld ity C c be ue e or Q ge in Fr an rb s U rb bu Su ew N bs ur ub O C 0 1 de si ut 10 C 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 Type of Neighbourhood during PHE Empirical Results: 2. Event History Analysis Variables Gender (0=Woman;1=Man) Change of Home Neighbourhood (0= From or To Ouside of the Qc CMA) 1= Core 2= Core Suburbs 3= Suburbs Core 4= Old Suburbs 5= Old Suburbs New Suburbs 6= New Suburbs Old Suburbs 7= New Suburbs + Fringe Age Previous Job Duration Tenure (0= Owner Owner) 1= Owner Tenant 2= Tenant Owner 3= Tenant Tenant 4= Co-tenant Tenant 5= Staying Co-tenant Previous Home Duration Number of Children at home when CWP Distance New Home®New Job/Previous Home®New Job Employment Regime at New Job Location (0= Part Time; 1= Full Time) Perceived Stability of Employment at New Job (0= Very Stable) 1= Mostly Stable 2= Mostly Unstable 3= Precarious B SE Wald Sig Exp(B) 0,307 0,102 9,105 0,003 1,359 + -0,955 -0,163 -0,349 -0,855 -0,391 -0,247 -0,785 -0,005 0,015 0,175 0,204 0,225 0,155 0,259 0,329 0,240 0,011 0,018 49,077 29,844 0,641 2,409 30,418 2,279 0,563 10,673 0,221 0,643 0,000 0,000 0,423 0,121 0,000 0,131 0,453 0,001 0,638 0,422 0,385 0,849 0,705 0,425 0,676 0,781 0,456 0,995 1,015 1,004 0,721 0,612 1,096 0,467 -0,363 -0,204 0,261 0,186 0,175 0,346 0,272 0,025 0,098 14,799 15,107 12,221 10,063 2,940 213,393 4,327 0,000 0,000 0,000 0,000 0,002 0,086 0,000 0,038 2,728 2,057 1,845 2,993 1,595 0,695 0,815 0,052 0,019 7,284 0,007 1,053 + 0,016 0,154 0,010 0,920 1,016 0,071 0,138 0,058 0,114 0,156 0,223 0,894 0,386 0,784 0,067 0,827 0,535 0,376 0,796 1,073 1,148 1,059 + + + + - Tests of Model coeff. X2: 845,29 Df: 22 Sig.: 0,000 For how long will they delay that decision? One Minus Survival Function at mean of covariates 1,2 1,0 ,8 ,6 ,4 ,2 0,0 -,2 -200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Elapsed time between CWP and MH (Weeks) - censoring at end of 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 One Minus Survival Function for patterns 1 - 2 1,2 1,0 ,8 ,6 ,4 ,2 Gender 0,0 Woman -,2 Man -200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Elapsed time between CWP and M H (Weeks) - censoring at en 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 Discussion and Conclusion Results given by Event History Analysis: – How many will move house during the following job episode? • On 418 respondents, 271 moved home after a job change (64,8%) – For how long will they delay that decision? • Probability of changing home after a job change =0,2 after ~2 years – What are the factors significantly influencing that move house decision? • Tenure – – – – • • • • • Co-tenant Tenant Owner Tenant Tenant Owner Tenant Tenant Gender (man) Increased Distance home job Number of Children Previous home duration Change of Home Neighbourood – New Suburbs + Fringe – Old Suburbs – Core 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005 + + + + + + - Retrospective Survey – Inaccuracy of responses (limitations of human memory with elapsed time) – Memory distorsions (individual’s account of the event) – But people tend to remember major events (year of residential move, job change) – Results reflect situation in 80’s and 90’s To the best of our knowledge, this type of application is original (residential move after a job change – Positive contribution to transportation land-use modelling (Quebec) – The query interface could be also used to analyse patterns of activity/travel decision coming from our panel surveys (Quebec & Toronto) and OD surveys – Next stage: Elaborate separate models for owners and tenants 2nd MCRI/PROCESSUS Colloquium, Toronto, June 12-15, 2005
© Copyright 2026 Paperzz