Exploring bikeability in a metropolitan setting: stimulating and hindering factors in commuting route environments

Abstract

BackgroundRoute environments may influence people's active commuting positively and thereby contribute to public health. Assessments of route environments are, however, needed in order to better understand the possible relationship between active commuting and the route environment. The aim of this study was, therefore, to assess the potential associations between perceptions of whether the route environment on the whole hinders or stimulates bicycle commuting and perceptions of environmental factors.MethodsThe Active Commuting Route Environment Scale (ACRES) was used for the assessment of bicycle commuters' perceptions of their route environments in the inner urban parts of Greater Stockholm, Sweden. Bicycle commuters (n = 827) were recruited by advertisements in newspapers. Simultaneous multiple regression analyses were used to assess the relation between predictor variables (such as levels of exhaust fumes, noise, traffic speed, traffic congestion and greenery) and the outcome variable (hindering - stimulating route environments). Two models were run, (Model 1) without and (Model 2) with the item traffic: unsafe or safe included as a predictor.ResultsOverall, about 40% of the variance of hindering - stimulating route environments was explained by the environmental predictors in our models (Model 1, R2 = 0.415, and Model 2, R 2= 0.435). The regression equation for Model 1 was: y = 8.53 + 0.33 ugly or beautiful + 0.14 greenery + (-0.14) course of the route + (-0.13) exhaust fumes + (-0.09) congestion: all types of vehicles (p ≤ 0.019). The regression equation for Model 2 was y = 6.55 + 0.31 ugly or beautiful + 0.16 traffic: unsafe or safe + (-0.13) exhaust fumes + 0.12 greenery + (-0.12) course of the route (p ≤ 0.001).ConclusionsThe main results indicate that beautiful, green and safe route environments seem to be, independently of each other, stimulating factors for bicycle commuting in inner urban areas. On the other hand, exhaust fumes, traffic congestion and low 'directness' of the route seem to be hindering factors. Furthermore, the overall results illustrate the complexity of a research area at the beginning of exploration.

Objective correlates and determinants of bicycle commuting propensity in an urban environment

“…T th th s' k wl this ss ci ti with bj ctiv (NDVI) measures is novel. Green space, when incorporated into the plan of an urban environment, has been previously suggested as a method to increase physical activity participation (Lee and Maheswaran, 2011) and has been reported as the most stimulating perceived (subjective) environmental determinant of bicycle commuting (Wahlgren and Schantz, 2012). It may be thought that lower-density areas, of lower traffic, are greener; however, when testing for sensitivity to population density of the work/study address our finding was robust.…”

“…While noise may directly influence utility in this way (Winters et al, 2011 andPanter et al, 2008), greenness may generally promote physical activity (James et al, 2015, Lee et al, 1999, Rodriguez et al, 2014, Frank et al, 2007and Ewing et al, 2008. In fact, greenness has been observed as one of the most stimulating perceived (subjective) environmental determinants to bicycle commute (Wahlgren and Schantz, 2012). In addition to a broader set of environmental measures being required, the context in which built environment measures are made deserves attention.…”

Physical environmental factors that invite older adults to walk for transportation

“…These scores act as the dependent variable for the rating task. A similar scale has been used previously by Wahlgren et al (2012) to assess the invitingness of cycling routes.…”

Dynamic process model of mass effects on travel demand

“…While this is not such a common use of the survey methods used in transport, there is still certainly a significant amount of potentially relevant literature on the valuation of aesthetics (e.g. Ewing, 2001;Garrod et al, 2002;Ewing et al, 2005;Cao et al, 2009;Broach et al, 2012;Wahlgren and Schantz, 2012), several of which also relate modal volumes to such valuations.…”