Hybrid Geographical Models of Urban Spatial Structure and Behaviour

  • Mark Birkin


The chapter explores the introduction of simple behavioural mechanisms into a spatial microsimulation model. It is hypothesised that the representation of individual behaviour using appropriate rules can allow the outcome from meso-level models, such as spatial interaction models, to be reproduced. The dynamic properties of these models are also explored. Therefore the research seeks to establish links between microsimulation, agent-based approaches and spatial interaction models, at a variety of scales. The simulations are operationalised in the context of a British city.


House Price Residential Location Microsimulation Model Trip Length Spatial Interaction Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ballas D, Rossiter D, Thomas B, Clarke GP, Dorling D (2005) Geography matters: simulating the local impacts of national social policies. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  2. Birkin M, Clarke M (1987) Comprehensive models and efficient accounting frameworks for urban and regional systems. In: Griffith D, Haining R (eds) Transformations through space and time. Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, pp 169–195Google Scholar
  3. Birkin M, Clarke M (1988) SYNTHESIS: A SYNTHetic Spatial Information System for urban modelling and spatial planning. Environment and Planning A 20: 1645–1671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Birkin M, Clarke M (1989) The generation of individual and household incomes at the small area level using Synthesis. Regional Studies 23: 535–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Birkin M, Wilson AG (1989) Some properties of spatial-structural-economic dynamic urban models. In: Hauer J, Timmermans H, Wrigley N (eds) Progress in the dynamic analysis of spatial systems. Reidel, pp 184–200Google Scholar
  6. Clarke M, Wilson AG (1983) The dynamics of urban spatial structure: Progress and problems. Journal of Regional Science 23: 1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cliff D (2003) Explorations in evolutionary design of online auction market mechanisms. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 2:2: 162–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Evans S (1973) A relationship between the gravity model for trip distribution and the transportation problem in linear programming. Transportation Research 7: 39–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Foot D (1981) Urban models. Methuen, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Gilbert N (2003) Multi-agent based simulation. ESRC Research Methods Workshop, LeedsGoogle Scholar
  11. Gjerstad S, Dickhaut J (1998) Price formation in double auctions. Games and Economic Behaviour 22:1: 1–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harris B, Wilson AG (1978) Equilibrium values and dynamics of attractiveness terms in production-constrained spatial interaction models. Environment and Planning A 10: 371–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Heppenstall A, Evans A, Birkin M (2005) A hybrid multi-agent/spatial interaction model system for petrol price setting. Transactions in GIS 9: 35–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lowry I (1964) A Model of Metropolis. The Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, CAGoogle Scholar
  15. Murphy M (2003) Including feedback in demographic microsimulation models. ESRC Research Methods Workshop, LeedsGoogle Scholar
  16. Nagel K (2003) Traffic networks. In: Bornholdt S, Schuster H (eds) Handbook of Graphs and Networks: From the Genome to the Internet. Wiley, New York, pp 248–272Google Scholar
  17. Nakaya T, Yano K, Fotheringham AS, Ballas D, Clarke GP (2003) Retail interaction modelling using meso and micro approaches. Paper presented at the 33 rd Regional Science Association, RSAI — British and Irish Section conference, St Andrews, Scotland, AugustGoogle Scholar
  18. Orcutt GH, Merz J, Quinke H (eds) (1986) Microanalytic Simulation Models to Support Social and Financial Policy. North-Holland, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  19. Putnam S (1974) Preliminary results from an integrated transportation and land-use models package. Transportation 3: 193–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rees PH (2005) Subnational Population Projections in the United Kingdom: Progress Report. Seminar presented at the Institute of Geography and Spatial Organisation, Polish Academy of Sciences, WarsawGoogle Scholar
  21. Webber M (1980) Information theory and urban spatial structure. Croom Helm, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. Williams HCWL (1977) On the formation of travel demand models and economic evaluation of user benefit. Environment and Planning A 9: 285–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Zedlewski S (1990) The development of the Dynamic Simulation of Income Model (DYNASIM). In: Lewis G, Michel S (eds) Microsimulation Techniques for Tax and Transfer Analysis. The Urban Institute Press, Washington DC, pp 109–136Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Physica-Verlag Heidelberg and Accademia di Architettura, Mendrisio, Switzerland 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark Birkin
    • 1
  1. 1.School of GeographyUniversity of LeedsUK

Personalised recommendations