Abstract:The role of bicyclists as consumers is explored through an examination of the relationship between travel mode and shopping behavior. As cities develop policies to combat congestion and reduce emissions from the transportation sector, tension often develops when scarce road space must be allocated, particularly in dense urban cores. The challenge is to accommodate all travel modes and ensure that local businesses are not negatively affected by infrastructure changes. Previous studies in the United States and a… Show more
“…The general consensus is that increases in the number or length of bicycle facilities leads to increased levels of cycling (Dill et al, 2003;Pucher et al, 2010), and thus increased volume of consumers travelling to nearby businesses. In addition, surveys conducted in Portland, Dublin (Ireland), San Francisco, and New York all have found that bicyclists and pedestrians tend to spend more compared to drivers in commercial areas because bicyclists and pedestrians tend to visit local businesses more frequently compared to drivers (Popovich et al, 2014;Bent et al, 2009;Lee, 2008;Clifton et al, 2012). These studies utilized business owner surveys or intercept consumer surveys to learn about the various travel modes by which they arrived at the establishments and resulting expenditure behavior in local businesses.…”
Section: Business Impacts and Economic Vitalitymentioning
Many cities across the country, as part of Complete Streets initiatives or to promote community livability and environmental sustainability, have engaged in street improvement or transportation infrastructure upgrade projects that increase access and mobility for pedestrians and bicyclists through a reduction of on-street parking or traffic lanes. With various transportation modes competing for scarce resources (including right-of-way and transportation funding), city planners and transportation agencies often struggle with how to justify these infrastructure investments for non-motorized modes such as bicycling and walking, particularly when driving is still the predominant mode of transportation in most cities. There is a vital need to understand whether and how these investments impact economic vitality, business activities and neighborhood equity in surrounding areas. By examining multiple data sources (e.g., Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) employment data, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) employment and wages data, retail sales tax data, and National Establishment Time Series (NETS) employment and sales data), utilizing multiple analytic approaches (e.g., aggregated trend analysis, difference-indifference (DID), interrupted time series (ITS) analysis, and distributional analysis) on seven corridors within four selected study cities across the U.S. (Portland, San Francisco, Minneapolis, and Memphis), this study aims to accomplish two main objectives: (i) to establish whether and how these types of investments impact economic vitality, business activities and demographic composition of surrounding neighborhoods with outcomes that are applicable to additional cities and corridors for preimplementation assessments; and (ii) to develop a systematic and rigorous methodological approach that is replicable to other cities and corridors for postimplementation evaluation and analysis. While we observed some mixed results, we generally found that street improvements have either positive impacts on corridor economic and business performance or non-significant impacts. More importantly, this multicity multiapproach exploration allowed the authors to focus on a broader perspective than the individual findings in each corridor or city-detailed comparisons of the different available data sources and methodologies to elucidate the advantages, disadvantages and challenges of conducting research in this field. This study provides policymakers and planners with a solid research and practical foundation as well as a robust analytical framework to strategize the implementation of a multimodal transportation network and to support non-motorized transportation infrastructure investment.
“…The general consensus is that increases in the number or length of bicycle facilities leads to increased levels of cycling (Dill et al, 2003;Pucher et al, 2010), and thus increased volume of consumers travelling to nearby businesses. In addition, surveys conducted in Portland, Dublin (Ireland), San Francisco, and New York all have found that bicyclists and pedestrians tend to spend more compared to drivers in commercial areas because bicyclists and pedestrians tend to visit local businesses more frequently compared to drivers (Popovich et al, 2014;Bent et al, 2009;Lee, 2008;Clifton et al, 2012). These studies utilized business owner surveys or intercept consumer surveys to learn about the various travel modes by which they arrived at the establishments and resulting expenditure behavior in local businesses.…”
Section: Business Impacts and Economic Vitalitymentioning
Many cities across the country, as part of Complete Streets initiatives or to promote community livability and environmental sustainability, have engaged in street improvement or transportation infrastructure upgrade projects that increase access and mobility for pedestrians and bicyclists through a reduction of on-street parking or traffic lanes. With various transportation modes competing for scarce resources (including right-of-way and transportation funding), city planners and transportation agencies often struggle with how to justify these infrastructure investments for non-motorized modes such as bicycling and walking, particularly when driving is still the predominant mode of transportation in most cities. There is a vital need to understand whether and how these investments impact economic vitality, business activities and neighborhood equity in surrounding areas. By examining multiple data sources (e.g., Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) employment data, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) employment and wages data, retail sales tax data, and National Establishment Time Series (NETS) employment and sales data), utilizing multiple analytic approaches (e.g., aggregated trend analysis, difference-indifference (DID), interrupted time series (ITS) analysis, and distributional analysis) on seven corridors within four selected study cities across the U.S. (Portland, San Francisco, Minneapolis, and Memphis), this study aims to accomplish two main objectives: (i) to establish whether and how these types of investments impact economic vitality, business activities and demographic composition of surrounding neighborhoods with outcomes that are applicable to additional cities and corridors for preimplementation assessments; and (ii) to develop a systematic and rigorous methodological approach that is replicable to other cities and corridors for postimplementation evaluation and analysis. While we observed some mixed results, we generally found that street improvements have either positive impacts on corridor economic and business performance or non-significant impacts. More importantly, this multicity multiapproach exploration allowed the authors to focus on a broader perspective than the individual findings in each corridor or city-detailed comparisons of the different available data sources and methodologies to elucidate the advantages, disadvantages and challenges of conducting research in this field. This study provides policymakers and planners with a solid research and practical foundation as well as a robust analytical framework to strategize the implementation of a multimodal transportation network and to support non-motorized transportation infrastructure investment.
