IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2022i1p622-d1019574.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Framework to Facilitate Advanced Mixed Methods Studies for Investigating Interventions in Road Space for Cycling

Author

Listed:
  • Christian Werner

    (Department of Geoinformatics, University of Salzburg, 5020 Salzburg, Austria)

  • Elisabeth Füssl

    (FACTUM Sozialwissenschaftliche Mobilitätsforschung, 1230 Vienna, Austria)

  • Jannik Rieß

    (FACTUM Sozialwissenschaftliche Mobilitätsforschung, 1230 Vienna, Austria)

  • Bernd Resch

    (Department of Geoinformatics, University of Salzburg, 5020 Salzburg, Austria
    Center for Geographic Analysis, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA)

  • Florian Kratochwil

    (con.sens verkehrsplanung zt gmbh, 1070 Vienna, Austria)

  • Martin Loidl

    (Department of Geoinformatics, University of Salzburg, 5020 Salzburg, Austria)

Abstract

Cycling mobility contributes to better livability in cites, helps societies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and their dependency on fossil fuels, and shows positive health effects. However, unattractive conditions, primarily inadequate infrastructure, hinder the further growth of cycling mobility. As interactions of cyclists with the (built) environment are complex, assessing potential impacts of an intervention aimed at improving physical conditions is not trivial. Despite a growing body of literature on various facets of cycling mobility, assessments are widely limited to a single method and thereby either focus on one detailed aspect or on one perspective. While multi-method and mixed methods studies are emerging, they are not embedded into a structured, integrated framework for assessing systemic effects of interventions yet. Therefore, we propose a conceptual integration of several relevant methods such as questionnaires, interviews, GIS analyses and human sensing. In this paper, we present a generic, extensible framework that offers guidance for developing and implementing case-specific mixed methods designs for multifaceted assessments of interventions. The framework supports domain experts and researchers across different stages of conducting a study. Results from this research further indicate the added value of mixed methods studies compared to single-method approaches.

