Cycling to work in 90 large American cities: New evidence on the role of bike paths and lanes

Transportation

Volumn 39, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 409-432

  Buehler, Ralph ^a   Pucher, John ^b  

^a VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Bicycling; Bike lanes; Bike paths; Infrastructure; Sustainability; Urban transport

Indexed keywords

BICYCLING; BIKE LANES; BIKE PATHS; INFRASTRUCTURE; URBAN TRANSPORT;

CORRELATION METHODS; ECONOMICS; ELASTICITY; GASOLINE; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; TRANSPORTATION;

BICYCLES;

COMMUTING; CYCLE TRANSPORT; DATA SET; INFRASTRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT; JOURNEY TO WORK; LEAST SQUARES METHOD; LOGIT ANALYSIS; PUBLIC TRANSPORT; SUSTAINABILITY; URBAN TRANSPORT; VARIANCE ANALYSIS;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 84856693117     PISSN: 00494488     EISSN: 15729435     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11116-011-9355-8     Document Type: Article

References (110)

1. AASHTO: About the National Household Travel Survey. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC (2007).
2. Abraham, J. E., McMillan, S., Brownlee, A. T., Hunt, J. D.: Investigation of cycling sensitivities. Paper presented at the 81st transportation research board annual meeting, Washington, DC (2002).
3. Akar, G., Clifon, K. J.: The influence of individual perceptions and bicycle infrastructure on the decision to bike. Transp. Res. Rec. 2140, 165-172 (2009).
4. Alliance for Biking and Walking: Bicycling and Walking in the United States: 2010 Benchmarking Report. Alliance for Biking and Walking, Washington, DC (2010).
5. APBP: Bicycle Parking Guidelines. Assocition of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals, Washington, DC (2002).
6. Aultman-Hall, L., Hall, F. L., Baetz, B. B.: Analysis of bicycle commuter routes using geographic information systems: Implications for bicycle planning. Transp. Res. Rec. 1578, 102-110 (1998).
7. Baltes, M.: Factors influencing nondiscretionary work trips by bicycle determined from 1990 us census metropolitan area statistical area data. Transp. Res. Rec. 1538, 96-101 (1997).
8. Barnes, G., Thompson, K., Krizek, K. J.: A longitudional analysis of the effect of bicycle facilities on the commute share. Paper presented at the 85th transportation research board annual meeting, Washington, DC (2006).
9. Bergström, A., Magnusson, R.: Potential of transferring car trips to bicycle during winter. Transp. Res. A 37(8), 649-666 (2003).
10. British Medical Association: Cycling: Towards Health and Safety. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1992).
11. Broach, J., Gliebe, J., Dill, J.: Bicycle route choice model developed using revealed preference GPS data. Paper presented at the 90th annual meeting of the transportation research board, Washington, DC (2011).
12. Brons, M., Givoni, M., Rietvield, P.: Access to railway stations and its potential in increasing rail use. Transp. Res. A 43, 136-149 (2009).
13. Buehler, R.: Transport policies, automobile use, and sustainable transport: a comparison of Germany and the United States. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 30, 76-93 (2010).
14. Buehler, R., Pucher, J., Merom, D., Bauman, A.: Active travel in Germany and the USA: contributions of daily walking and cycling to physical activity. Am. J. Prev. Med. 41, September (2011, forthcoming).
15. Cavill, N., Kahlmeier, S., Racioppi, F. (eds.): Physical Activity and Health in Europe: Evidence for Action. WHO Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen (2006).
16. CEMT: National Policies to Promote Cycling. European Conference of Ministers of Transport, Paris (2004).
17. Cervero, R.: The built environment and travel: evidence from the United States. Eur. J. Transp. Infrastruct. Res. 3(2), 119-137 (2003).
18. Cervero, R., Sarmiento, O., Jacoby, E., Gomez, L., Neiman, A.: Influences of built environment on walking and cycling: lessons from bogota. Int. J. Sustain. Transp. 3(4), 203-226 (2009).
19. City of Toronto: City of Toronto Bike Plan: Shifting Gears. City of Toronto, Toronto, Canada (2001).
20. City of Vancouver: 1999 Bicycle Plan: Reviewing the Past and Planning the Future. City of Vancouver, Vancouver, Canada (1999).
21. Cleaveland, F., Douma, F.: The impact of bicycling facilities on commute mode share. In: 88th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, Washington, DC (2009).
22. Cohen, D., Sehgal, A., Williamson, S.: Impact of new bicycle path on physical activity. Prev. Med. 46, 80-81 (2008).
