Exploring Space-Time Fixity about Activity Types and Mode Choice

Amirotul M. H. Mahmudah*  -  Sebelas Maret University
Arif Budiarto  -  Sebelas Maret University
Dimas B. E. Dharmowijyo  -  Logistics Department, National Distribution Services, Melbourne, Australia
Tri Basuki Joewono  -  Department of Civil Engineering, Parahyangan Catholic University, Indonesia
Tri Hardiyanti Asmaningrum  -  Safety Engineering, Institut Teknologi Kalimantan, Indonesia

(*) Corresponding Author
DOI: 10.30659/jpsa.v22i2.48312

Space-time fixity and flexibility of activity are essential for understanding how space-time constraints influence accessibility and mobility in daily life. Reducing these constraints helps improve quality of life and solve urban problems like traffic jams. Thus, these concepts are vital not only in academia but also in transportation and travel behavior studies. This research explores how activity type and mode choice influence space-time fixity. Descriptive statistic were used to profile respondents and their activities, while bivariate analysis looked at the relationship between mode choice and activity type in terms of space-time fixity. Specifically, mode choices—such as non-motorized, motorcycle, car, public transport, and ride-sourcing—and various out-of-home activities like travel, working/studying, socializing, and grocery shopping. Daily activity data from the Surakarta agglomeration area during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2021 was collected for this study. This study finds that space fixity occurs more often than time fixity, and activities' average level of space and time fixity is fairly flexible. The time fixity pattern for mode choices in out-of-home activities is similar for most activities, except socializing. In contrast, space fixity patterns differ among out-of- home activities. Working/studying outside the home shows the highest time and space fixity across all modes. Research indicates that a score of 6.0 on a 7-point Likert scale represents the highest space-time fixity. This score applies to those who mainly use public transport, with time fixity linked to travel activity and space fixity to out-of-home working/studying activity. The implications of these results on urban planning are discussed.

