Skip to main content
Log in

A comprehensive analysis of household transportation expenditures relative to other goods and services: an application to United States consumer expenditure data

  • Published:
Transportation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper proposes a multiple discrete continuous nested extreme value (MDCNEV) model to analyze household expenditures for transportation-related items in relation to a host of other consumption categories. The model system presented in this paper is capable of providing a comprehensive assessment of how household consumption patterns (including savings) would be impacted by increases in fuel prices or any other household expense. The MDCNEV model presented in this paper is estimated on disaggregate consumption data from the 2002 Consumer Expenditure Survey data of the United States. Model estimation results show that a host of household and personal socio-economic, demographic, and location variables affect the proportion of monetary resources that households allocate to various consumption categories. Sensitivity analysis conducted using the model demonstrates the applicability of the model for quantifying consumption adjustment patterns in response to rising fuel prices. It is found that households adjust their food consumption, vehicular purchases, and savings rates in the short run. In the long term, adjustments are also made to housing choices (expenses), calling for the need to ensure that fuel price effects are adequately reflected in integrated microsimulation models of land use and travel.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Note that the CEX data, while extensive in many ways, also collects expenditures in quarterly periods. In the current analysis, we used CEX estimates that translate these quarterly estimates into annual expenditures. Several assumptions are made in this conversion, and a description of these is beyond the scope of this paper. The reader is referred to BLS (2003) for the CEX survey documentation. By using annual expenditures, we are considering an annual time horizon for capturing expenditure pattern choices rather than smaller periods of time. However, by doing so, we are also ignoring seasonal variations in expenditure patterns (for example, more proportion of expenditure on clothing/apparel than in other categories during the holiday season). Also, the CEX survey does not collect location information on household residences or activity participation locations (i.e., locations where the actual spending take place). Hence, expenditures cannot be related to location characteristics, sales information, etc.

  2. As in any choice modeling exercise, it is only necessary that the dependent variable (in our case, the expenditure amounts on various consumption categories) distribution in the sample be representative of the dependent variable distribution in the population for the usual maximum likelihood estimation approach (the so called exogenous sample maximum likelihood or ESML approach) to provide consistent estimates.

  3. The terms “consumption” and “expenditure” are used interchangeably in this paper, as are the terms “category” and “alternative”.

  4. For notational simplicity, a subscript for decision-makers (or households) is not included. The coefficient vector β captures the impact of z k on the baseline utility.

  5. This error structure assumes that the nests are mutually exclusive and exhaustive (i.e., each alternative can belong to only one nest and all alternatives are allocated to one of the S K nests).

References

  • Ahn, J., Jeong, G., Kim, Y.: A forecast of household ownership and use of alternative fuel vehicles: a multiple discrete-continuous choice approach. Energy Econ. 30(5), 2091–2104 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anas, A.: A unified theory of consumption, travel, and trip chaining. J. Urban Econ. 62(2), 162–186 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • APTA: Public transit ridership continues to grow in first quarter of 2008: almost 88 more million trips taken than 2007 first quarter. News Release, June 2, 2008. American Public Transit Association, Washington, DC. http://www.apta.com/mediacenter/pressreleases/2008/Pages/080602_ridership_report.aspx (2008)

  • Austin, D.: Effects of gasoline prices on driving behavior and vehicle markets. Congressional Budget Office, No. 2883, Washington, DC (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bento, A.M., Goulder, L.H., Henry, E., Jacobsen, M.R., von Haefen, R.H.: Distributional and efficiency impacts of gasoline taxes: an econometrically based multi-market study. Am. Econ. Rev. 95(2), 282–287 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bento, A.M., Goulder, L.H., Jacobsen, M.R., von Haefen, R.H.: Distributional and efficiency impacts of increased U.S. gasoline taxes. Am. Econ. Rev. 99(3), 667–699 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhat, C.R.: A multiple discrete-continuous extreme value model: formulation and application to discretionary time-use decisions. Transp. Res. Part B 39(8), 679–707 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhat, C.R.: The multiple discrete-continuous extreme value (MDCEV) model: role of utility function parameters, identification considerations, and model extensions. Transp. Res. Part B 42(3), 274–303 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhat, C.R., Koppelman, F.S.: Activity-based modeling of travel demand. In: Hall, R.W. (ed.) The Handbook of Transportation Science, pp. 35–61. Kluwer, Norwell (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhat, C.R., Sen, S.: Household vehicle type holdings and usage: an application of the multiple discrete-continuous extreme value (MDCEV) model. Transp. Res. Part B 40(1), 35–53 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BLS: Homeowner expenditures take more out of budgets in Northeast and West. Monthly Labor Review the Editor’s Desk, U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, DC. http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/1998/Dec/wk3/art02.htm (1998)