23. de Geus, B., de Bourdeaudhuij, I., Jannes, C., Meeusen, R.: Psychosocial and environmental factors associated with cycling for transport among a working population. Health Educ. Res. 23, 697-708 (2008).
24. DeJong, G., Gunn, H.: Recent evidence on car cost and time elasticities of travel demand in Europe. J. Transp. Econ. Policy 35(2), 137-160 (2001).
25. Dill, J.: Bicycling for transportation and health: the role of infrastructure. J. Public Health Policy 30, S95-S110 (2009).
26. Dill, J., Carr, T.: Bicycle commuting and facilities in major US cities: if you build them, commuters will use them-another look. Transp. Res. Rec. 1828, 116-123 (2003).
27. Dill, J., Gliebe, J.: Understanding and Measuring Bicycle Behavior: A Focus on Travel Time and Route Choice. Oregon Transportation Research and Education Consortium, Portland, OR (2008).
28. Dill, J., Voros, K.: Factors affecting bicycling demand: Initial survey findings from the Portland, Oregon region. Transp. Res. Rec. 2031, 9-17 (2007).
29. Dora, C., Phillips, M.: Transport, Environment and Health. WHO Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen (2000).
30. Elvik, R.: The non-linearity of risk and the promotion of environmentally sustainable transport. Accid. Anal. Prev. 41, 849-855 (2009).
31. Epsey M (1998) Gasoline demand revisited: an international meta-analysis of elasticities. Energy Econ. 20, 273-295.
32. Evenson, K. R., Herring, A. H., Houston, S. L.: Evaluating change in physical activity with the building of a multi-use trail. Am. J. Prev. Med. 28, 177-185 (2005).
33. Ewing, R., Cervero, R.: Travel and the built environment. A synthesis. Transp. Res. Rec. 1780, 87-114 (2001).
34. Ewing, R., Cervero, R.: Travel and the built environment: a meta analysis. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 76(3), 265-294 (2010).
35. Ewing, R., Pendall, R., Chen, D.: Measuring Sprawl and Its Impact. Smart Growth America, Washington, DC (2002).
36. Ewing, R., Bartholomew, K., Winkelman, S., Walters, J., Chen, D.: Growing cooler. The evidence on urban development and climate change. Urban Land Institute, Washington, DC (2008).
37. Fietsberaad: Continuous and Integral: The Cycling Policies of Groningen and Other European Cities. Fietsberaad, Amsterdam, NL (2006).
38. Fietsberaad: Bicycle Policies of the European Principals: Continuous and Integral. Fietsberaad, Amsterdam, NL (2010).
39. Gatersleben, B., Appleton, K. M.: Contemplating cycling to work: attitudes and perceptions in different stages of change. Transp. Res. A 41(4), 302-312 (2007).
40. Givoni, M., Rietveld, P.: The access journal to the railway station and its role in passengers' satisfaction with rail travel. Transp. Policy 14, 357-365 (2007).
41. Guo, J. Y., Bhat, C. R., Copperman, R. B.: Effect of the built environment on motorized and non-motorized trip making: substitutive, complementary, or synergistic? Paper presented at the transportation research board annual meeting, Washington, DC (2007).
42. Handy, S. L.: Understanding the link between urban form and nonwork travel behavior. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 15(3), 183-198 (1996).
43. Hanly, M., Dargay, J., Goodwin, P.: Review of income and price elasticities in the demand for road traffic. Department for Transport, London (2002).
44. Hegger, R.: Public transport and cycling: living apart or together? Public Transp. Int. 2, 38-41 (2007).
45. Heinen, E., van Wee, B., Maat, K.: Bicycle use for commuting: a literature review. Transp. Rev. 30(1), 105-132 (2010).
46. Howard, C., Burns, E. K.: Cycling to work in Phoenix: route choice, travel behavior, and commuter characteristics. Transp. Res. Rec. 1773, 39-46 (2001).
47. Hunt, J. D., Abraham, J. E.: Influences on bicycle use. Transportation 34, 453-470 (2007).
48. IOTF: Obesity in Europe: The Case for Action. International Obesity Task Force and European Association for the Study of Obesity, London, UK (2010).
49. Jacobsen, P.: Safety in numbers: more walkers and bicyclists, safer walking and bicycling. Inj. Prev. 9, 205-209 (2003).
50. Jacobsen, P. L., Racioppi, F., Rutter, H.: Who owns the roads? How motorised traffic discourages walking and bicycling. Inj. Prev. 15, 369-373 (2009a).
51. Jacobsen, P. L., Racioppi, F., Rutter, H.: Who owns the roads? How motorised traffic discourages walking and bicycling. Inj. Prev. 15(6), 369-373 (2009b). doi: 10. 1136/ip. 2009. 022566.
52. Krizek, K. J., Johnson, P. J.: Proximity to trails and retail: effects on urban cycling and walking. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 72(1), 33-42 (2006).
