Table 3.
ESM + EMD analysis result for 16 Districts in Beijing.
| District Name | Abnormal Travel Rate (AT) | Average Abnormal Travel Rate (AAT) |
Sig. Two-tailed(P-value) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Changping Dist. | −7.531077193 | −21.52% | 0.000*** |
| Chaoyang Dist. | −4.878891757 | −13.94% | 0.000*** |
| Daxing Dist. | −6.055480207 | −17.30% | 0.000*** |
| Dongcheng Dist. | −7.00047346 | −20.00% | 0.000*** |
| Fangshang Dist. | −10.87323249 | −31.07% | 0.000*** |
| Fengtai Dist. | −15.505 | −44.30% | 0.000*** |
| Haidian Dist. | −15.26172735 | −43.60% | 0.000*** |
| Huairou Dist. | −2.094791421 | −5.99% | 0.000*** |
| Mengtougou Dist. | −9.5823562 | −27.38% | 0.000*** |
| Miyun Dist. | −9.479246297 | −27.08% | 0.000*** |
| Pinggu Dist. | 0.450861732 | 1.29% | 0.000*** |
| Shingjingshan Dist. | −8.447487903 | −24.14% | 0.000*** |
| Shunyi Dist. | −8.608088075 | −24.59% | 0.000*** |
| Tongzhou Dist. | −4.836302224 | −13.82% | 0.000*** |
| Xicheng Dist. | −12.90058944 | −36.86% | 0.000*** |
| Yanqin Dist. | −5.281059367 | −15.09% | 0.000*** |
| Overall | −3.028768057 | −8.65% | 0.000*** |
Note: *** represents significance at 99% confidence level.