IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i8p3375-d348584.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating Cyclists’ Route Preferences with Respect to Infrastructure

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Hardinghaus

    (German Aerospace Center (DLR), Institute of Transport Research, 12489 Berlin, Germany
    Department of Geography, Humboldt University of Berlin, 10099 Berlin, Germany)

  • Panagiotis Papantoniou

    (Department of Transportation Planning and Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, GR-15773 Athens, Greece)

Abstract

Providing a sufficiently appropriate route environment is crucial to ensuring fair and safe biking, thus encouraging cycling as a sustainable mode of transport. At the same time, better understanding of cyclists’ preferences regarding the features of their routes and their infrastructure requirements is fundamental to evaluating improvement of the current infrastructure or the development of new infrastructure. The present study has two objectives. The first is to investigate cyclists’ route preferences by means of a choice experiment based on a stated preference survey. Subsequently, the second objective is to compare cyclist preferences in two countries with different cycling characteristics (both in infrastructure as well as cyclists’ behavior). For this purpose, a graphical online stated preferences survey was conducted in Greece and Germany. Within the framework of statistical analyses, multinomial mixed logit discrete choice models were developed that allow us to quantify the trade-offs of interest, while distinguishing between the preferences of different user groups. In addition, user requirements in Greece, as a country with a low cycling share and very little dedicated bike infrastructure, were compared to the requirements in Germany, where cycling is popular and the infrastructure is well developed. The results over the whole sample indicate that subgroups value infrastructure differently according to their specific needs. When looking at country specifics, users from Greece are significantly more willing to accept longer travel times in return for higher-quality facilities. The utility of low speed limits in mixed traffic is also different. In Germany, low speed limits offset the disturbance caused by motorized traffic, but in Greece they do not. Consequently, the results help to asses which types of infrastructure are most sustainable from a user perspective and help to set priorities when the aim is to adapt the road infrastructure efficiently in a stable strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Hardinghaus & Panagiotis Papantoniou, 2020. "Evaluating Cyclists’ Route Preferences with Respect to Infrastructure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:8:p:3375-:d:348584
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/8/3375/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/8/3375/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Reid Ewing & Robert Cervero, 2010. "Travel and the Built Environment," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 76(3), pages 265-294.
    2. Andreas Blitz & Annika Busch-Geertsema & Martin Lanzendorf, 2020. "More Cycling, Less Driving? Findings of a Cycle Street Intervention Study in the Rhine-Main Metropolitan Region, Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-25, January.
    3. Tilahun, Nebiyou Y. & Levinson, David M. & Krizek, Kevin J., 2007. "Trails, lanes, or traffic: Valuing bicycle facilities with an adaptive stated preference survey," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 287-301, May.
    4. J. Hunt & J. Abraham, 2007. "Influences on bicycle use," Transportation, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 453-470, July.
    5. Broach, Joseph & Dill, Jennifer & Gliebe, John, 2012. "Where do cyclists ride? A route choice model developed with revealed preference GPS data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1730-1740.
    6. Gössling, Stefan & Choi, Andy & Dekker, Kaely & Metzler, Daniel, 2019. "The Social Cost of Automobility, Cycling and Walking in the European Union," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 65-74.
    7. John Pucher & Ralph Buehler, 2017. "Cycling towards a more sustainable transport future," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(6), pages 689-694, November.
    8. Liu, Yanan & Yang, Dujuan & Timmermans, Harry J.P. & de Vries, Bauke, 2020. "Analysis of the impact of street-scale built environment design near metro stations on pedestrian and cyclist road segment choice: A stated choice experiment," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    9. Lanzendorf, Martin & Busch-Geertsema, Annika, 2014. "The cycling boom in large German cities—Empirical evidence for successful cycling campaigns," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 26-33.
    10. Vedel, Suzanne Elizabeth & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Skov-Petersen, Hans, 2017. "Bicyclists’ preferences for route characteristics and crowding in Copenhagen – A choice experiment study of commuters," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 53-64.
    11. Ipek Sener & Naveen Eluru & Chandra Bhat, 2009. "An analysis of bicycle route choice preferences in Texas, US," Transportation, Springer, vol. 36(5), pages 511-539, September.
    12. Tomás Rossetti & Verónica Saud & Ricardo Hurtubia, 2019. "I want to ride it where I like: measuring design preferences in cycling infrastructure," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 697-718, June.
    13. Nebiyou Tilahun & Kevin Krizek & David Levinson, 2007. "Trails, Lanes, or Traffic: Value of Different Bicycle Facilities Using Adaptive Stated-Preference Survey," Working Papers 200701, University of Minnesota: Nexus Research Group.
    14. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    15. Ralph Buehler & Jennifer Dill, 2016. "Bikeway Networks: A Review of Effects on Cycling," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1), pages 9-27, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jonas Schmid-Querg & Andreas Keler & Georgios Grigoropoulos, 2021. "The Munich Bikeability Index: A Practical Approach for Measuring Urban Bikeability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, January.
    2. Darja Šemrov & Robert Rijavec & Peter Lipar, 2022. "Dimensioning of Cycle Lanes Based on the Assessment of Comfort for Cyclists," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-12, August.