  • BLS: BLS interview survey form 2001. U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, DC. http://www.bls.gov/cex/#forms (2001)

  • BLS: 2002 Consumer expenditure interview survey public use microdata documentation. U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, DC. http://www.bls.gov/cex/csxmicrodoc.htm#2002 (2003)

  • BLS: Consumer expenditures in 2002. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Report 974, Washington, DC (2004)

  • Choo, S., Lee, T., Mokhtarian, P.L.: Do transportation and communications tend to be substitutes, complements, or neither? U.S. Consumer Expenditures Perspective, 1984–2002. Transp. Res. Rec. 2010, 121–132 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, M.: The impact of rising prices on household gasoline expenditures. Consumer Federation of America. www.consumerfed.org/ (2005)

  • Di, Z.X., Belsky, E., Liu, X.: Do homeowners achieve more household wealth in the long run? J. Hous. Econ. 16(3–4), 274–290 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dynan, K.E., Skinner, J., Zeldes, S.P.: Do the rich save more? J. Polit. Econ. 112(2), 397–444 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engel, E.: Die productions- und consumtionsverhaltnisse des konigreichs sachsen. Zeitschrift des Statistischen Bureaus des Koniglich Sachsischen Ministeriums des Innern, Nos. 8 and 9 (1857). Reprinted in Bulletin de l’Institut Internationale de la Statistique, 9 (1895)

  • Espey, M.: Explaining the variation in elasticity estimates of gasoline demand in the United States: a meta-analysis. Energy J. 17(3), 49–60 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  • Feng, Y., Fullerton, D., Gan, L.: Vehicle choices, miles driven, and pollution policies. NBER Working Paper No. 11553. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge (2005)

  • Fetters, E.: Gas, grocery prices drive cost of living up. HeraldNet. http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20080615/NEWS01/198576393&news01ad=1 (2008). Accessed 15 June 2008

  • FHWA: Traffic volume trends. Federal Highway Administration, US Department of Transportation, Office of Highway Policy Information, Washington, DC. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/tvtw/tvtpage.htm (2008)

  • Gicheva, D., Hastings, J., Villas-Boas, S.: Revisiting the income effect: gasoline prices and grocery purchases. NBER Working Paper No. 13614, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge (2007)

  • Harris, E., Sabelhaus, J.: Consumer expenditure survey: family-level extracts, 1980:1–1998:2. Congressional Budget Office, Washington, DC. http://www.nber.org/data/ces_cbo.html (2000)

  • Huggett, M., Ventura, G.: Understanding why high income households save more than low income households. J. Monet. Econ. 45(2), 361–397 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, J.E., Knittel, C.R., Sperling, D.: Evidence of a shift in the short-run price elasticity of gasoline demand. Energy J. 29(1), 93–114 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, P.: New approaches to understanding travel behaviour: the human activity approach. In: Hensher, D.A., Stopher, P.R. (eds.) Behavioral Travel Modeling, pp. 55–80. Redwood Burn Ltd., London (1979)

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, P., Koppelman, F.S., Orfeuil, J.P.: Activity analysis: state-of-the-art and future directions. In: Jones, P. (ed.) Developments in Dynamic and Activity-Based Approaches to Travel Analysis, pp. 34–55. Gower Publishing Co, Aldershot (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, E.: Fuel spike curbs vacations, dining out: poll. Reuters, Washington. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1744550120080618 (2008). Accessed 18 June 2008

