RCIN and OZwRCIN projects


Title: Space-time variation of accessibility to jobs by public transport – a case study of Szczecin


Goliszek, Sławomir

Date issued/created:


Resource type:



Europa XXI 33 (2017)



Place of publishing:



29 cm

Type of object:



The article includes an analysis of spatial and temporal possibilities of commuting to work by collective transport during the morning rush hours in Szczecin. This article focuses on transport accessibility by collective transport in Szczecin measured with the use of Geographic Information System (GIS) tools and General Transit Feed Specification (GTFS) format for exchanging public transportation schedule and geographic information. A public transport model includes journey sources who are people of working age and destinations which are different workplaces in Szczecin. The main objective of the article to determine places of the highest accessibility by collective transport within 1-minute period of time. The accessibility analysis for jobs and companies is made in Szczecin, as Szczecin’s public transport operator has published the GTFS format as the first in Poland. In addition, Szczecin has a very specific urban layout, separated by a river and connected by one (main communication artery) and the other smaller bridge for crossings between Lewobrzeżem and Prawobrzeżem. The analysis is to show the exact hour during which the largest number of citizens has the possibility to commute to the highest possible workplaces. The result shall depict interdependence between various components (space usage, time, individual), transport accessibility and a choice of a place having the best possible accessibility during the morning rush hours (Geurs & Ritseman van Eck 2001). The results are to be presented with the use of the cumulative accessibility and graphs.1.


