This map shows the average commuting time from home to work in Europe.
(Author: Maps.interlude, Link to image information and dfferent resolutions )
It might be surprising that, in spite of wildly different traffic systems and large differences in the use share of cars, these times are so similar.
An explanation is given in the wikipedia article on Marchetti’s Constant. Basically, the time spent commuting is mostly an anthropological constant, and is largely independent of means of transport and culture.
In other words, if we use faster means of transport, we almost automatically commute larger distances - regardless whether this improves our quality of life or not.
This relationship should probably be central in modern traffic planning, but it is often not considered. (There is an interesting article in German by the traffic scientist Rudolf Pfleiderer, titled “Das Phänomen Verkehr”, which describes in more detail the relationships between traffic, speed, and distance - perhaps somebody knows a good English article?)
So not 1000s of years & USA doesn’t fall within the “constant commute budget” (“is an anomaly”) bcs it has 10pp more cars compared to EU?
(Also I wasn’t saying USA is an outlier, I was saying even it has vastly divergent “constant commute time budgets” depending on location, so it’s def not a constant. If anything an upper/max tolerance.)
(Even the top countries in this list don’t have the commute times of USA average.)
I’m just saying that the “Marchetti’s constant” is a figurative idea meant to not be taken as a whole, but merely a consideration for mid-term behaviour changes in context city planning/changes.
Only a fraction of the ppl would commute if not necessary (but it acts like a time budget depending on the need to work at specific places vs wanting or having to live in a certain zone).
This is what I’m questioning.
It’s not even constant now or in any moment of humanity with commutes.
Am I missing something that you were trying to say?
Eg of how the not-constant changes:
