Transport/land-use interactions through the lens of

Networks and Communication Studies
NETCOM, vol. 18, n° 3-4, 2004
p. 249-264
NOTES
Transport/land-use interactions
through the lens of metropolization :
from theory to the specific case
of London global city-region
Manuel Appert1
Mots-clés.— Accessibilité - Aménagement - Analyse exploratoire - Développement durable - Graphe Londres - Métropolisation - Mobilité - Réseau - Système spatial - Transport - Ville
Keywords.— Accessibility - City-region - Global city - London - Mobility - Network - Spatial system Strategic planning - Sustainable development - Transport - World city
Current global socio-economic dynamics, the opening of national markets
(Benko, 1990 ; Dollfus, 1994), increasing competition and correlated technological
innovations have resulted in the formation of what Pierre Veltz called “the
archipelago economy” (l’économie d’archipel) (1997), where a few interconnected
global cities are described as « islands » which lead the world economy (Taylor,
2004). Several of these processes emerged after WW2, but others appeared with
the diffusion of ICT (Castells, 1996 ; Sassen, 1991). Combined and analyzed
through the pattern of their spatial dynamics at all scales, they are revisited through
the lens of metropolization and global-city theories.
It seems that an international consensus has been reached on the identification and the analysis of these processes, though with some variations in vocabulary
(Lacour and Puissant, 1999). A few authors excepted (Hall, 1989 ; Buck et al., 2002),
the English literature tends to emphasize the socio-economic order of global cities
(Castells, 1991 ; Sassen, 1991 ; Allen, 2001) or their international connectivity (Taylor,
2004), whereas the French literature focuses more on the spatial dimensions inside
1. Manuel Appert, Doctorant - UMR 6012 ESPACE, Maison de la Géographie, 17, rue Abbé de
l’Épée, 34 090 Montpellier, Tél. : 04 67 14 58 41, ATER - Université Lumière Lyon 2, [email protected]
250
NETCOM, vol. 18, n° 3-4, 2004
and between cities (Pumain and Mattei, 1998, 2003 ; Dureau et al., 2000) through
the concept of métropolisation (Lacour and Puissant, 1999).
At the infra-urban level, the new urban economy is characterized variously
by a shift from industrial activities to business services (Hall, 1989 ; Graham and
Spence, 1995), the social polarization or professionalization (Fainstein, 1992 ;
Hamnet, 1994ab) and some new social linkages (Ascher, 1995 ; Bassand, 1997)
dependent on networks (Bakis, 1993 ; Dupuy, 1991, 1995).
The three fundamental principles forming the essence of city (Derycke, 1999)
-agglomeration, proximity and the ability to interact- have not disappeared. The
increasing use of ICT has not dissolved the “urban glue” (Hall, 2003) ; proximity is
more temporal than physical, measured in a space time conditioned by multimodal
accessibility between and inside metropolitan city-regions (Varlet, 1992 ; Chapelon,
1997). The spatial interactions that take place in the city redefine themselves continuously according to travel time metrics (Brunet and Dollfus, 1990). Inside cityregions, urban sprawl is a key feature, as are the spatial processes of specialization,
sub-centering, with an associated intensification and complexification of mobility
patterns in ever wider areas (Bonnafous et al., 1993 ; Lacour and Puissant, 1999).
METROPOLIZATION AND THE TRANSPORT/LAND-USE INTERACTIONS.
The emphasis on metropolization developed during the second part of the
1980s, but since then few studies have focused on the more specific transport and
land-use interactions. Among works on transport-land-use interactions, even fewer
relate to the metropolization process (Cervero, 1998 ; IAURIF, 1992, 1998 ; Kenworthy and Newman, 1989, 1999 ; Montès, 2003), and when they do, they confined
themselves to the international interurban level (Bauchet, 1991 ; Cattan et al., 1994 ;
Troin, 1995 ; INRETS, 1995 ; Chapelon, 2000).
Our hypothesis is that the new social and economic order is conditioned
and conditions the development of urban transport, the circulatory components of
expanding metropolises. Transport networks and urban land-use do indeed have
relationships which are direct or indirect, immediate or retroactive, causal or
congruent (Offner and Pumain, 1996), on the short, medium and long term in
metropolitan city regions considered as spatial systems (Pumain et al., 1989).
Furthermore, we consider that the daily mobility of urban households is the
evidence of interactions between transport network features and land use. Urban
daily mobility is the short term material expression of the heterogeneous levels of
accessibility in the city. Accessibility, from the widest conceptual point of view, is
conditional upon the transport network’s performances (network and services) and
upon the location system (nature, intensity and location of urban land use) (Huriot
and Perreur, 1994 ; Chapelon, 1997). Accessibility depends on various temporalities
in the short term (the variability of transport network performances during the
course of the day) (May et al., 1989 ; Appert and Chapelon, 2003 ; Chapelon and
NOTES - INFORMATIONS
251
Bozzani, 2003) ; in the longer term also, it can be interpreted as a spatial marker of
the joint histories of location and transport systems.