1. Aguilera A., 2005. Growth in commuting distances in French polycentric metopolitan areas: Paris. Lyon and Marseille. Urban Studies, vol. 42 (9), pp. 1537–1547.
2. Åkerman J., Höjer M., 2006. Howmuch transport can the climate stand?—Sweden on a sustainable path in 2050. Energy Policy, vol. 34 (14), pp. 1944–1957.
3. Boussauw K., Derudder B., Witlox F., 2011. Measuring spatial separation process through the minimum commute: the case of Flanders. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research, vol. 11 (1), pp. 42–60.
4. Cervero R., 2001. Efficient urbanisation: economic performance and the shape of theme tropolis. Urban Studies, vol. 38 (10), pp. 1651–1671.
5. Chowdhury T. A., Scott D. M., Kanaroglu P.S., 2013. Urban form and commuting efficiency: a comparative analysis across time and space. Urban Studies, vol. 50 (1), pp. 191–207.
6. Cropper M., Gordon P., 1991. Wasteful commuting: a re-examination. Journal of Urban Economics, vol. 29, pp. 2-13.
7. El-Geneidy A., Buliung R., Diab E., et al. 2015. Non-stop equity: Assessing daily intersections between transit accessibility and social disparity across the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA). Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des.
8. El-Geneidy A., Levinson D., Diab E., et al., 2016. The cost of equity : Assessing transit accessibility and social disparity using total travel cost. In 95th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. pp. 1–34. Washington D.C., USA.
9. Farber S., Morang M. Z., Widener M. J., 2014. Temporal variability in transit-based accessibility to supermarkets. Applied Geography, vol. 53, pp. 149–159.
10. Fransen K., Neutens T., Farber S., De Maeyer P., Deruyter G., Witlox F., 2015. Identifying public transport gaps using time-dependent accessibility levels. Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 48, pp. 176–187.
11. Gadziński J., Radzimski A., 2015. The first rapid tram line in Poland: How has it affected travel behaviours, housing choices and satisfaction, and apartment prices? Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 54, pp. 451-463.
12. Geurs K. T., De Montis A., Reggiani A., 2015. Recent advances and applications in accessibility modelling. Computer Environment Urban System, vol. 49, pp. 82–85.
13. Geurs K. T., Ritsema van Eck J. R., 2001. Accessibility measures: review and applications. RIVM report 408505 006, Bilthoven: National Institute of Public Health and the Environment.
14. Geurs K. T., van Wee B., 2004. Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: review and research directions. Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 12, pp. 127–140.
15. Giuliano G., Small K., 1993. Is the journey to work explained by urban structure? Urban Studies, vol. 30 (9), pp. 1485–1500.
16. Givoni M., Banister D., 2013. Moving Towards Low Carbon Mobility. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
17. Goliszek S., Połom M., 2016. The use of general transit feed specification (GTFS) application to identify deviations in the operation of public transport at morning rush hour on the example of Szczecin. Europa XXI, vol. 31, pp. 51-60.
18. Hadas Y., 2013. Assessing public transport systems connectivity based on Google Transit data. Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 33, pp. 105–116.
19. Hamilton B.W., 1982. Wasteful commuting. Journal of Political Economy, vol. 90 (5), pp. 1035–1053.
20. Kim S., 1995. Excess commuting for two-worker households in the Los Angeles metropolitan areas. Journal of Urban Economics, vol. 38 (2), pp. 166–182.
21. Kompleksowe Badania Ruchu w Szczecinie w 2010 roku.
22. Lau C.Y., 2011. Spatial mismatch and the affordability of public transport for the poor in Singapore's new towns. Cities, vol. 28 (3), pp. 230–237.
23. Loo B., Chow A., 2011. Jobs-housing balance in an era of population decentralization: an analytical framework and a case study. Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 19 (4), pp. 552–562.
24. Lucas K., 2011. Making the connections between transport disadvantage and the social exclusion of low income populations in the Tshwane Region of South Africa. Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 19 (6), pp. 1320–1334.
25. Małecki K., Iwan S., Kijewska K., 2014. Influence of Intelligent Transportation Systems on Reduction of sthe Environmental Negative Impact of Urban Freight Transport Based on Szczecin Example. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. vol. 151, pp. 215-229.
26. Manning A., 2003. The real thin theory: monopsony in modern labour markets. Labour Economics, vol. 10 (2), pp. 105–131.
27. Modarres A., 2013. Commuting and energy consumption: toward an equitable transportation policy. Journal of Transport Geography. vol. 33, pp. 240–249.
28. Naudé W., 2008. Is there a spatial mismatch in South Africa's metropolitan labour market? Cities, vol. 25 (2), pp. 268-276.
29. Niedzielski M. A., 2006. A spatially disaggregated approach to commuting efficiency. Urban Studies, vol. 43 (13), pp. 2485-2502.
30. Niedzielski M. A., Horner M.W., Xiao N., 2013. Analyzing scale independence in jobs-housing and commute efficiency metrics. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice.
31. Novaco R.W., Gonzalez O.I., 2009. Commuting and well-being [in:] Amichai-Hamburger Y. (ed.), Technology and Wellbeing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 174–205.
32. O'Kelly M. E., Lee W., 2005. Disaggregate journey-to-work data: implications for excess commuting and jobs-housing balance. Environment and Planning A, vol. 37 (12), pp. 2233–2252.
33. Poelman H., Dijkstra L., 2015 Measuring access to public transport in European cities. Regional and Urban Policy. 17 pp.
34. Punpuing S., 1993. Correlates of commuting patterns: a case-study of Bangkok, Thailand. Urban Studies, vol. 30 (3), pp. 527–545.
35. Salonen M., Toivonen T., 2013. Modelling travel time in urban networks: comparable measures for private car and public transport. Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 31, pp. 143–153.
36. Shearmur R., 2006. Travel from home: an economic geography of commuting distances in Montreal. Urban Geography, vol. 27 (4), pp. 330–359.
37. Shirgaokar M., 2014. Employment centers and travel behavior: exploring the work commute of Mumbai's rapidly motorizing middle class. Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 41, pp. 249–258.
38. Stępniak M., Goliszek S., 2017. Spatio-temporal variation of accessibility by public transport – the equity perspective [in:] I. Ivan, A. Singleton. J. Horák, T. Inspektor, The rise of big spatial data. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 241-261.
39. Tao S., Rohde D., Corcoran J., 2014. Examining the spatial–temporal dynamics of bus passenger travel behaviour using smart card data and the flow-comap. Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 41, pp. 21–36.
40. Vickerman R. W., 1974, Accessibility, attraction and potential: A review of some concepts and their use in determining mobility. Environment and Planning A, vol. 6, pp. 675-691.
41. Wachs M., Kumagai T., 1973, Physical accessibility as a social indicator. Socioeconomic Planning Science, vol. 7, pp. 327-456.
42. Wang C.-H., Chen N., 2015. A GIS-based spatial statistical approach to modeling job accessibility by transportation mode: case study of Columbus, Ohio. Journal of Transport Geography. vol. 45, pp. 1–11.
43. White M. J., 1988. Urban commuting journeys are not 'wasteful'. Journal of Political Economy. vol. 96 (5), pp. 1097–1110.
44. Widener M. J., Farber S., Neutens T., Horner, M., 2015. Spatiotemporal accessibility to supermarkets using public transit: an interaction potential approach in Cincinnati. Ohio. Journal of Transport Geography. vol. 42, pp. 72–83.
45. Yang J., 2008. Policy implications of excess commuting: examining the impacts of changes in US metropolitan spatial structure. Urban Studies, vol. 45 (2), pp. 391– 405.
46. Yongling, Y., Guonan, Z., 2009. Empirical analysis of spatial mismatch of living-working: based on a field survey in downtown Beijing. International Journal of Urban Sciences, vol. 13 (1), pp. 1–17.
47. Database company REGON acquisition 5.2016
48. General Transit Feed Specification (GTFS) https://developers.google.com/transit/gtfs/reference/
49. General Transit Feed Specification in Szczecin http://www.zditm.szczecin.pl/rozklady/GTFS/latest/
50. Kompleksowe Badania Ruchu w Szczecinie 2010 – Comprehensive Traffic Research in Szczecin 2010 http://bip.um.szczecin.pl/chapter_11124.asp?soid=DFD7E3651BF74AD0824410CF5F8E4944


Europa XXI



Start page:


End page:


Detailed Resource Type:



File size 2,1 MB ; application/pdf

Resource Identifier:

oai:rcin.org.pl:65098 ; 1429-7132 ; 10.7163/Eu21.2017.33.4


CBGiOŚ. IGiPZ PAN, call nos.: Cz.6406, Cz.6407 ; click here to follow the link




Creative Commons Attribution BY 3.0 PL license

Terms of use:

Copyright-protected material. [CC BY 3.0 PL] May be used within the scope specified in Creative Commons Attribution BY 3.0 PL license, full text available at:

Digitizing institution:

Institute of Geography and Spatial Organization of the Polish Academy of Sciences

Original in:

Central Library of Geography and Environmental Protection. Institute of Geography and Spatial Organization PAS

Projects co-financed by:

European Union. European Regional Development Fund ; Programme Innovative Economy, 2010-2014, Priority Axis 2. R&D infrastructure



Object collections:

Last modified:

Mar 25, 2021

In our library since:

Mar 30, 2018

Number of object content hits:


All available object's versions:


Show description in RDF format:


Show description in OAI-PMH format:


Objects Similar



Citation style:

This page uses 'cookies'. More information