Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
appear to be limiting more widespread use of the land use model and the experience with the UrbanSim model. The following points were covered in his presentation. ⢠Currently, the application of land use models by met- ropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) and other agen- cies is somewhat limited. There appear to be a number of factors influencing the lack of more widespread applica- tion of integrated land use models. These factors include lack of funding and staff resources and skepticism about new models. Information on the benefits of the new mod- els is needed to address these concerns. It is also important to show agencies that an incremental approach to imple- mentation can be used to introduce new land use models. ⢠Spatial interaction models, such as DRAM/ EMPAL, are still being used in many areas. These models are constrained and have limitations related to spatial details and low behavioral content. UrbanSim provides a microlevel model that is very spatially detailed. UrbanSim is being used in some applications by MPOs, state depart- ments of transportation, consulting firms, and universi- ties around the country. Although UrbanSim provides benefits over the spatial interaction models and other techniques, areas for improvements can be identified based on the experiences to date. ⢠UrbanSim requires a lot of data that may not always be available to the agency running the application. This limitation can be addressed by fitting UrbanSim to the available data. There may be issues related to geography with the use of UrbanSim, but these can be addressed by making the geography for location choice flexible. Urban- Sim uses one set of tools for estimation, specification, and simulation, but this problem can be resolved by integrat- ing these three functions. Constraint issues, such as those related to neighborhood choice, represent another possi- ble concern. The theory of constrained choice is not a trivial problem and choice models are needed that better reflect constraints. Accessibility measures represented by log- sums are a travel model issue; however, this can be addressed by linking UrbanSim with activity- based mod- els. Computing (or run times) is another travel model issue with sophisticated models. A breakthrough in assignment is needed to reduce run times. Additional research on travel behavior is needed to better integrate models to reflect actual behavior. Finally, concerns related to software can be addressed through open platforms. THE PATH TO A STAGED IMPLEMENTATION OF INTEGRATED MODELS Becky Knudson Becky Knudson discussed key elements to consider when implementing a statewide integrated model. She de - scribed the need for outreach to decision makers, gar- nering internal and external support, and developing a strong implementation program. The following points were covered in her presentation. ⢠Development of the Oregon Department of Trans- portationâs statewide model was initiated in response to changing planning requirements in the state, especially those related to land use. The first generation of the statewide model was implemented in the late 1990s. The experience in Oregon highlights the importance of out- reach, internal and external support, and a well- thought- out implementation program to the successful introduction of new modeling tools. ⢠A first step in developing outreach programs is to gain a clear understanding of the needs of decision mak- ers and stakeholders. Tools can then be developed with these needs in mind. Seeking opportunities to use models to assist decision makers in making informed policy deci- sions is an effective outreach technique. Making connec- tions with decision makers and stakeholders early in the process can also help generate future support. ⢠Internal support within an agency for the develop- ment and ongoing use of new modeling tools is crucial. Unlike infrastructure projects, new travel demand models do not lend themselves to ribbon- cutting ceremonies. Models are not highly visible to the public or decision makers. It is important to ensure that agency management supports the development and use of the new models. External support is also very beneficial. Understanding the needs of other departments, agencies, and groups can be helpful in garnering future support. ⢠The experience in Oregon highlights a number of elements associated with a strong implementation pro- gram. First, it is important to select model projects wisely. The ideal project should provide good exposure and demonstrate the modelâs ability to provide relevant and useful information for decision makers. Second, it is critical to develop and retain skilled staff. Third, the models must be used efficiently, including automating model functions when possible. Fourth, it is essential to develop effective communication skills. Use common language and terminology to explain analytical findings. The use of everyday analogies is particularly helpful. Identifying trade- offs is very important; it gets to the heart of what decision makers care about. ⢠Development of the statewide- integrated model has a number of goals. The first goal is the full integra- tion of the model with explicit representation of econ- omy, land use, and transport. A second goal focuses on linkages to environmental analyses and performance indicators. A third goal is to build on the lessons learned from the first generation of the model. A final goal is to ensure connection and coordination with the metropol- itan modeling framework. Key criteria to accomplish 25LAND USE FORECAST
