中文摘要：

居住与就业是城市的基本功能活动,其空间配置决定了居民的通勤行为,从而对城市发展和居民生活产生显著影响,因此开展城市的通勤效率研究对优化居住与就业的空间分布,实现城市可持续发展等方面尤为重要。基于北京都市区居民问卷调查数据,通过理论通勤、过剩通勤、通勤容量等相关模型对居民的通勤效率进行评价;在此基础上,着重分析了公共交通出行与私家车出行之间的通勤效率差异性。研究表明：①北京都市区居民的通勤出行中有64.48%属于过剩通勤,从通勤容量使用率来看都市区仅为32.49%,反映了目前居住与就业失衡的现实情况;②从不同出行方式来看,公共交通过剩通勤程度更高,即私家车出行的通勤效率要高于公共交通,表明公共交通出行依然存在较大的优化提升空间;③从通勤效率差异的影响因素来看,就业可达性变量显著影响公共交通通勤,对私家车通勤时间的影响没有通过显著性检验;年龄、学历、平均月收入、住房产权等与二者显著相关,但性别、家庭结构的影响都不显著;居住密度及居住地空间位置对公共交通、私家车通勤时间都具有一定影响,但就业密度及就业地空间位置对不同出行方式通勤时间的影响则不显著,认为城市应当鼓励公共交通出行,通过提高公共交通的通达性、对私家车征收拥挤费用等措施来弥补公共交通与私家车出行之间的不平等性。

英文摘要：

Two main functions of a city—housing and employment—have a substantial influence on urban development, as their spatial configurations determine residents＇ commuting behavior and otherwise affect lifestyles. Research on commuting efficiency therefore plays an important role in urban sustainable development and optimism of the spatial distributions of housing and employment. In this paper, based on results of a questionnaire conducted in the Beijing metropolitan area, commuting efficiency is analyzed and evaluated by way of theoretical commuting, excess commuting, and commuting capacity models. The paper analyzes the commuting efficiency differentiation of public transit and private automobiles.Results are as follows.（1） The excess commuting rate in the Beijing metropolitan area is64.48% while the commuting capacity utilization rate is only 32.49%, which permits speculation that the current employment–housing situation is substantially imbalanced.（2） For commuting efficiency for different travel modes, private automobiles are superior to public transit, which indicates that the public transportation excess commuting rate is higher than that of private automobiles, and great capacity exists for optimizing public transportation.（3） By analyzing impact factors of the commuting efficiency differentiation of public transit and private automobiles, the factor of job accessibility is found to significantly influence commuting via public transit, while the correlation between job accessibility and private automobile travel does not prove significant. A significant correlation is found between age,education, occupation type, average monthly income, housing property, and commuting time for both travel modes, but the influences of sex and family structure are found to be not significant. Additionally, residential locations are found to impact commuting times for both travel modes more than residential density does, whereas the impact of working locations is found to be not significant. Consequently, it is