The development of scheduled transport networks (timetabled-public transport) has supported the radial pattern of urban expansion for some 150 years.
Lately, however, it has been more the hierarchization of the road network with its
associated spatial accessibility and the democratic use of the private vehicle that
have led to the current and accelerating trend towards suburbanization of residences and jobs. This happened first in the USA during the interwar period and
then spread to Britain in the 1950s, to the Benelux and Germany in the 1960s, and
in the 1970s, to France and Spain (Bastié, 1984 ; Hall, 1997 ; Merlin, 1997).
While the process of suburbanization continues, spatial proximity gives way
to a more temporal proximity. “Differentiated speeds” (vitesses différenciées,
Ollivro, 2000) draw new space time maps of the urban area, contracting space, or
expanding it, in places according to the travel speeds and spatial coverage of the
transport network. Indeed, it can become quicker to travel to a more physically
remote area by car than to travel to a closer location by public transport.
Travel time variability on a stretch of road can also be significant during the
course of the day, resulting in a greater variation of route selection (May et al.,
1989 ; Appert, 1999). Consequently, places that are visited on a frequent basis
change ; out-of-town regional shopping centres, easily accessible by road, tend to
replace shops around the corner. This is also true for urban sociability, our relationship network which is becoming more and more spread across the city
(Ascher, 1995). Centrality thus shifts and de-multiplies according to the spatial
patterns and performances of the networks. The USA, and other countries, have
experienced this trend for a long time now, with the creation of brand new out-oftown C.B.D.s that Joel Garreau has called edge cities (1992), more commonly
known in Europe as urban subcentres, located in the urban fringes.
In previous works, we have developed a simple road network accessibility
model that allowed us to compare the accessibility of inner cities with that of the
urban peripheries. The results showed that there was an increasing difference in
levels of access, the inner cities losing out to their fringes, resulting in what is
described as urban core enclosing (enclavement urban central). The pattern of
centrality is changing into a ring shape, following orbital routes (Appert, 1999 ;
Appert and Chapelon, 2003). In these areas, business parks, retailing, warehousing
alongside sprawling residential estates (mainly detached or semi-detached houses
built at under 20 dwellings per h) are developing fast. Gabriel Dupuy concluded
that the interactions between the road network and the location system are vectors
of the creation of automobile-dependent urban areas, also called “auto-territories”
in the French litterature (territoire de l’automobile) (Dupuy, 1995).
The Automobile dependency (Dupuy, 1999) has become a major issue for
planners. The motor car, which some lobbyists would seem to worship (Gérondeau, 1993) because it gives people mobility, has been considered as “the road to
252
NETCOM, vol. 18, n° 3-4, 2004
prosperity” (according to a conservative white paper). Now, it is also generating
nuisances and costs that are becoming unsustainable for the community. In fact,
the entire metropolitan system (transport and land use) is no longer sustainable in
its present state (Breheny, 1992 ; Beuthe and Nijkamp, 1998 ; Prud’homme et al.,
1999). A system of self-reinforcing nuisances has emerged, resulting in more pollution, road insecurity (Mogridge, 1990 ; Merlin, 1994 ; Banister, 2000), and spatial
inequity, leading in turn to the exclusion of some households located in areas so
poorly served by transport that they miss job opportunities (Bassand, 1997 ;
Orfeuil, 2002). The accessibility losses differ from one place to another, increasing
the polarisation of urban sub-areas. Furthermore, the loss of land to relatively
extensive urban developments is leading to wider gaps between workplace and
residence, further increasing spatial inequity for those unable to move daily over
longer distances (Merlin, 1994 ; Appert, 2003).
Causes of the self-reinforcing nature of these nuisances are to be found in
the fact that the most intensive users of the road network do not support the entire
cost of their journey. It is widely acknowledged that community financial regulation is not sustainable to meet the costs incurred when motorists stick to their
behaviour and maintain the system.
Policies and enticements have multiplied since the late 1970s. Local authorities and planning bodies have spent vast amounts of money to tackle congestion
and exclusion by extending their public transportation systems (Massot and
Orfeuil, 1990 ; Beaucire, 1996). Nevertheless, these actions have remained too
piecemeal because the responsibility for transport networks and spatial planning
lies in different hands. Such an un-integrated approach is now strongly criticised
and some academic works have demonstrated the beneficial effects of integrated
transport policies (Montès, 1995).
RESEARCHES ON TRANSPORT- LAND-USE INTERACTIONS AND INTEGRATED
PLANNING
Integrated transport and land-use policies have developed during these last
10 years. It seems that they generate a lot of expectations and hope among local
authorities and planning bodies (cf. the SRU2 Planning Act in France, or Planning
Policy Guidance 33 and PPG 13 in Britain).
