Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- Built environment (1)
- Cycle streets (1)
- Design functions (1)
- Environment perception (1)
- Literature review (1)
- Mobility design (1)
- Non-motorised travel (1)
- Shared space (1)
- Street design (1)
- Travel behaviour (1)
Institute
- Geographie (3)
In order to encourage a shift from the car to the more sustainable transport mode of cycling, cycle streets have been implemented in cities all over the world in the last few years. In these shared streets, the entire carriageway is designated for cyclists, while motorized traffic is subordinated. However, evidence on the impact of cycle street interventions related to travel behavior change has been limited until now. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate whether cycle streets are an effective measure to facilitate bicycle use and discourage car use, thus contributing to the aim of promoting sustainable travel. For this purpose, we conducted a written household survey in the German city of Offenbach am Main involving participants affected by a cycle street intervention (n = 701). Based on two stage models of self-regulated behavioral change (SSBC), we identified the participants’ level of willingness to use a bicycle frequently and to reduce car use. By means of bivariate and multivariate statistical methods, we analyzed the influence of awareness, use, and perceptions of the cycle street on the willingness to change behavior towards more sustainable travel. The results show that the intervention has a positive impact on frequent bicycle use, while we observed only a limited effect on car use reduction. Traffic conflicts and car speeding within the cycle street adversely affect the acceptance of the intervention. The study’s findings provide new insights into the actual effects of a cycle street and its potential to encourage sustainable travel behavior.
Highlights:
• Evaluation of three cycle street designs by means of visualisation assessments.
• Shared space is evaluated as the safest and most attractive cycle street design.
• The conventional urban street design is perceived as the most clearly structured.
• Affinity towards walking and cycling favours a positive evaluation of shared space.
Abstract
Cycle streets have been implemented in many urban areas around the world in recent years to make cycling safer and more attractive. In these streets, cyclists have priority over motorised traffic. They are allowed to use the entire roadway and determine traffic speed. However, there have been no standardised design guidelines for cycle streets to date. Moreover, there is limited understanding of the individual perception of different cycle street designs. Yet, positive evaluations of safety and attractiveness are especially important for pleasant travel in public spaces. Therefore, this study examines the individual perceptions of three cycle street designs: conventional, flow and shared space. Visualisations of these designs were implemented in a written household survey conducted in the urban Rhine-Main metropolitan region in Germany (n = 701). Participants were asked to assess the different designs in terms of safety, clarity, attractiveness and fun. Furthermore, bivariate analyses and regression models were performed to investigate whether individual travel preferences and attitudes, regular mode use and socio-demographic characteristics affect assessments of the designs. The results show that the shared space design is rated as the safest, most attractive and most fun. The conventional cycle street is evaluated as the most clearly structured. Individual affinity towards cycling and walking favours a good evaluation of the shared space design, while a high car affinity and having a migrant background positively affect the assessment of the conventional design. In addition, younger participants and members of households without a car assess the flow design more favourably.
Highlights
• Explanation of mobility design and its practical, aesthetic and emblematic effects on travel behaviour.
• Review of recent studies on mobility design elements and the promotion of non-motorised travel.
• Discussion of research gaps and methodological challenges of data collection and comparability.
Abstract
To promote non-motorised travel, many travel behaviour studies acknowledge the importance of the built environment to modal choice, for example with its density or mix of uses. From a mobility design theory perspective, however, objects and environments affect human perceptions, assessments and behaviour in at least three different ways: by their practical, aesthetic and emblematic functions. This review of existing evidence will argue that travel behaviour research has so far mainly focused on the practical function of the built environment. For that purpose, we systematically identified 56 relevant studies on the impacts of the built environment on non-motorised travel behaviour in the Web of Science database. The focus of research on the practical design function primary involves land use distribution, street network connectivity and the presence of walking and cycling facilities. Only a small number of papers address the aesthetic and emblematic functions. These show that the perceived attractiveness of an environment and evoked feelings of traffic safety increase the likelihood of walking and cycling. However, from a mobility design perspective, the results of the review indicate a gap regarding comprehensive research on the effects of the aesthetic and emblematic functions of the built environment. Further research involving these functions might contribute to a better understanding of how to promote non-motorised travel more effectively. Moreover, limitations related to survey techniques, regional distribution and the comparability of results were identified.