  • Li, S., von Haefen, R., Timmins, C.: How do gasoline prices affect fleet fuel economy? NBER Working Paper No. 14450, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge (2008)

  • Li, Z., Rose, J.M., Hensher, D.A.: Forecasting automobile petrol demand in Australia: an evaluation of empirical models. Transp. Res. Part A 44(1), 16–38 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  • Linn, A.: Rising gas costs crimping budgets. MSNBC News. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23637018/ (2008). Accessed 20 March 20 2008

  • Moriarty, P.: Household travel time and money expenditures. Road Transp. Res. J. Aust. N. Z. Res. Pract. 11(4), 14–23 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  • MSNBC News: Why now is a good time to buy a car: cost of a new vehicle is lower than it has been in years. ForbesAutos.com, MSNBC News. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25287252/ (2008a). Accessed 24 June 2008

  • MSNBC News: Average cost of gas nationwide hits $4. Associated Press, MSNBC News. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25045979/ (2008b). Accessed 9 June 2008

  • MSNBC News: Gas prices gouge eating, shopping habits, too—Americans cutting back on other expenses to keep tanks full. MSNBC News. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23636538/ (2008c). Accessed 19 March 2008

  • NBER: The national bureau of economic research (NBER) archive of consumer expenditure survey microdata extracts. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge. http://www.nber.org/data/ces_cbo.html (2003)

  • Nicholson, A.J., Lim, Y.H.: Household expenditure on transport in New Zealand. Aust. Road Res. 17(1), 28–39 (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicol, C.: Elasticities of demand for gasoline in Canada and the United States. Energy Econ. 25(2), 201–214 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oi, W.Y., Shuldiner, P.Q.: An Analysis of Urban Travel Demands. Northwestern University Press, Evanston (1962)

    Google Scholar 

  • Oladosu, G.: An almost ideal demand system model of household vehicle fuel expenditure allocation in the United States. Energy J. 24(1), 1–21 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  • Olvera, L.D., Plat, D., Pochet, P.: Household transport expenditure in sub-saharan African cities: measurement and analysis. J. Transp. Geogr. 16(1), 1–13 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paulin, G.D.: A comparison of consumer expenditures by housing tenure. J. Consum. Aff. 29(1), 164–198 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pendyala, R.M.: Travel trends and conditions in an era of high gas prices. Presentation at the gas price summit, Arizona House of Representatives, Phoenix, AZ, 24 June 2008

  • Pendyala, R.M., Goulias, K.G.: Time use and activity perspectives in travel behavior research. Transportation 29(1), 1–4 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, J.: The Economic Effects of Recent Increases in Energy Prices. Congressional Budget Office, No. 2835, Washington, DC (2006)

  • Pinjari, A.R., Bhat, C.R.: A multiple discrete-continuous nested extreme value (MDCNEV) model: formulation and application to non-worker activity time-use and timing behavior on weekdays. Transp. Res. Part B. 44(4), 562–583 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prais, S.J., Houthakker, H.S.: The analysis of family budgets. Second edition (1971). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1955)

  • Puller, S.L., Greening, L.A.: Household adjustment to gasoline price change: an analysis using 9 years of US survey data. Energy Econ. 21(1), 37–52 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez, T.W., Makarewicz, C., Hasa, P.M., Dawkins, C.J.: Transportation costs, inequities, and trade-offs. Presented at the 85th annual meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 2006

  • Small, K.A., Van Dender, K.: Fuel efficiency and motor vehicle travel: the declining rebound effect. Energy J. 28(1), 25–51 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  • Thakuriah, P., Liao, Y.: An analysis of variations in vehicle-ownership expenditures. Transp. Res. Rec. 1926, 1–9 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thakuriah, P., Liao, Y.: Transportation expenditures and ability to pay: evidence from consumer expenditure survey. Transp. Res. Rec. 1985, 257–265 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their comments/suggestions on an earlier version of the paper. The timely and thoughtful handling of this paper by Martin Richards is much appreciated. The authors are also grateful to Lisa Macias for her help in typesetting and formatting this document.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chandra R. Bhat.