2. Planning Act available on the French ministère de l’équipement website : http://www.logement.equipement.gouv.fr/actu/loi_SRU/default.htm
3. Planning policy guidances. Available on :
http://www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/groups/odpm_control/documents/contentservertemplate/o
dpm_index.hcst ?n=3383&l=3 ;
http://www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/groups/odpm_control/documents/contentservertemplate/o
dpm_index.hcst ?n=3413&l=3
NOTES - INFORMATIONS
253
The necessity of an integrated approach to solve mobility nuisances is
increasingly accepted and implemented, leading us to think that it can be a
paradigm for urbanism in the XXIrst century (Goodwin, 1999). The trend is
supported by a scientific corpus based on recent theoretical (Cervero, 1989, 1998 ;
Breheny, 1992 ; Mackett, 1993 ; Beuthe and Nijkamp, 1998 ; Hall, 1998), empirical
(Kenworthy and Newman, 1989 ; CERTU 1999 ; Titheridge et al., 1999) and operational approaches (Cohen De Lara and Dron, 1995 ; Fouchier, 1998).
However, the findings of this rich literature are fairly complex and sometimes divergent or cautious, rendering their transfer to the field of planning difficult. Among those works, the findings on the density/transport usage might have
been transferred too quickly, especially in respect to the complex nature of their
relationships and their ambiguities. Researchers such as J.M. Offner (1993), who
expressed deep concerns and advocated caution, have not been listened to. It is
also recognised that political will and governance are at least as important because
they influence the implementation stage that tests the consistency of policies.
Works focusing on the impact of governance on policy efficiency are welcome and
may help in the future (Ménerault, 1994).
Researches conducted since Cervero’s Suburban Gridlock (1986) or Newman
and Kenworth’s works on the relationships between density and automobile use
(1989) have resuscitated theories of some major planners and formalized them, but
this time, in order to limit the usage of private vehicles instead of encouraging it. New
Urbanism4 and the Smart Growth5 principles are inspired either by Cerda, Howard or
Wright, who viewed the city - at their time and in their own conceptual framework
(anti or pro urban ideology, public vs. private transport, morphological and/or functional approach) - as an organization of proximities dependent on a network, or by
the Chicago school which considered the city as an organic structure where transport
played the role of arteries (Hall 1988, 1998 ; Dupuy, 1991 ; Pellegrino et al., 1999).
Some of these studies seem to be more intent on reopening long-forgotten
debates and controversies than on providing pragmatic ready-to-use blueprints. In
the new context of sustainable development (Carrière and Mathis, 1995 ; Camagni
and Gibelli, 1997), several debates re-emerged : urban density and the need to
travel (ECOTEC 1993 ; Fouchier, 1998 ; CERTU, 1999), spatial mix and the length of
travel by car (Cervero 1989, 1998 ; Kenworthy and Newman, 1999 ; ECOTEC 1993 ;
Massot and Orfeuil, 1995 ; Fouchier, 1998 ; CERTU 1999, Titheridge et al., 1999), the
need to invest in public transport (Cervero, 1990), lastly the expansion of the road
4. Urban planning think tank of planners and practioners (mainly anglo-saxon) formed in the
early 90s. Its purpose, inspired by the great planners of the XIXth and early XXth century, is to reinstate
the advantages of the compact city. Their website can be found on : http://www.cnu.org/about/index.cfm
5. Principles and planning policies developed since 1995 by the state of Washington, USA. Their
goals were to insure a more intensive use of land in the suburban areas to cater for urban growth.
Combined with investment on radial transit systems, they were expected to result in a more sustainable
mobility. In France it can be assimilated to the Zones d’activités concertées. Such policies and schemes
are theorized by the New Urbanism.
254
NETCOM, vol. 18, n° 3-4, 2004
network (SACTRA, 1994 ; Goodwin, 1996 ; Litman, 2001) versus road pricing
(Goodwin, 1996 ; CEMT, 1999).
No clear consensus has emerged. Scholarly findings seem to diverge, for
example, on the relationship between density and mobility. Newman and
Kenworth (1999) think that mobility decreases with increasing density, but
H. Titheridge et al. do not find any significant statistical relationship between these
two variables (1999). Moreover, those works about formalizing the interactions
(Mackett, 1993 ; Cervero 1998) tend to stick to fairly small scales and to relations
between pairs of variables (Newman and Kenworthy, 1999 ; ECOTEC, 1993 ;
CERTU, 1999). This allows for interesting international comparisons but at the
same time neglects intra-urban variations and the complexity of relations. Yet, it is
at this level of organization that locations and differentiated network performances
interact to form the metropolitan system, and it is only at this level that mobility
management policies are efficient. Several studies go into greater details at the
local level (Fouchier, 1998 ; Fusco, 2003), but the selected urban perimeters are
often restrictive and exclude polarized and built up areas that are not contiguous.