    3. Sebastian Seriani & Vicente Perez & Vicente Aprigliano & Taku Fujiyama, 2022. "Experimental Study of Cyclist’ Sensitivity When They Are Overtaken by a Motor Vehicle: A Pilot Study in a Street without Cycle Lanes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-20, December.
    4. Lixuan Zhao & Dewei Fang & Yang Cao & Shan Sun & Liu Han & Yang Xue & Qian Zheng, 2023. "Impact-Asymmetric Analysis of Bike-Sharing Residents’ Satisfaction: A Case Study of Harbin, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-19, January.
    5. Márquez, Luis & Soto, Jose J., 2021. "Integrating perceptions of safety and bicycle theft risk in the analysis of cycling infrastructure preferences," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 285-301.
    6. Scott, Darren M. & Lu, Wei & Brown, Matthew J., 2021. "Route choice of bike share users: Leveraging GPS data to derive choice sets," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    7. Bahamonde-Birke, Francisco J. & Geigenmüller, Iris M. & Mouter, Niek & van Lierop, Dea S. & Ettema, Dick F., 2024. "How do I want the city council to spend our budget? Conceiving MaaS from a citizen's perspective … (as well as biking infrastructure and public transport)," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 96-104.
    8. Pedro Plasencia-Lozano, 2021. "Evaluation of a New Urban Cycling Infrastructure in Caceres (Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-19, February.
    9. Tufail Ahmed & Ali Pirdavani & Davy Janssens & Geert Wets, 2023. "Utilizing Intelligent Portable Bicycle Lights to Assess Urban Bicycle Infrastructure Surfaces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-22, March.
    10. Chiara Ricchetti & Lucia Rotaris, 2024. "The role of linear green infrastructure for cycling: A literature review," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2024(1), pages 219-256.
    11. Michael Hardinghaus & Simon Nieland & Marius Lehne & Jan Weschke, 2021. "More than Bike Lanes—A Multifactorial Index of Urban Bikeability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-17, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Umer Mansoor & Mohammad Tamim Kashifi & Fazal Rehman Safi & Syed Masiur Rahman, 2022. "A review of factors and benefits of non-motorized transport: a way forward for developing countries," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 1560-1582, February.
    2. Anowar, Sabreena & Eluru, Naveen & Hatzopoulou, Marianne, 2017. "Quantifying the value of a clean ride: How far would you bicycle to avoid exposure to traffic-related air pollution?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 66-78.
    3. Fitch, Dillon T. & Handy, Susan L., 2020. "Road environments and bicyclist route choice: The cases of Davis and San Francisco, CA," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    4. Scott, Darren M. & Lu, Wei & Brown, Matthew J., 2021. "Route choice of bike share users: Leveraging GPS data to derive choice sets," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    5. Tomás Rossetti & Verónica Saud & Ricardo Hurtubia, 2019. "I want to ride it where I like: measuring design preferences in cycling infrastructure," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 697-718, June.
    6. Lu, Wei & Scott, Darren M. & Dalumpines, Ron, 2018. "Understanding bike share cyclist route choice using GPS data: Comparing dominant routes and shortest paths," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 172-181.
    7. Márquez, Luis & Soto, Jose J., 2021. "Integrating perceptions of safety and bicycle theft risk in the analysis of cycling infrastructure preferences," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 285-301.
    8. Park, Yujin & Akar, Gulsah, 2019. "Why do bicyclists take detours? A multilevel regression model using smartphone GPS data," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 191-200.
    9. Rossetti, Tomás & Guevara, C. Angelo & Galilea, Patricia & Hurtubia, Ricardo, 2018. "Modeling safety as a perceptual latent variable to assess cycling infrastructure," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 252-265.
    10. Liu, Yanan & Yang, Dujuan & Timmermans, Harry J.P. & de Vries, Bauke, 2020. "Analysis of the impact of street-scale built environment design near metro stations on pedestrian and cyclist road segment choice: A stated choice experiment," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    11. Lei Kang & Jon Fricker, 2013. "Bicyclist commuters’ choice of on-street versus off-street route segments," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(5), pages 887-902, September.
    12. Van Veghel, Daniel & Scott, Darren M., 2024. "Investigating the impacts of bike lanes on bike share ridership: A holistic approach and demonstration," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    13. McArthur, David Philip & Hong, Jinhyun, 2019. "Visualising where commuting cyclists travel using crowdsourced data," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 233-241.
    14. Palhazi Cuervo, Daniel & Kessels, Roselinde & Goos, Peter & Sörensen, Kenneth, 2016. "An integrated algorithm for the optimal design of stated choice experiments with partial profiles," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 93(PA), pages 648-669.
    15. Faghih Imani, Ahmadreza & Miller, Eric J. & Saxe, Shoshanna, 2019. "Cycle accessibility and level of traffic stress: A case study of Toronto," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    16. Vedel, Suzanne Elizabeth & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Skov-Petersen, Hans, 2017. "Bicyclists’ preferences for route characteristics and crowding in Copenhagen – A choice experiment study of commuters," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 53-64.
    17. Chen, Ching-Fu & Chen, Pei-Chun, 2013. "Estimating recreational cyclists’ preferences for bicycle routes – Evidence from Taiwan," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 23-30.
    18. Michael Hardinghaus & Simon Nieland & Marius Lehne & Jan Weschke, 2021. "More than Bike Lanes—A Multifactorial Index of Urban Bikeability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-17, October.
    19. Menghini, G. & Carrasco, N. & Schüssler, N. & Axhausen, K.W., 2010. "Route choice of cyclists in Zurich," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(9), pages 754-765, November.
    20. Jinhyun Hong & David McArthur & Varun Raturi, 2020. "Did Safe Cycling Infrastructure Still Matter During a COVID-19 Lockdown?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-15, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:8:p:3375-:d:348584. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.