Appendix

Appendix

For \( r_{s} = 1,X_{rs} = \{ 1\} . \)

For \( r_{s} = 2,X_{rs} = \left\{ {{\frac{{\left( {q_{{s}} - 1} \right)\left( {1 - \theta_{s} } \right)}}{{\theta_{s} }}} + {\frac{{\left( {q_{s} - 2}\right)\left( {1 - \theta_{s}} \right)}}{{\theta_{s} }}} + \cdots + {\frac{{2\left( {1 - \theta_{s}} \right)}}{{\theta_{s} }}} + {\frac{{1\left( {1 - \theta_{s} } \right)}}{{\theta_{s}}}}} \right\}. \)

For \( r_{s} = 3, 4, \ldots ,q_{s} ,X_{rs} \) is a matrix of size \( \left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {q_{s} - 2} \\ {r_{s} - 2} \\ \end{array} } \right] \) which is formed as described below.

Consider the following row matrices \( A_{{qs}} \) and \( A_{rs} \) (with the elements arranged in the descending order, and of size \( q_{s} - 1 \) and \( r_{s} - 2 \), respectively):

$$ \begin{gathered} A_{{qs}} = \left\{ {{\frac{{\left( {q_{s} - 1} \right)\left( {1 - \theta_{s}} \right)}}{{\theta_{s} }}},{\frac{{\left( {q_{s} - 2} \right)\left( {1 - \theta_{s} } \right)}}{{\theta_{s} }}},{\frac{{\left( {q_{s} - 3} \right)\left( {1 - \theta_{s} } \right)}}{{\theta_{s}}}}, \ldots ,{\frac{{3\left( {1 - \theta_{s} } \right)}}{{\theta_{s}}}},{\frac{{2\left( {1 - \theta_{s}} \right)}}{{\theta_{s}}}},{\frac{{1\left( {1 - \theta_{s}} \right)}}{{\theta_{s} }}}} \right\} \hfill \\ A_{rs} = \left\{ {r_{s} - 2,r_{s} - 3,r_{s} - 4, \ldots ,3,2,1} \right\}. \hfill \\ \end{gathered} $$

Choose any \( r_{s} - 2 \) elements (other than the last element, \( {\frac{{1 - \theta_{s}}}{{\theta_{s}}}} \)) of the matrix \( A_{qs} \) and arrange them in the descending order into another matrix \( A_{{iqs}} \). Note that we can form \(\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {q_{s} - 2} \\ {r_{s} - 2} \\ \end{array} } \right] \) number of such matrices. Subsequently, form another matrix \( A_{{irqs }} = A_{{iqs}} + A_{rs} . \) Of the remaining elements in the \( A_{{qs}} \) matrix, discard the elements that are larger than or equal to the smallest element of the \( A_{{iqs}} \) matrix, and store the remaining elements into another matrix labeled \( B_{{irqs }} \). Now, an element of \( X_{rs} \) (i.e., \( x_{{irqs}} \)) is formed by performing the following operation: \( x_{{irqs}} = {\text{Product}}\left( {A_{{irqs}} } \right) \times {\text{Sum}}\left( {B_{{irqs}} } \right) \); that is, by multiplying the product of all elements of the matrix \( A_{{irqs}} \) with the sum of all elements of the matrix \( B_{{irqs}} \). Note that the number of such elements of the matrix \( X_{rs} \) is equal to \( \left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {q_{s} - 2} \\ {r_{s} - 2} \\ \end{array} } \right] \).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ferdous, N., Pinjari, A.R., Bhat, C.R. et al. A comprehensive analysis of household transportation expenditures relative to other goods and services: an application to United States consumer expenditure data. Transportation 37, 363–390 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-010-9264-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-010-9264-2

Keywords

Navigation