FOCUS ON LONDON : MOBILITY MANAGEMENT ISSUES IN A GLOBAL CITY-REGION
Within what Pierre Veltz (1997) termed the archipelago of global command
centres, London is a key-island, a truly global city alongside New York and Tokyo
(Sassen, 1991). London was already a global powerhouse at the turn of the 18th
century (Hall, 1989), but the contemporary economic context has reinforced its
lead and influence. London is the most internationalized global city (Taylor, 2004)
and consequently it is experiencing intense metropolization. At the metropolitan
level, the city is showing major transformations that extend far beyond the administrative boundaries of Greater London. This global city-region (Allen, 2001) has
expanded on a wider area known as Greater South East (Hall, 1989, 1997 ; Shepherd, 1989 ; Chaline and Papin, 2004 ; Mogridge, 1997). This phenomenon stems
from a long process of decentralization and suburbanization begun just after the
1944 Abercrombie plan6 (Hall, 1997 ; Champion, 2001).
We think that, as Sir Peter Hall suggested, London metropolitan influence
extends from Swindon to the west to the shores of the North sea to the east, and
from Peterborough to the north to Brighton and the coast to the south (Hall, 1989).
Inside this area, socio-economic processes (FDI competition, business services
dominance, polarizations, complexification of the mobility component of organization) and associated spatial restructurings (surburbanization, sub-centring, fragmentation, traffic increase with accompanying nuisances) are quite similar to those in
other metropolises (New York and Paris), but are also more specific. London has
6. Decentralization and overspill guided by a green belt with tight development controls inside
(1947), and new and expanded towns (since 1946) located some 30 to 100 km of Central London.
NOTES - INFORMATIONS
255
experienced a suburbanization process as intense as major US cities (Hall, 1997), but
the urban expansion process has largely occurred in a discontinuous pattern because
of the Green Belt that stops London from sprawling at its fringes, by the introduction
of new towns and expanding towns that have absorbed 1.4m people and the growth
of small and medium size pre-existing towns across the Greater South East Area
(Hall, 1997 ; Mogridge, 1997 ; Baudelle, 2002). The spatial pattern of urbanization
outside the metropolitan Green Belt has mainly been discontinuous, diffused, widely
spaced with fairly large gaps between places of residence, work, shopping, and
recreation. The resulting spatial structure of the metropolitan region is multi-centred,
hierarchized but still mono-nucleated, with Inner London maintaining its position as
the engine of the regional economy7, despite the dynamism of the peripheries and
most notably the western crescent (Buck et al., 2002). The metropolitan region’s
growth pattern has changed, the central core of the metropolis gaining as many jobs
and residents as the rest of the region since the late 1980s8.
The severity of network congestion and the low investment rate in long
distance public transport improvements (suburban rail) giving access to the central
business district from the commuter belts are perhaps both responsible for this recentring tendency. The space-time shrinking process that had taken place, owing
to differentiated increases in travel speeds, has probably been reduced or
stopped9. Land availability restrictions in the “Conservative-Nimby peripheries”
also seem to have contributed, diminishing land value differences between the
central area and the counties to the west of the British capital (mainly Surrey, Berkshire, Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire).
But urgent action is necessary to tackle the shortage of homes in the South
East according to the latest Barker report10. Of the 4.4m dwellings that Britain
needs by 2016, almost half are needed in and around London (Pacione, 2004).
Local authorities will have to comply with Planning Policy Guidances (PPG) that
demand higher density developments11. Meanwhile, the governmental Transport
7. During the last economic cycle (1993-2003), GVA growth in Greater London reached an
annual rate of 3,1% while growth in the Outer Metropolitan Area reached 2,9% and 2,6% in the UK as a
whole. One cannot say if this trend will be sustained in the medium to long term, but the specialization
of the London economy in the most dynamic industries such as Business services and finance may help
maintain its growth lead. The total number of jobs in London and in the rest of the region has increased
by 24,5% between 1993 and 2003. Comparatively, between 1990 and 2000, central Paris lost 11,8% of its
jobs whereas the total number of jobs in the Ile-de-France region remained stable.
8. From a low point in 1986 with 6.6m, Greater London reached 7.2m again in 2001, with total
jobs reaching the late 70s figure of 4.5m after sliding to 3.6m in the mid 80s.
9. Travel time changes obtained by comparing public transport timetables between 1990 and 2003,
and the collection of data from traffic sensors that lie under the road surface (provided by Tafficmaster).
10. Report available on: http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/0F2/D4/barker_review_report_494.pdf
11. Among the Planning Policy Guidances, Planning Policy Guidances 13 deals with transport and
PPG3 deals with housing issues. Among the Regional Planning Guidances, Regional Planning Guidances
3a is for London, recently replaced by the London Plan in 2004, RPG 3b9b is cross regional and is for
Thames Gateway, RPG 6, the East of England, RPG 8, the East Midlands and RPG 9, the South East.
256
NETCOM, vol. 18, n° 3-4, 2004
10-year plan, the most ambitious and costly plan in decades (2000-201012) (Appert,
2002), might contribute to a new de-concentration process because of the
improvements budgeted for the peripheries. Problems might come from a possible
increase in automobile dependency in the outer metropolitan area due to highway
capacity improvements (DFT13, 2003) as long as congestion charging in Central
London remains (GLA, 2001) and overcrowding on suburban rail deteriorates.