“…Both San Francisco studies found that those who arrived on foot and those who arrived by bike, taxi, or other (a lumped category) spent less per trip than motorists on average (Bent & Singa, 2009; San Francisco City Transportation Authority, 2010), though neither tested the results statistically. A study from a smaller California city (Davis) found that cyclists spent more on average on downtown retail purchases than motorists (food service, bar, and other service business purchases were excluded), a difference which was marginally significant statistically (p = 0.128) (Popovich & Handy, 2014). The Portland study found that pedestrians spent more on average at bars than motorists, but less at restaurants and convenience stores, and much less at supermarkets.…”
Section: Spending By Travel Modementioning
confidence: 98%
“…Six of the studiestwo in San Francisco, three in Toronto, and one in Victoriawere done via intercept surveys of adult passersby in downtowns or retail corridors of urban areas. One study utilised crosssectional surveys of residents of an entire city, with questions targeted at consumer spending in the downtown area of Davis, California (Popovich & Handy, 2014). Another study used exit surveys of patrons leaving restaurants, bars, and convenience stores across a range of neighbourhood types in Portland, Oregon (Clifton et al, 2013).…”
Section: Spending By Travel Modementioning
confidence: 99%
“…All eight studies calculated and compared per-month spending by travel mode, which reflects the combination of number of trips and spending per trip. Six of the studies concluded that cyclists and/or pedestrians spent more per month than motorists, though only two of them confirmed that the amounts were statistically different (Forkes & Smith, 2010;Popovich & Handy, 2014). The Portland study found that cyclists and pedestrians spent more, on average, at restaurants, bars, and convenience stores than those who drove, but motorists spent more at supermarkets (Clifton et al, 2013).…”
Local officials in North America frequently face opposition to new or expanded bicycle or pedestrian facilities. The most vocal opponents are usually motorists and local business owners who fear that the removal of or reductions in vehicular parking or travel lanes will reduce patronage from motorists and that any increased patronage from pedestrians or cyclists will not offset the lost revenues. A lack of direct evidence on the economic impacts of facilities on local businesses has made it difficult to support or debunk such fears. A lack of quantitative evidence in particular has prevented the incorporation of such impacts into cost-benefit analyses. The issue has received enough attention from researchers in recent years that a review of the evidence is now warranted. We reviewed the relevant literature and identified 23 studies, focusing on the US and Canada, that either (1) quantified and compared consumer spending between active travellers and automobile users (n = 8), or (2) quantified an economic impact to local businesses following the installation of bicycle or pedestrian facilities (n = 15). Taken together, the studies indicate that creating or improving active travel facilities generally has positive or non-significant economic impacts on retail and food service businesses abutting or within a short distance of the facilities, though bicycle facilities might have negative economic effects on auto-centric businesses. The results are similar regardless of whether vehicular parking or travel lanes are removed or reduced to make room for the active travel facilities. The studies also highlight best practices for designing future research. Ten of the 15 studies that quantified an economic impact to local businesses used both before-and-after data and comparison sites or other statistical controls for variables unrelated to the active travel facility "treatment;" six of those used statistical testing.
“…En efecto, el usar la bicicleta regularmente ayuda a reducir las emisiones de carbono, un paso fundamental para combatir la emergencia climática actual (EuropEan Commission, 2017;mizdrak & al., 2020). Además, una mayor presencia de ciclistas puede ayudar a mejorar la cohesión social y la resiliencia de las comunidades (Wild & WoodWard, 2021), y ayudar a disminuir la congestión y mejorar la seguridad vial de las ciudades (marshall & FErEnChak, 2019), colaborando a impulsar las ventas de sectores comerciales de tipo local (VolkEr & handy, 2021;popoViCh & handy, 2014). Finalmente, andar en bicicleta regularmente es una forma de actividad física no intensiva que puede reducir el riesgo cardiovascular y mejorar la salud mental y el bienestar (oja & al., 2021; dE hartog & al., 2010).…”
Este artículo analiza la forma en que diferentes instrumentos de planificación urbana regulan la interacción de ciclistas con otros modos de transporte en Chile. Se realiza un análisis cualitativo de diecisiete documentos normativos e indicativos, buscando entender el lugar asignado a la bicicleta, los comportamientos esperados para quienes la usan, y las formas en que son tratados los conflictos que emergen entre ciclistas y otros modos de transporte. Los resultados revelan una falta de alineación considerable entre los documentos, careciendo de objetivos y visiones comunes y una gobernanza fragmentada de las calles. Además, se constata un giro conceptual sobre el “conflicto” entre los manuales surgidos antes y después de la Política Nacional de Desarrollo Urbano de 2014, que comienza a cuestionar la visión auto céntrica del espacio vial que ha dominado la planificación urbana chilena.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.