53. Krizek, K. J., El-Geneidy, A., Thompson, K.: A detailed analysis of how an urban trail system affects cyclists' travel. Transportation 34, 611-624 (2007).
54. Krizek, K. J., Forsyth, A., Baum, L.: Walking and cycling international literature review. Victoria Department of Transport, Melbourne, Australia (2009).
55. League of American Bicyclists: Bicycling Friendly Community Program. League of American Bicyclists, Washington, DC (2010).
56. LeClerc, M.: Bicycle Planning in the City of Portland: Evaluation of the City's Bicycle Master Plan and Statistical Analysis of Relationship Between the City's Bicyle Network and Bicycle Commute. Portland State University, Portland, OR (2002).
57. Litman, T.: Land Use Impacts on Transport: How Land Use Factors Affect Travel Behavior. Victoria Transport Institute, Victoria, Canada (2007a).
58. Litman, T.: Transportation elasticities. Victoria Transport Policy Institute. http://www. vtpi. org/tdm/tdm11. htm#_Toc161022580 (2007b). Accessed 23 June 2011.
59. Lusk, A. C., Furth, P. G., Morency, P., Miranda-Moreno, L. F., Willett, W. C., Dennerlein, J. T.: Risk of injury for bicycling on cycle tracks versus in the street. Inj. Prev. Brief Report http://injuryprevention. bmj. com/content/early/2011/02/02/ip. 2010. 028696. full (2011). Accessed 23 June 2011.
60. Martens, K.: The bicycle as a feedering mode: experiences from three European countries. Transp. Res. D 9, 281-294 (2004).
61. Martens, K.: Promoting bike and ride: the Dutch experience. Transp. Res. A 41, 326-338 (2007).
62. Menghini, G., Carrasco, N., Schüssler, N., Axhausen, K.: Route choice of cyclists in Zurich. Transp. Res. A 9, 754-765 (2010).
63. Moudon, A. V., Lee, C., Cheadle, A. D., Collier, C. W., Johnson, D., Schmid, T. L., Weather, R. D.: Cycling and the built environment, a US perspective. Transp. Res. D 10, 245-261 (2005).
64. NACTO: Cities for Cycling. National Association of City Transportation Officials, Washington, DC (2010).
65. Nankervis, M.: The effect of weather and climate on bicycle commuting. Transp. Res. A 33(6), 417-431 (1999).
66. National Climatic Data Center: Mean Number of Days with Maximum Temperature 90 Degrees for Higher. U. S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC (2010).
67. Nelson, A., Allen, D.: If you build them, commuters will use them. Transp. Res. Rec. 1578, 79-83 (1997).
68. Netherlands Ministry of Transport: Cycling in the chain: the combination with public transport. In: Cycling in the Netherlands. Netherlands Ministry of Transport, The Hague, pp. 48-51 (2009).
69. Noland, R., Kunreuther, H.: Short-run and long-run policies for increasing bicycle transportation for daily commuter trips. Transp. Policy 2(1), 67-79 (1995).
70. Papke, L. E., Wooldridge, J. M.: Econometric methods for fractional response variables with an application to 401(k) plan participation rates. J. Appl. Econ. 11(6), 619-632 (1996).
71. Parkin, J., Wardman, M., Page, M.: Estimation of the determinants of bicycle mode share for the journey to work using census data. Transportation 35, 93-109 (2008).
72. Pucher, J., Buehler, R.: Why Canadians cycle more than Americans: a comparative analysis of bicycling trends and policies. Transp. Policy 13(1), 265-279 (2006).
73. Pucher, J., Buehler, R.: At the frontiers of cycling: policy innovations in the Netherlands, Denmark, and Germany. World Transp. Policy Pract. 13(3), 8-57 (2007).
74. Pucher, J., Buehler, R.: Making cycling irresistible: lessons from the Netherlands, Denmark, and Germany. Transp. Rev. 28(1), 495-528 (2008).
75. Pucher, J., Buehler, R.: Analysis of Cycling Policies and Trends in Large American and Canadian Cities. U. S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Washington, DC (2011).
76. Pucher, J., Komanoff, C., Schimek, P.: Bicycling renaissance in North America? Recent trends and alternative policies to promote bicycling. Transp. Res. A 33(7/8), 625-654 (1999).
77. Pucher, J., Dill, J., Handy, S. L.: Infrastructure, programs and policies to increase bicycling: an international review. Prev Med 50(S1), S106-S125 (2010).
78. Pucher, J., Buehler, R., Merom, D., Bauman, A.: Walking and cycling in the United States, 2001-2009: Evidence from the NHTS. Am J Public Health 101 e1-e8 (2011a). doi: 10. 2105/AJPH. 2010. 300067.
79. Pucher, J., Buehler, R., Seinen, M.: Bicycling renaissance in North America? An update and re-assessment of cycling trends and policies. Transp. Res. A 45(6), 451-475 (2011b).
80. Pucher, J., Garrard, J., Greaves, S.: Cycling down under: a comparative analysis of bicycling trends and policies in Sydney and Melbourne. J. Transp. Geogr. 18(2), 332-345 (2011c).