Finally, the patterns of daily mobility are becoming dual, the inner area
becoming more and more distinct from the peripheries. Central London is gaining
from travel speed increases due to congestion charging (TFL, 2004) and improvements in public transport performances, especially buses. Public transport patronage is experiencing rapid growth as an immediate consequence of these
improvements (GLA, 2004). In the rest of the region, automobiles reign, the
number of journeys is steadily increasing, and public transport patronage is stagnating or diminishing, even in the metropolitan sub-centres. Rail travel is on the
rise, journeys originating from or terminating in Inner London are becoming
cheaper than the driving option. On the one hand, road congestion is becoming an
issue because of delays occur outside rush hours and in locations further and
further away from London. On the other hand, rail capacity is becoming scarce.
In this sensitive context of complex transport / land-use relationships, policy
assessments have to be reconsidered. Is it still possible to plan large-scale projects
such as Crossrail, the long awaited West-East cross route under Central London,
while at the same time managing daily mobility ? One may also question the efficiency of policies that impose density guidelines and targets when it is academically known that intensification can result in adverse effects if not planned with
improved public transport14.
12. Report on the impact of the Transport 10 year plan commissioned by the Independent
Transport Commission. Directed by Peter Hall and Stephen Marshall in 2002. The report is online at :
http://www.trg.soton.ac.uk/itc/reports.htm
13. Document downloadable on : http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_transstats/
documents/page/dft_transstats_026975.pdf
14. This paper is the theoretical framework of our PHD thesis (head of research: H. Bakis and L.
Chapelon). The purpose of our research work is to evaluate the transport and land use policies in the
London metropolitan area in respect of their ability to achieve a sustainable mobility system. We
postulate that metropolitan space and transport networks have intense relations in the short, medium
and long term. The daily interactions which materialize by the human mobility patterns translate into a
specific metropolitan spatial organization. The interactions have a space range in the longer term, the
joint evolution of land use and transport networks inducing the metropolitan system footprint. Our
work is to try to identify the most significant interactions between the transport network and the land
use variables in the perspective of defining a sustainable metropolitan system. In this context, we test
different schemes developed in the Greater South East region of the UK. Accessibility measures are
produced to assess the so-called sustainable effects of high densities, urban compactness, urban
functional mixity, urban settlement geometry jointly with Public transport developments, road policies
and integrated networks.
NOTES - INFORMATIONS
257
REFERENCES
ALLEN J.S., ed. (2001). Global city-regions : trends, theory, policy. Oxford : Oxford University
Press, 467 p.
APPERT M. (1999). Pour une intégration de la congestion dans l’évaluation spatio-temporelle
d’un réseau routier régional : le cas de l’estuaire de la Tamise. Maîtrise de
Géographie, Université Paul Valéry, sous la direction de Laurent Chapelon, 193 p.
APPERT M. (2002). “Royaume-Uni : la faillite du tout routier”. Alternatives économiques,
n° 206, septembre 2002. p. 66-67.
APPERT M., CHAPELON L. (2002). Planification des transports régionaux en LanguedocRoussillon et Nord-Pas-de-Calais : évaluation de la concurrence rail-route, analyse
comparée des chaînes de transport à dominante routière et ferroviaire. Programme
de recherche INRETS – Groupement Régional Nord-Pas-de-Calais. Montpellier: UMR
ESPACE, 84 p.
APPERT M., CHAPELON L. (2003). “Variabilité de la performance des réseaux routiers dans
l’espace et le temps : application à la région urbaine de Londres”, MATHIS P., dir.
Graphes et réseaux : modélisation multiniveaux. Paris : Hermès, p. 51-76.
ASCHER F. (1995). Métapolis ou l’avenir des villes. Paris : Éditions Odile Jacob, 350 p.
BAKIS H. (1993). Les Réseaux et leurs enjeux sociaux. Paris : PUF, coll. «Qua sais-je ?», 127 p.
BANISTER D., ed. (2000). Transport planning (transport, development and sustainability).
London : Spon Press, 320 p.
BASSAND M. (1997). Métropolisation et inégalités sociales. Lausanne : Presses Polytechniques
et Universitaires romandes, 245 p.
BASTIÉ J. (1984). Le Grand Paris. Paris : Masson, 208 p.
BAUCHET P. (1991). Le Transport dans l’économie mondiale. Paris : Anthropos, 530 p.
BAUDELLE G. (2002). “Deux systèmes urbains ? Une comparaison hiérarchique et théorique de
la croissance urbaine de part et d’autre de la Manche (1960-1990)”. L’Information
Géographique, n° 1, p. 70-79.
BEAUCIRE F. (1996). Les Transports publics et la ville. Toulouse : Milan, 63 p.
