Talk:Induced demand

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Economics (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Merger with other similar pages[edit]

I expanded the induced traffic page considerably, before noticing that there were other pages for induced travel demand and induced demand. Since they all seem to be saying pretty much the same thing, they should probably be merged into one (I suggest this one).

Dave A 22:59, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Merge is now complete.

Dave A 18:03, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm concerned about not having induced traffic as its own entry, because it's really not the same thing as induced demand, which is a broader economic concept. Induced traffic has specific real-world policy implications. The result of the merge has been that induced travel demand and induced traffic are given remarkable prominence in the overall concept. There are other forms of induced demand, such as demand for in the US for petrol, food, and certain utilities, that are generated by inflated supply -- they have differenet policy implications. If anyone later edits this article to reduce it's traffic focus, as they would perhaps be entitled to do, we might have to re-create induced travel and induced traffic demand. Thesmothete 21:44, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I did consider that, but since the previous induced demand article covered broadly the same topics, I thought it best to merge them. I understand the problem though - but I would suggest recreating just one of those additional pages rather than both, if necessary. Dave A 10:07, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

== Cut from freeway article == (NPOV anyone) dml In the Atlanta metro area, for example, the former governor of Georgia proposed a massive 210-mile (340km) expressway encircling the suburbs, costing billions of dollars, and destroying dozens of rural farms and exurban homes (potentially hundreds if development continued in its eventual path). Some equated it to heart bypass surgery (in this case, Atlanta's original Perimeter, Interstate 285), with the patient ignoring warnings and failing to do anything to prevent it from happening again. The opponents of the expansion won out when a new governor was elected in late 2002, but it underscored the destruction which occurs anywhere with such freeways, frequently including a legacy of urban blight and suburban sprawl.

I think the articles need to be separate here, the induced travel demand should be on its own page, and induced demand should be general, not including specific examples but rather referencing them. Jamie Q


Of course, building new roads can actually decrease traffic flow (Braess' Paradox). PML.

Braess Paradox doesn't say capacity decreases flow, it says new roads under very specific circumstances, increase travel time. (By extension, with elastic demand, demand may ultimately drop, but I think Braess's paper assumed fixed demand. someone ought to write it out ... dml

terminology on traffic: induced, generated, diverted[edit]

I see several terms used in development documents (generated, induced, diverted traffic), and I would like to suggest that some discussion of the definitions, distinctions and approaches to quantifying these would be helpful. Illustrations or examples might strengthen the discussion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.79.62.18 (talk) 04:28, 27 March 2007 (UTC).

I attempted to clarify some of the definitions in a discussion of the sources of induced traffic. --A Melbourne (talk) 07:01, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Induced Demand - Incorrect assumptions[edit]

Attempts to constrict development and economic growth in order to stimulate public transport and personal bicycle transport use ignore the global economy and escape of assumed bounds. People and/or businesses can simply move to places with lower transportation and other costs. These could be exurbs, other states, or developing nations. Besides relocating, people reduce their transportation and time costs traveling to local business by ordering online, another loss to the local economy.

Examples where excess supply does not bring use or demand would be US cities like Detroit and Flint Michigan, where surplus housing, roads, factories, and workers exist. Employers failed, shrunk, or left for locations with lower cost. Areas in US states of Florida, Nevada, and Arizona experienced much housing development ahead of demand by 2008 that is projected to remain vacant for some time. Many people moved from industrial Michigan and fewer than hoped, to overdeveloped places. Mark Kaepplein (talk) 06:18, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Could this page be more generalised?[edit]

This page is supposed to be about induced demand or latent demand, and yet is entirely about induced traffic.

I suggest that either this page be merged with the induced traffic page, or else that it be more generalised. I came to this page after a discussion at work about latent demand that had nothing to do with traffic. 202.37.32.2 (talk) 02:15, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

I think the problem is that we have a not very good article on induced demand generally (which seems not to be considered a high priority in economics) but which could easily be a very good article on induced traffic specifically (which is certainly a very high priority in discussions of transport policy, sustainability, congestion, and roads planning). I appreciate that the question of naming has been addressed several times, but I would like to have a go at changing this back to induced traffic, some rewriting and adding new references, and then making a cross reference to what would then at best be a stub for induced demand more widely. I'll leave this suggestion here for a little while before starting, to see if there are objections. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hackneycab (talkcontribs) 13:50, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

I agree with the OP. This article is almost exclusively about the disadvantages of increasing road capacity and private motor vehicle use, delving into irrelevant points like pollution and global warming. This is supposed to be an article about the economics of 'Induced Demand', not about the pros and cons of private transport! Booksacool1 (talk) 00:09, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

induced != latent[edit]

though they are similar, the two terms are not interchangeable. one way to think of the difference: Latent demand is a part of the phenomenon of induced demand. induced demand is an increase due to more capacity. latent demand is potential demand but is constrained because of congestion, kind of like potential energy stored until it's released. Source: ‘Suburban Nation’ by Andres Duany et al [1] :: “This condition is best explained by what specialists call latent demand. Since the real constraint on driving is traffic, not cost, people are always ready to make more trips when the traffic goes away. The number of latent trips is huge--perhaps 30 percent of existing traffic. Because of latent demand, adding lanes is futile, since drivers are already poised to use them up.” El duderino (abides) 06:57, 26 January 2015 (UTC)