81. Rashad, I.: Associations of cycling with urban sprawl and the gasoline price. Am. J. Health Promot. 24(1), 27-36 (2009).
82. Reynolds, C., Harris, M., Teschke, K., Cripton, P., Winters, M.: The impact of transportation infrastructure on bicycling injuries and crashes: a review of the literature. Environ. Health 8(47), 1-19 (2009).
83. Rietveld, P., Daniel, V.: Determinants of bicycle use: do municipal policies matter? Transp. Res. A 38, 531-550 (2004).
84. Robinson, D.: Safety in numbers in Australia: more walkers and bicyclists, safer walking and cycling. Health Promot. J. Aust. 16, 47-51 (2005).
85. Schwanen, T.: Urban form and commuting behavior a cross European comparison. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie 93(3), 336-343 (2002).
86. Shafizadeh, K., Niemeier, D.: Bicycle journey-to-work: travel behavior characteristics and spatial analysis. Transp. Res. Rec. 1578, 84-90 (1997).
87. Stinson, M., Bhat, C.: Commuter bicycle route choice: analysis using a stated preference survey. Transp. Res. Rec. 1828, 107-115 (2003).
88. Taylor, D., Mahmassani, H.: Analysis of state preferences for intermodal bicycle-transit interfaces. Transp. Res. Rec. 1556, 86-95 (1996).
89. Timperio, A., Ball, K., Salmon, J., Roberts, R., Giles-Corti, B., Baur, C., Crawford, D.: Personal, family, social, and environmental correlates of active commuting to school. Am. J. Prev. Med. 30(1), 45-51 (2006).
90. TRB: Integration of Bicycles and Transit-TCRP Synthesis Report 62. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC (2005).
91. USDHHS: Physical Activity and Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA (1996).
92. USDHHS: Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans. U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA (2008).
93. USDOC: American Community Survey 2006-2008 Three Year Averages. U. S. Department of Commerce, U. S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC (2009a).
94. USDOC: United States Census 2000. U. S. Department of Commerce, U. S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC (2009b).
95. USDOC: American Community Survey 2009. U. S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC (2010).
96. USDOE: Average Gasoline Retail Prices in U. S. States 2006-2008. United States Department of Energy, Washignton, DC (2010a).
97. USDOE: Monthly Energy Review: Motor Gasoline Retail Prices. Energy Information Administration. United States Department of Energy, Washington, DC (2010b).
98. USDOT: The National Bicycling and Walking Study: Transportation Choices for a Changing America. U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC (1994).
99. USDOT: Bicycles and Transit: A Partnership that Works. U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, DC (1998).
100. USDOT: National Bicycling and Walking Study: A Ten-year Status Report. U. S. Department of Transportation. Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC (2004).
101. USDOT: National Transit Database. U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, DC (2008).
102. USDOT: Bicyclist Fatalities by State. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), United States Department of Transportation, Washington, DC (2010a).
103. USDOT: National Household Travel Survey 2009. Version 2. 0/2010. U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC (2010b).
104. USDOT: National Household Travel Survey, Our Nation's Travel. U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC (2010c).
105. USDOT: The National Walking and Bicycling Study: 15-Year Status Report. U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC (2010d).
106. Vandenbulcke, G., Dujardin, C., Thomas, I., de Geus, B., Degraeuwe, B., Meeusen, R., Int Panis, L.: Cycle commuting in Belgium: spatial determinants and 're-cycling' strategies. Transp. Res. A 45(2), 118-137 (2011).
107. Wardman, M., Tight, M., Page, M.: Factors influencing the propensity to cycle to work. Transp. Res. A 41, 339-350 (2007).
108. Winters, M., Friesen, M., Koehoorn, M., Teschke, K.: Utilitarian bicycling: a multilevel analysis of climate and personal influences. Am. J. Prev. Med. 32, 52-58 (2007).
109. Xing, Y., Handy, S., Mokhtarian, P.: Factors associated with proportions and miles of bicycling for transportation and recreation in six small us cities. Transp. Res. D 15, 73-81 (2010).
110. Zahran, S., Brody, S. D., Maghelal, P., Prelog, A., Lacy, M.: Cycling and walking: explaining the spatial distribution of healthy modes of transportation in the United States. Transp. Res. D 13(7), 462-470 (2008).