BENKO G. (1990). La Dynamique spatiale de l’économie contemporaine. La GarenneColombes : Éditions de l’Espace européen, 396 p.
BEUTHE M., NIJKAMP P. (1998). New Contributions to Transport Analysis in Europe. Aldershot :
Ashgate, 360 p.
BONNAFOUS A. et al., dir. (1993). Circuler demain. Paris-La Tour d’Aigues : DATAR-Éditions
de l’Aube, 191 p.
BREHENY M. J., ed. (1992). Sustainable Development and Urban Form. London : Pion, 292 p.
BRUNET R., DOLLFUS O., dir. (1990). Mondes nouveaux. Paris-Montpellier : Hachette-Reclus.
coll. Géographie universelle, 551 p.
BUCK N. et al. (2002). Working Capital : life and labour in contemporary London. London :
Routledge, 408 p.
CAMAGNI R., GIBELLI M.C. (1997). Développement urbain durable : défis et réponses. La Tour
d’Aigues : Éditions de l’Aube, 192 p.
258
NETCOM, vol. 18, n° 3-4, 2004
CARRIÈRE J.P., MATHIS P. (1995). L’Aménagement face au défi de l’environnement. Poitiers :
ADICUEER, 312 p.
C ASTELLS M. (1991). The Infor mational City : infor mation technology, economic
restructuring, and the urban-regional process. Oxford : Blackwell, 402 p.
CASTELLS M. (1996). The Rise of the Network Society. Cambridge, USA : Blackwell, 556 p.
CATTAN N. et al. (1994). Le Système des villes européennes. Paris : Anthropos, 201 p.
CEMT - CONFÉRENCE EUROPÉENNE DES MINISTRES DES TRANSPORTS (1998). Des transports efficients
pour l’Europe : politiques pour l’internalisation des coûts externes. Paris : CEMT, 289 p.
CEMT-CONFÉRENCE EUROPÉENNE DES MINISTRES DES TRANSPORTS (1999). La congestion routière en
Europe. Paris : CEMT, 262 p.
CERTU, CETE NORD-PICARDIE (1999). Liens entre forme urbaine et pratiques de mobilité : les
résultats du projet SESAME. Rapport d’étude, 92 p.
CERVERO R. (1986). Suburban Gridlock. New Brunswick, N.J. : Rutgers University Press, 248 p.
CERVERO R. (1989). America’s suburban centers : the land use-transportation link. BostonLondon. : Unwin-Hyman, 232 p.
C ERVERO R. (1990). “Mobility planning for large scale suburban activity centers”.
Transportation Planning, vol. 17, n° 3, p. 12-15.
CERVERO R. (1998). The Transit Metropolis. Washington, D.C. : Island Press. 477 p.
CHALINE C. (1973). La Métropole londonienne : croissance et planification urbaine. Paris :
Armand Colin. 291 p.
CHALINE C. (1991). Le Royaume-Uni : économie et régions. Paris : Masson. 238 p.
CHALINE C., PAPIN D. (2004). Le Royaume-Uni ou l’exception britannique. Paris : Ellipses, 192 p.
CHAMPION T. (2001). “The continuing Urban-Rural Population Movement in Britain : Trends,
Patterns, Significance”. Espace, Populations, Sociétés, 1-2, p. 37-51.
CHAPELON L., BOZZANI S. (2003). « L’intermodalité air-fer en France : une méthode d’analyse
spatiale et temporelle ». L’Espace Géographique, n° 1, p. 60-76.
CHAPELON L. (1997). Offre de transport et aménagement du territoire : évaluation spatiotemporelle des projets de modification de l’offre par modélisation multi-échelles des
systèmes de transport. Thèse de doctorat en aménagement. Tours : Laboratoire du
CESA, 558 p.
CHAPELON L. (2000). « Accessibilité routière et périphéricité des villes atlantiques : évaluation
diachronique 1998-2005 du réseau routier français », CARRIÈRE J.P., FARTHING S., dir., Les
Cités Atlantiques : villes périphériques ou métropoles de demain ? Paris : PubliSud,
p. 139-170.
C HURCH A., F ROST M., S ULLIVAN K. (2001). “Transport and social exclusion in London”.
Transport Policy, n° 7, p. 195-205.
COHEN DE LARA M., DRON D. (1995). Pour une politique soutenable des transports. Paris : La
Documentation Française, 327 p.
CULLINGWORTH B., NADIN V. (2002). Town and Country planning. London : Routledge, p. 481.
(13th edition).
DERYCKE P.-H. (1999). “Comprendre les dynamiques métropolitaines”. LACOUR C., PUISSANT S.,
éds, La Métropolisation. Paris : Anthropos, p. 1-19.
DOLLFUS O. (1994). L’Espace monde. Paris : Economica, 111 p.
NOTES - INFORMATIONS
259
DFT-DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT. Regional transport statistics 2003. London : DfT. 99 p.
DUPUY G. (1991). L’Urbanisme des réseaux : théories et méthodes. Paris : Armand Colin, 198 p.
