Consistent with gender differences in risk aversion, female commuter cyclists preferred to use routes with maximum separation from motorized traffic. Improved cycling infrastructure in the form of bicycle paths and lanes that provide a high degree of separation from motor traffic is likely to be important for increasing transportation cycling amongst under-represented population groups such as women.

No abstract

BackgroundGender differences in cycling are well-documented. However, most analyses of gender differences make broad comparisons, with few studies modeling male and female cycling patterns separately for recreational and transport cycling. This modeling is important, in order to improve our efforts to promote cycling to women and men in countries like Australia with low rates of transport cycling. The main aim of this study was to examine gender differences in cycling patterns and in motivators and constraints to cycling, separately for recreational and transport cycling.MethodsAdult members of a Queensland, Australia, community bicycling organization completed an online survey about their cycling patterns; cycling purposes; and personal, social and perceived environmental motivators and constraints (47% response rate). Closed and open-end questions were completed. Using the quantitative data, multivariable linear, logistic and ordinal regression models were used to examine associations between gender and cycling patterns, motivators and constraints. The qualitative data were thematically analyzed to expand upon the quantitative findings.ResultsIn this sample of 1862 bicyclists, men were more likely than women to cycle for recreation and for transport, and they cycled for longer. Most transport cycling was for commuting, with men more likely than women to commute by bicycle. Men were more likely to cycle on-road, and women off-road. However, most men and women did not prefer to cycle on-road without designed bicycle lanes, and qualitative data indicated a strong preference by men and women for bicycle-only off-road paths. Both genders reported personal factors (health and enjoyment related) as motivators for cycling, although women were more likely to agree that other personal, social and environmental factors were also motivating. The main constraints for both genders and both cycling purposes were perceived environmental factors related to traffic conditions, motorist aggression and safety. Women, however, reported more constraints, and were more likely to report as constraints other environmental factors and personal factors.ConclusionDifferences found in men’s and women’s cycling patterns, motivators and constraints should be considered in efforts to promote cycling, particularly in efforts to increase cycling for transport.

No abstract

Health aspects of day-to-day cycling have gained attention from the health sector aiming to increase levels of physical activity, and from the transport and planning sector, to justify investments in cycling. We review and discuss the main pathways between cycling and health under two perspectives -generalizable epidemiological evidence for health effects and specific impact modeling to quantify health impacts in concrete settings. Substantial benefits from physical activity dominate the public health impacts of cycling. Epidemiological evidence is strong and impact modeling is well advanced. Injuries amount to a smaller impact on the population level, but affect crash victims disproportionately and perceived risks deter potential cyclists. Basic data on crash risks are available, but evidence on determinants of risks is limited and impact models are highly dependent on local factors. Risks from air pollution can be assumed to be small, with limited evidence for cycling-specific mechanisms. Based on a large body of evidence, planners, health professionals, and decision-makers can rest assured that benefits from cycling-related physical activity are worth pursuing. Safety improvements should be part of the efforts to promote cycling, both to minimize negative impacts and to lower barriers to cycling for potential riders.

No abstract

Issue addressed: Australian women's participation in cycling for transport and recreation is approximately half that of men. These gender differences do not occur in several western European countries. Research is required to investigate the individual, social and environmental determinants of Australian women's participation in cycling for transport and recreation.Discussion: Few studies have systematically investigated women's perceptions and experiences of cycling and little is known about what motivates and sustains their involvement. Preliminary indications are that, for women, there may be an interest in and capacity to participate in cycling that is not being translated into practice. Safety concerns appear to be a significant deterrent to women cycling. Safety factors have a differential impact on women as they are generally more risk averse than men. Quantitative risk assessments suggest that the risk of injury associated with cycling is small and that the health benefits outweigh the health costs. Cycling promotion campaigns may achieve greater success with women if they enable women to experience cycling in an environment that both is, and is perceived to be, safe and supportive. Conclusions:Research is needed to determine what strategies are likely to be most effective in promoting cycling among Australian women, as a basis for developing programs, policies and facilities to support women's participation in cycling.The promotion of cycling as a form of active transport and recreation provides an ideal opportunity for health promoters to work collaboratively with sectors such as transport, environment, local government and town planning to simultaneously improve the health of individuals, urban environments and communities.

Awareness of the role of physical activity for the prevention of diabetes was low. Physical activity promotion for women with previous GDM needs to be shaped around the opportunities and constraints identified by this population group.