مقاله انگلیسی رایگان در مورد حسابداری یک مدل انتخابی در محل کار (الزویر)

Economies of agglomeration is usually used to describe the benefits that firms obtain by locating closer to each other, whilst spatial competition arises from the fact that nearby firms in the same industry are generally competing against each other more than against distant ones. In the presence of spatial competition, the agglomeration effect may still be observed as a cluster of businesses that attract more labour and material suppliers as well as customers. From the consumer’s perspective, it is convenient to have a cluster of destinations to do multiple activities with less effort of travel in between, and thus a cluster of businesses may attract more customers than dispersed ones. From the worker’s perspective, the agglomeration effect on their choice of workplace is less clear, as most workers only have one place of work and thus, the benefit of less travel between work locations does not apply. However, firms having better access to other businesses to undertake work-related activities may still obtain an advantage. In addition, with agglomerated employers, workers can find an employer who wants a particular skill set that matches more closely their own. This advantage may be observed in the market via the individual’s choice of workplace as firm locations translate into job locations. This paper describes the development and application of a new workplace choice model that is capable of capturing economies of agglomeration and spatial competition effects, given the location of firms and the distribution of jobs across the study area. There is increasing interest amongst transport planners, modellers and economists in measuring agglomeration and spatial competition effects; however, very few regional travel demand models in use today are able to quantify the spatial competition and agglomeration effects with respect to workplace choice. Specifically, gravity models of destination choice (Anas, 1983; Alonso, 1964) ignore the agglomeration effect as they treat workplace choice as given. By contrast, competing destinations models (e.g., Fotheringham, 1986) can detect the dominating effect only, be it the agglomeration or the spatial competition effect. Activity-based models (e.g., Shiftan, 1998) have incorporated the economies of agglomeration through trip chaining but generally ignore the heterogeneity in spatial competition as defined by Tobler’s first law of geography which states that: “everything is related to everything else, but near things are more related than distant things” (Tobler, 1970, p.236).