DUPUY G. (1995). Les Territoires de l’automobile. Paris : Economica, 216 p.
DUPUY G. (1999). La dépendance automobile : symptômes, analyses, diagnostic, traitements.
Paris : Economica, 160 p.
DUREAU F. et al. (2000). Métropoles en mouvement. Paris : Anthropos. Collection Villes, 647 p.
ECOTEC (1993). Reducing transport emissions through planning. Rapport au ministère des
transports britannique. London : HMSO.
FAINSTEIN S. et al., eds (1992). Divided Cities : New York and London in the Contemporary
World. Oxford : Blackwell, 293 p.
F OUCHIER V. (1998). Les Densités urbaines et le développement durable. Paris : La
Documentation Française, 212 p.
FUSCO G. (2003). Un modèle systémique d’indicateurs pour la durabilité de la mobilité
urbaine. Thèse de Doctorat, Université de Nice-Sophia Antipolis, 728 p.
GARREAU J. (1992). Edge City : Life on the new frontier. New York : Anchor Books, 548 p.
GÉRONDEAU C. (1993). LesTransports en France : quelques vérités bonnes à dire. Paris :
Transports actualités, 327 p.
GEURS K.T., WEE B. (2004). “Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies :
review and research directions”. Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 12, p. 127-140.
GLA-GREATER LONDON AUTHORITY (2001). The Mayor’s Transport Strategies. London: GLA, 458 p.
GLA-GREATER LONDON AUTHORITY (2004). London economy today – n° 25, september 2004.
London : GLA-economics, 14 p.
GLA-GREATER LONDON AUTHORITY (2004b). The London plan. London : GLA, 420 p.
GOODWIN P.B. (1996). “Empirical evidence on induced traffic, a review and synthesis”.
Transportation, n° 23, p. 35-54.
GOODWIN P.B. (1999). “Transformation of transport policy in Great-Britain”. Transportation
Research Part A, n° 33, p. 655-669.
GRAHAM D., SPENCE N. (1995). “Contemporary deindustrialisation and tertiarisation in the
London economy”. Urban Studies, vol. 32, n° 6, p. 885-911.
HALL P. (1988). Cities of tomorrow. Oxford : Blackwell, 473 p.
HALL P. (1989a). London 2001. London : Unwin Hayman, 226 p.
HALL P. (1989b). Urban and regional planning. London : Unwin Hayman, 318 p.
HALL P. (1997). “The Future of the Metropolis and its Form”. Regional Studies, vol. 31, p. 211-220.
HALL P. (1998). Cities in civilization. New York : Pantheon Books, 1 169 p.
HALL P. (2003). “The End of the City ? The Report of My Death was an Exaggeration”. City,
n° 7, p. 141-152.
HAMNET C. (1994). « Social polarisation in global cities : theory and evidence ». Urban Studies,
vol. 31, p. 401-424.
HAMNET C. (1994). “Socio economic change in London : professionalisation not polarisation”.
Built environment, vol. 20, p. 192-203.
H URIOT J.-M., P ERREUR J. (1994). “L’accessibilité”, A URAY J.-P., et al., dir., Encyclopédie
d’économie spatiale, p. 55-59.
260
NETCOM, vol. 18, n° 3-4, 2004
IAURIF-INSTITUT D’AMÉNAGEMENT ET D’URBANISME DE LA RÉGION ÎLE-DE-FRANCE (1992). Paris –
Londres : comparaison des systèmes de transport de quatre métropoles. Paris :
IAURIF, 136 p.
IAURIF-INSTITUT D’AMÉNAGEMENT ET D’URBANISME DE LA RÉGION ÎLE-DE-FRANCE (1992). Paris –
Londres – New York - Tokyo : une comparaison des systèmes de transport. Paris :
Institut d’Aménagement et d’Urbanisme de la Région Ile-de-France, 111 p.
INRETS-INSTITUT NATIONAL DE RECHERCHE ET D’ÉTUDES SUR LES TRANSPORTS ET LEUR SÉCURITÉ
(1995). “Grandes infrastructures de transport et territoire”. Actes INRETS, n° 60, 231 p.
K ENWORTH J., N EWMAN P. (1999). Sustainability and cities. Overcoming automobile
dependence. Washington D.C. : Island Press, 444 p. (1st edition : 1989)
LACOUR C., PUISSANT S., dir. (1999). La Métropolisation. Paris: Anthropos. Collection Villes, 190 p.
LINNECKER B.J., SPENCE N.A. (1992). “Accessibility measures compared in an analysis of the
impact of the M25 London orbital motorway on Britain”. Environment and
Planning, vol. 24, p. 1137-1154.
LITMAN T. (2001). “Generated Traffic : Implications for Transport Planning”. ITE Journal,
vol. 71, n° 4, p. 38-47.
MACKETT R.L. (1993). “Structure of linkages between transport and land use”. Transportation
Research B, vol. 27, n° 3.