Suggested Citation

  • Christian Werner & Elisabeth Füssl & Jannik Rieß & Bernd Resch & Florian Kratochwil & Martin Loidl, 2022. "A Framework to Facilitate Advanced Mixed Methods Studies for Investigating Interventions in Road Space for Cycling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-22, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:622-:d:1019574
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/622/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/622/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Geels, Frank W., 2012. "A socio-technical analysis of low-carbon transitions: introducing the multi-level perspective into transport studies," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 471-482.
    2. Meghan Winters & Gavin Davidson & Diana Kao & Kay Teschke, 2011. "Motivators and deterrents of bicycling: comparing influences on decisions to ride," Transportation, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 153-168, January.
    3. Nello-Deakin, Samuel, 2020. "Environmental determinants of cycling: Not seeing the forest for the trees?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    4. Tom Storme & Corneel Casier & Hossein Azadi & Frank Witlox, 2021. "Impact Assessments of New Mobility Services: A Critical Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-20, March.
    5. Muñoz, Begoña & Monzon, Andres & López, Elena, 2016. "Transition to a cyclable city: Latent variables affecting bicycle commuting," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 4-17.
    6. Bernd Resch & Inga Puetz & Matthias Bluemke & Kalliopi Kyriakou & Jakob Miksch, 2020. "An Interdisciplinary Mixed-Methods Approach to Analyzing Urban Spaces: The Case of Urban Walkability and Bikeability," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-20, September.
    7. 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.
    8. Schneider, Robert J., 2013. "Theory of routine mode choice decisions: An operational framework to increase sustainable transportation," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 128-137.
    9. Pritchard, Ray & Bucher, Dominik & Frøyen, Yngve, 2019. "Does new bicycle infrastructure result in new or rerouted bicyclists? A longitudinal GPS study in Oslo," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 113-125.
    10. Karen Lucas & Ian Philips & Ersilia Verlinghieri, 2022. "A mixed methods approach to the social assessment of transport infrastructure projects," Transportation, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 271-291, February.
    11. Aldred, Rachel & Croft, Joseph & Goodman, Anna, 2019. "Impacts of an active travel intervention with a cycling focus in a suburban context: One-year findings from an evaluation of London’s in-progress mini-Hollands programme," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 147-169.
    12. Gadsby, April & Hagenzieker, Marjan & Watkins, Kari, 2021. "An international comparison of the self-reported causes of cyclist stress using quasi-naturalistic cycling," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    13. Gamble, Julie & Snizek, Bernhard & Nielsen, Thomas Sick, 2017. "From people to cycling indicators: Documenting and understanding the urban context of cyclists' experiences in Quito, Ecuador," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 167-177.
    14. Banister, David, 2008. "The sustainable mobility paradigm," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 73-80, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. Mahfouz, Hussein & Lovelace, Robin & Arcaute, Elsa, 2023. "A road segment prioritization approach for cycling infrastructure," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    3. Cass, Noel & Faulconbridge, James, 2016. "Commuting practices: New insights into modal shift from theories of social practice," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 1-14.
    4. Tammaru, Tiit & Sevtsuk, Andres & Witlox, Frank, 2023. "Towards an equity-centred model of sustainable mobility: Integrating inequality and segregation challenges in the green mobility transition," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    5. Jokinen, Jani-Pekka & Sihvola, Teemu & Mladenovic, Milos N., 2019. "Policy lessons from the flexible transport service pilot Kutsuplus in the Helsinki Capital Region," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 123-133.
    6. Sanjay Gupta & Kushagra Sinha, 2022. "Assessing the Factors Impacting Transport Usage of Mobility App Users in the National Capital Territory of Delhi, India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-20, October.
    7. Ruhrort, Lisa & Allert, Viktoria, 2021. "Conceptualizing the Role of Individual Agency in Mobility Transitions: Avenues for the Integration of Sociological and Psychological Perspectives," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 12, pages 1-1.
    8. Canitez, Fatih, 2019. "Pathways to sustainable urban mobility in developing megacities: A socio-technical transition perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 319-329.
    9. Moradi, Afsaneh & Vagnoni, Emidia, 2018. "A multi-level perspective analysis of urban mobility system dynamics: What are the future transition pathways?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 231-243.
    10. Maurici Ruiz-Pérez & Joana Maria Seguí-Pons, 2020. "Transport Mode Choice for Residents in a Tourist Destination: The Long Road to Sustainability (the Case of Mallorca, Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-31, November.
    11. João Valsecchi Ribeiro de Souza & Adriana Marotti de Mello & Roberto Marx, 2019. "When Is an Innovative Urban Mobility Business Model Sustainable? A Literature Review and Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-18, March.
    12. Hirschhorn, Fabio & Paulsson, Alexander & Sørensen, Claus H. & Veeneman, Wijnand, 2019. "Public transport regimes and mobility as a service: Governance approaches in Amsterdam, Birmingham, and Helsinki," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 178-191.
    13. Morton, Craig & Anable, Jillian & Yeboah, Godwin & Cottrill, Caitlin, 2018. "The spatial pattern of demand in the early market for electric vehicles: Evidence from the United Kingdom," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 119-130.
    14. Malik, Faheem Ahmed & Egan, Robert & Dowling, Conor Mark & Caulfield, Brian, 2023. "Factors influencing e-cargo bike mode choice for small businesses," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    15. Aparicio, Ángel, 2020. "Streamlining the implementation process of urban mobility innovations: Lessons from the ECCENTRIC project in Madrid," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 160-169.
    16. Kevin Manaugh & Geneviève Boisjoly & Ahmed El-Geneidy, 2017. "Overcoming barriers to cycling: understanding frequency of cycling in a University setting and the factors preventing commuters from cycling on a regular basis," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 871-884, July.
    17. Mouter, Niek & Koster, Paul & Dekker, Thijs, 2021. "Contrasting the recommendations of participatory value evaluation and cost-benefit analysis in the context of urban mobility investments," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 54-73.
    18. Kinigadner, Julia & Büttner, Benjamin, 2021. "How accessibility instruments contribute to a low carbon mobility transition: Lessons from planning practice in the Munich region," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 157-167.
    19. Griffiths, S. & Furszyfer Del Rio, D. & Sovacool, B., 2021. "Policy mixes to achieve sustainable mobility after the COVID-19 crisis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    20. Poklewski-Koziełł, Damian & Dudzic-Gyurkovich, Karolina & Duarte, Carlos Marmolejo, 2023. "Investigating urban form, and walkability measures in the new developments. The case study of Garnizon in Gdansk," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).

    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:15:y:2022:i:1:p:622-:d:1019574. 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.