Determinants of bicycle use: do municipal policies matter?

Abstract

Bicycle use varies strongly between countries, and even between municipalities within the same country substantial variations may exist. This paper analyses to what extent municipality policies matter in explaining these variations. It appears that most of the inter-municipality variation in bicycle use is related to physical aspects such as altitude differences and city size, and features of the population (share of youngsters). Differences in ethnic composition also appear to matter. Important policy-related variables are: the number of stops cyclists have to make on their routes; hindrances in road use; and safety of cyclists. In addition the relative position of bicycles with respect to cars (speed, parking costs) also appears to matter. These results shed light on various components of the cyclists' generalised costs, such as those related to accidents and physical efforts, that are not usually considered. We also conclude that cultural tradition, possibly related to ethnicity deserves a more explicit role in travel surveys and the analysis of travel behaviour than it usually receives.

Introduction

Non-motorised transport modes are often considered as vital elements of sustainable transport systems. Their emissions of pollutants and noise, and the accident risks they pose for other road users are very low. Thus, a high share of non-motorised transport modes would certainly contribute to a more attractive urban environment. Moreover, it is increasingly recognised that the use of non-motorised transport modes is an effective way for many people to cope with health problems and obesity.

There are substantial differences between countries in the shares of transport modes. For example, in EU countries the share of non-motorised transport in the total number of kilometres travelled varies from about 3% to 10%. In these countries, the differences in the share of such trips per person per day in the total number of trips are even larger: from 10% to 48%. These differences are related, among other things, by factors such as weather, physical conditions, income (penetration of car ownership), supply of infrastructure for non-motorised transport modes, and attractiveness of competing modes. From a policy perspective, it is not so clear what policy makers can do to promote these transport modes. Is it sufficient to provide footpaths and bicycle lanes? Or are more stringent policies needed, implying the discouragement of using competing modes?

To address questions like this, one needs insights into the contributions of the various factors in the use of non-motorised transport modes. This is by no means an easy task, since intangible factors also seem to play a role. For example, the status of a non-motorised transport mode such as cycling seems to differ strongly between countries, ranging from the poor man's mode to the sports mode that suits an active lifestyle. If one wants to reduce the problem of addressing this intangibility problem, one could attempt to explain differences within the same country where cultural variations are probably smaller. And this is indeed what we do in the present paper. We focus on differences in bicycle use between cities in one country. We have chosen the Netherlands because this country has good data on bicycle use. Furthermore, an attractive feature of the Netherlands is that it not only does it have a high share of bicycle use (about 35% of all trips up to 7.5 km are made with this mode) but also variations between shares of the bicycle in urban trips appear to be substantial. For example, these shares range from about 15% to almost 50%, implying that there is much variation, which facilitates an explanatory analysis.

The structure of the paper is as follows. In Section 2, we briefly discuss factors that influence bicycle use. Then, in Section 3, we give some data on the use of non-motorised transport modes in an international context. This is followed by a short discussion on the place of the bicycle in the Netherlands and the relevant policy context. In Section 4, data issues are discussed, after which, in Section 5, the results from bivariate and multivariate analyses will be presented, in order to see whether municipality policies have a substantial role to play among the whole set of potential explanatory factors. Section 6 will conclude.