Open Access

The impact of local environment characteristics on individual cycling behaviour has been discussed in transport research for several years. Many previous studies have, however, primarily focused on the presence and distribution of built environment elements, considered using georeferenced or census data. This paper argues that not only is the objectively measured environment an influencing factor, but also the individual perception of this environment. Furthermore, besides built elements, the evaluation of perceived non-built attributes, such as discourses and policies, as well as the environment’s impact on cycling attitudes, should be taken into account for a more comprehensive view. For this purpose, this study examines the responses to a household survey in the German city of Offenbach am Main (n = 701). The impact of the perceived local environment on cycling behaviour and cycling attitudes has been analysed using 21 perception items as well as socio-demographics, travel mode availability and general travel attitudes. For a more detailed view on cycling behaviour, this study applies the stage model of self-regulated behavioural change (SSBC) indicating a level of openness to use a bicycle frequently in everyday life. The results of the multivariate analysis show that the perceptions of built and non-built environment characteristics interrelate. Furthermore, certain perceptions encourage bicycle use and positive attitudes towards cycling, such as perceived cycling safety and pleasure. Primarily, these perceptions are safe and appropriate cycling infrastructures, cycling as a common practice and the absence of vandalism, dirt and high car pressure.

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.

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.