Several researchers within the field of land use and travel have claimed that self‐selection of residents into geographical locations matching their travelling preferences precludes researchers from drawing firm conclusions about influences of residential location on travel. This paper counters this position. For one thing, if households self‐select into areas that meet their travel preferences, it seems self‐evident that urban structure matters. Evidence from qualitative interviews in the metropolitan areas of Copenhagen and Hangzhou indicates that most of the interviewees’ rationales for activity participation, location of activities, choice of travel mode and route choice contribute to a higher amount of motorized travel among outer‐area residents than among inner‐city dwellers, regardless of any self‐selection of residents to particular types of neighbourhoods. Drawing on data from Copenhagen Metropolitan Area, the paper shows that significant relationships between residential location and travel exist regardless of travel‐related residential preferences. Moreover, car ownership, and to some extent also transport attitudes, is influenced by residential location. Studies treating car ownership and attitudes to car travel as exogenous control variables not influenced by urban structure tend to underestimate the impacts of residential location on travel.

Urban densification has for some decades been considered as the most relevant strategy for ecological modernization within the field of urban spatial development. Compared to outward urban expansion, densification has important environmental merits, but is not without negative environmental impacts. This paper critically examines how urban densification policies contain an assumption – implicit or explicit – that continual growth, expressed in per capita consumption of building stock and infrastructure, should be accommodated. This is argued to lead to a weakening of environmental sustainability. The Norwegian capital Oslo is used as an example, illustrating the environmental achievements and limitations of the densification strategy. These achievements and limitations are then discussed in the light of theoretical literature on tensions between economic growth and environmental sustainability. The paper concludes with a call for further critical scrutiny of how growth assumptions influence/subtly shape urban sustainability policies.

While numerous studies have investigated influences of built environment characteristics on travel behavior, many scholars are concerned about the confounding effect of residential self-selection. This paper argues that the existence of transport-attitude-based residential self-selection hardly represents any threat to the validity of the basic knowledge on how residential location within urban contexts influences travel behavior. The causal mechanisms by which residential location influences travel behavior exist regardless of whether or not transport-related residential self-selection occurs. Moreover, the cases presented in this paper suggest that residential self-selection based on attitudes to travel is unlikely to represent any great source of error for parameter estimates of the effects of residential location variables on travel behavior as long as “traditional” demographic and socioeconomic variables have already been accounted for. The doubts raised by certain scholars about the implications of attitude-based residential self-selection for the validity of the knowledge base of land use and transportation policies thus appear to be not very well-founded.

Within research into influences of the built environment on travel behaviour, the issue of causality has gained increased attention. Several attempts have been made in order to identify the true effects of built environment characteristics by controlling for attitudinal and lifestyle factors and by applying more sophisticated techniques of analysis. Most research still suffers from insufficient theorizing and empirical investigation of causal mechanisms. An implicit conception of causality in terms of correlation between subsequent events appears to be widespread. This paper argues that such a conception of causality is inadequate and can lead to model specification error. Instead, a conception of causality as tendencies engendered by generative mechanisms is proposed. Based on such an understanding, the paper discusses in what sense the built environment can be said to exert causal influences on travel behaviour. In order to integrate knowledge about causal influences at the level of the individual and at the city level, a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods is recommended.

Informed by critical realist philosophy of science, this paper aims to contribute to a better understanding of the issue of causality within urban and planning research. The concept of causality dominating within certain influential disciplinary and philosophical traditions is difficult to reconcile with research into influences of the built environment on human actions. This paper promotes a conceptualizing of causality in terms of generative mechanisms operating in different combinations in normally non-closed systems, and discusses in what sense the built environment can be said to exert causal influences on human actions. In order to integrate knowledge about causal influences at the level of the individual and at the city level, a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods is recommended.

Sustainable mobility has been an important concern in urban planning and development in Oslo Metropolitan Area since the 1990s. The period has been characterized by concentrated and compact urban development, especially within the municipality of Oslo. This has contributed to a reduction in growth in car traffic. Analyses of selected land use and transport plans and policy documents, professional journal articles and interviews with key actors show that there has been a high degree of consensus about this spatial development strategy. Considerable investments have been made in public transport as well as in road development; the former based on broad consensus. Road capacity increases have been contested among professionals but widely supported by politicians.