  1. G. Matson, S. McElroy, Y. Lee, and G. Circella, “Longitudinal Analysis of COVID-19 Impacts on Mobility: An
  2. Early Snapshot of the Emerging Changes in Travel Behavior,” Transp. Res. Rec., vol. 2677, no. 4, pp. 298–312,
  3. , doi: 10.1177/03611981221090241.
  4. A. Rajabi, A. V. Mantzaris, E. C. Mutlu, and O. O. Garibay, “Investigating dynamics of covid-19 spread and
  5. containment with agent-based modeling,” Appl. Sci., vol. 11, no. 12, p. 5367, 2021, doi:
  6. 3390/app11125367.
  7. N. Barbour, N. Menon, and F. Mannering, “A statistical assessment of work-from-home participation during
  8. different stages of the COVID-19 pandemic,” Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect., vol. 11, p. 100441, 2021, doi:
  9. 1016/j.trip.2021.100441.
  10. I. Politis et al., “COVID-19 lockdown measures and travel behavior: The case of Thessaloniki, Greece,” Transp.
  11. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect., vol. 10, p. 100345, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.trip.2021.100345.
  12. M. Abdullah, C. Dias, D. Muley, and M. Shahin, “Exploring the impacts of COVID-19 on travel behavior and
  13. mode preferences,” Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect., vol. 8, p. 100255, 2020, doi:
  14. 1016/j.trip.2020.100255.
  15. H. Hook, J. De Vos, V. Van Acker, and F. Witlox, “Does undirected travel compensate for reduced directed
  16. travel during lockdown?,” Transp. Lett., vol. 13, no. 5–6, pp. 414–420, 2021, doi:
  17. 1080/19427867.2021.1892935.
  18. J. Zhang, “People’s responses to the COVID-19 pandemic during its early stages and factors affecting those
  19. responses,” Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun., vol. 8, no. 1, 2021, doi: 10.1057/s41599-021-00720-1.
  20. C. Katrakazas, E. Michelaraki, M. Sekadakis, and G. Yannis, “A descriptive analysis of the effect of the COVID-19
  21. pandemic on driving behavior and road safety,” Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect., vol. 7, p. 100186, 2020, doi:
  22. 1016/j.trip.2020.100186.
  23. J. Li, P. Xu, and W. Li, “Urban road congestion patterns under the COVID-19 pandemic: A case study in
  24. Shanghai,” Int. J. Transp. Sci. Technol., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 212–222, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.ijtst.2021.03.001.
  25. A. Shamshiripour, E. Rahimi, R. Shabanpour, and A. (Kouros) Mohammadian, “How is COVID-19 reshaping
  26. activity-travel behavior? Evidence from a comprehensive survey in Chicago,” Transp. Res. Interdiscip.
  27. Perspect., vol. 7, p. 100216, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.trip.2020.100216.
  28. G. Matson, S. McElroy, G. Circella, and Y. Lee, “Telecommuting Rates During the Pandemic Differ by Job Type,
  29. Income, and Gender,” pp. 1–3, 2021, doi: 10.7922/G2445JT6.
  30. M. D. N. Indonesia, Instruksi Menteri Dalam Negeri Nomor 17 Tahun 2021. Indonesia, 2021, pp. 1–19.
  31. T. Schwanen, M. P. Kwan, and F. Ren, “How fixed is fixed? Gendered rigidity of space-time constraints and
  32. geographies of everyday activities,” Geoforum, vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 2109–2121, 2008, doi:
  33. 1016/j.geoforum.2008.09.002.
  34. T. Hagerstrand, “What about people in regional science?,” in Papers in Regional Science, 1970, vol. 24, no. 1,
  35. pp. 7–24, doi: 10.1111/j.1435-5597.1970.tb01464.x.
  36. P. Burnett, “Spatial constraints-oriented modeling as an alternative approach to movement, microeconomic
  37. theory, and urban policy,” Urban Geogr., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 53–67, 1980, doi: 10.2747/0272-3638.1.1.53.
  38. I. Cullen and V. Godson, “Urban networks: The structure of activity patterns,” Prog. Plann., vol. 4, pp. 1–96,
  39. , doi: 10.1016/0305-9006(75)90006-9.
  40. Y. Shen, Y. Chai, and M. P. Kwan, “Space-time fixity and flexibility of daily activities and the built environment:
  41. A case study of different types of communities in Beijing suburbs,” J. Transp. Geogr., vol. 47, pp. 90–99, 2015,
  42. doi: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.06.014.
  43. M. P. Kwan, “Gender differences in space-time constraints,” Area, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 145–156, 2000, doi:
  44. 1111/j.1475-4762.2000.tb00125.x.
  45. R. Kitamura and M. Kermanshah, “Identifying Time and History Dependencies of Activity Choice.,” Transp. Res.
  46. Rec., pp. 22–30, 1983.
  47. S. T. Doherty, “Should we abandon activity type analysis? Redefining activities by their salient attributes,”
  48. Transportation (Amst)., vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 517–536, 2006, doi: 10.1007/s11116-006-0001-9.
  49. N. Ta, M. P. Kwan, Y. Chai, and Z. Liu, “Gendered Space-Time Constraints, Activity Participation and Household
  50. Structure: A Case Study Using A GPS-Based Activity Survey in Suburban Beijing, China,” Tijdschr. voor Econ. en
  51. Soc. Geogr., vol. 107, no. 5, pp. 505–521, 2015, doi: 10.1111/tesg.12167.
  52. H. J. Miller, “Time Geography and Space-Time Prism,” International Encyclopedia of Geography. pp. 1–19, 2017, doi: 10.1002/9781118786352.wbieg0431.
  53. D. Ettema, A. Borgers, and H. Timmermans, “Simulation model of activity scheduling behavior,” Transp. Res. Rec., no. January 1993, pp. 1–11, 1993.
  54. S. Nordbakke and T. Schwanen, “Transport, unmet activity needs and wellbeing in later life: exploring the links,” Transportation (Amst)., vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 1129–1151, 2014, doi: 10.1007/s11116-014-9558-x.
  55. M. J. Olde Kalter, "Dynamics in Mode Choice Behaviour," University of Twente, 2021.
  56. M. Meng, A. A. Memon, Y. D. Wong, and S. H. Lam, “Impact of traveller information on mode choice behaviour,” in Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Transport, 2018, vol. 171, no. 1, pp. 11–19, doi: 10.1680/jtran.16.00058.
  57. M. J. Olde Kalter, L. La Paix Puello, and K. T. Geurs, “Do changes in travellers’ attitudes towards car use and ownership over time affect travel mode choice? A latent transition approach in the Netherlands,” Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract., vol. 132, no. October 2018, pp. 1–17, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2019.10.015.
  58. A. M. H. Mahmudah, A. Budiarto, T. B. Joewono, T. H. Asmaningrum, and D. B. E. Dharmowijoyo, “Did in-home activities fulfill activity needs during the COVID-19 pandemic?,” Cogent Eng., vol. 11, no. 1, p., 2024, doi: 10.1080/23311916.2024.2307209.
  59. A. de Palma, S. Vosough, and F. Liao, “An overview of effects of COVID-19 on mobility and lifestyle: 18 months since the outbreak,” Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract., vol. 159, no. March, pp. 372–397, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2022.03.024.
  60. G. Nian, B. Peng, D. J. Sun, W. Ma, B. Peng, and T. Huang, “Impact of COVID-19 on urban mobility during post-epidemic period in megacities: From the perspectives of taxi travel and social vitality,” Sustain., vol. 12, no. 19, 2020, doi: 10.3390/SU12197954.

Jurnal Planologi
Published by Pusat Studi Planologi Universitas Islam Sultan Agung Semarang, in collaboration with Asosiasi Sekolah Perencanaan Indonesia.
Jl. Kaligawe Raya KM. 4 Semarang, Indonesia
Phone: +6212345678
Email: jurnalplanologi@unissula.ac.id

View My Stats

e-ISSN: 1829-9172

p-ISSN: 2615-5257

DOI : 10.30659/japs

Creative Commons License

Get a feed by atom here, RRS2 here and OAI Links here

apps