MASSOT M.-H., ORFEUIL J.-P. (1990). Offre et demande de transport en commun dans les villes
françaises sans métro. Arcueil : INRETS, 73 p.
MASSOT M.-H., ORFEUIL J.-P. (1995). “La mobilité, une alternative à la densification du centre”.
Annales de la Recherche Urbaine, n° 67, p. 23-31.
MAY A.D., BONSALL P.W., MARLER N.W. (1989). Car travel time variability on links of a radial
route in London : Results. Rapport de travail du Leeds Institute for Transport
Studies, 23 p.
MATHIS P. (2003). Graphes et réseaux : modélisation multiniveau. Paris : Hermès Science, 361 p.
MENERAULT P. (1994). “Pour des approches géographiques de l’intercommunalité : une
application aux transports urbains” Annales de Géographie, n° 579, p. 491-506.
MERLIN P. (1994). Les Transports en France. Paris : La Documentation Française, 176 p.
MERLIN P. (1997). Les Transports en région parisienne. Paris: La Documentation française, 202 p.
MOGRIDGE M. (1990). Travel in Towns. London : Macmillan, 308 p.
M ONTES C. (1995). “Transport and land-use planning : the case of British and French
conurbations”. Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 3, n° 2, p. 127-141.
MONTES C. (2003). LesTtransports dans l’aménagement urbain à Lyon. Lyon : Géocarrefour,
264 p.
O LLIVRO J. (2000). L’Homme à toutes vitesses. De la lenteur homogène à la rapidité
différenciée. Rennes : Presses Universitaires de Rennes, 184 p.
OFFNER J.-M. (1993). “Les effets structurants du transport : mythe politique, mystification
scientifique”. L’Espace géographique, n° 3, p. 233-244.
OFFNER J.-M., PUMAIN D. (1996). Réseaux et territoires. La Tour d’Aigues : Éditions de l’Aube,
280 p.
ORFEUIL J.-P. (2002). “Mobilité et inégalité dans l’aptitude à la pratique des territoires”.
Informations Sociales, n° 104.
NOTES - INFORMATIONS
261
PACIONE M. (2004). “Where will the people go ? – assessing the new settlements option for
the United Kingdom”. Progress in Planning, vol. 62, n° 2. p. 73-129.
P ELLEGRINO P., J EANNERET E.P., K EUFMANN R. M. (1999). “Infrastructures et modèles
urbanistiques”. Espaces et Sociétés, n° 96. p. 9-30.
PLASSARD F. (1992). “L’impact territorial des transports à grande vitesse”, DERYCKE P.-H.,
Espaces et dynamiques territoriales. Paris : Economica, p. 243-262.
PRUD’HOMME R. et al. (1999). Notre système de transport actuel est-il durable ? Paris : Presses
de l’ENPC, 91 p.
PUMAIN D., SANDERS L., SAINT-JULIEN Th. (1989). Villes et auto-organisation. Paris : Economica,
191 p.
PUMAIN D., MATTEI M.-F., éds. (1998). Données urbaines 2. Paris : Anthropos, 471 p.
PUMAIN D., MATTEI M.-F., éds. (2003). Données urbaines 4. Paris : Anthropos, 433 p.
SACTRA-STANDING ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON TRUNK ROAD ASSESSMENT (1994). Trunk roads and the
generation of traffic. Rapport pour le Department of Transport. London : HMSO, 242 p.
SASSEN S. (1991). The global city. New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton : Princeton University
Press, 398 p.
SASSEN S., ed. (2002). Global networks. Linked cities. New York : Routledge. 368 p.
SHEPHERD J. (1989). “Paris et Londres : deux dynamiques spatiales”. Cahiers du CREPIF,
n° 26, p. 31-43.
STATHOPOULOS N. (1997). La Performance territoriale des réseaux de transport. Paris : Presses
de l’ENPC, 228 p.
TAYLOR P.J. (1997). “Is the United Kingdom big enough for both London and England ?”
Environment and Planning A, vol. 29, n° 5, p. 766-770.
TAYLOR P.J. (2004). World City Network : a global urban analysis. London : Routledge, 241 p.
TFL – TRANSPORT FOR LONDON (2004). Congestion charging : impacts monitoring – second
annual report. London : TFL, 120 p.
TITHERIDGE H., HALL S., HALL P. (1999) Transport Sustainability : A Study of Small-Zone Data :
A Final Report. TRANSZ Working Paper 3, Bartlett School of Planning, University
College London.
TROIN J.-F. (1995). Rail et aménagement du territoire. Aix-en-Provence : Edisud, 261 p.
VARLET J. (1992). “Réseaux de transports rapides et interconnexions en Europe occidentale”.
L’Information géographie, n° 3, p. 101-114.
VELTZ P. (2000). Mondialisation, villes et territoires. L’économie d’archipel (3e édition). Paris :
PUF, collection Économie en liberté, 264 p.
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, p. 675-691.