Walking and Cycling Encouragement

Strategies That Encourage People To Use Non-motorized Transportation


TDM Encyclopedia

Victoria Transport Policy Institute


Updated 18 July 2017

This chapter describes various ways to encourage walking and cycling transport, including facility improvements, promotion campaigns, events, educational programs, and development of guides and other information materials.




Bicycle and Walking Encouragement include a variety of programs and activities that support and promote non-motorized transportation:


·         Improve walking and cycling conditions on existing roadways (Lagerwey, et al. 2015).


·         Cycling and walking events and activities, particularly on trails and cycling routes.


·         Cycling and walking commute campaigns. These often involve contests as to which workers and worksites commutes most by non-motorized modes.


·         Bicycle Parking and clothes changing facilities at worksites, transportation terminals and other destinations.


·         Education programs that teach cycling skills.


·         Provide cycling maps that show recommended cycling routes and facilities, roadway conditions (shoulders, traffic volumes, special barriers to cycling, etc.) hills, recreational facilities, and other information helpful to cyclists.


·         Improve walking and cycling safety through Traffic Calming, Streetscaping and Complete Streets policies (Ernst and Shoup 2009).


·         Bicycles provided by employers and community organizations to rent or loan.


·         Reimbursement of employee cycling mileage expenses.


·         Programs to encourage use of bicycles for Freight deliveries and other commercial uses.


·         Public Bike Systems which provide convenient rental bicycles for short utilitarian trips.


·         Pedways, which are indoor urban walking networks that connect buildings and transportation terminals.


·         Tourist promotion materials highlighting cycling and walking.


·         Provide Wayfinding and Multi-Modal Navigation Tools such as maps and other information on how to walk and cycle to a particular destination.


·         Providing employee bicycle travel reimbursement.



How It Is Implemented

Bicycle and walking encouragement programs are usually implemented by community groups such as cycling organizations and advocacy groups (Buehler and Handy 2008; Roughton, et al. 2012), local transportation agencies, employers, Transportation Management Associations, chambers of commerce, Tourist Promotion Organizations, and individual businesses.



Travel Impacts

These programs can help increase non-motorized transportation. Travel impacts tend to be greatest during a particular campaign, but the experience can lead participants to long-term changes in travel habits. Analysis by Wardman, Tight and Page (2007) indicates that an integrated program of improved cycling conditions (with bike lanes on commuter routes), Financial Incentives ($2-10 per day of cycling rather than driving) and improved trip end facilities (bike parking and shower facilities) could increase British cycling rates from about 6% to more than 20% of for commute trips under 7.5 miles, about half of which displace automobile trips. Public Bike Systems can shift as much as 8% of short urban trips to bicycle. See Evaluating Non-motorized Transport chapter for more discussion of travel impacts.


Table 1          Travel Impact Summary




Reduces total traffic.



Reduces peak period traffic.



Shifts peak to off-peak periods.



Shifts automobile travel to alternative modes.


Encourages non-motorized transportation.

Improves access, reduces the need for travel.



Increased ridesharing.



Increased public transit.



Increased cycling.


Encourages cycling.

Increased walking.


Encourages walking.

Increased Telework.



Reduced freight traffic.



Rating from 3 (very beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.



Benefits and Costs

Shifts from driving to cycling or walking can reduce traffic congestion, road and parking facility costs and environmental impacts, and increase community Livability and improved Public Health. Programs to encourage and support walking and cycling can increase Transport Choice by raising public acceptance and support for non-motorized travel (Fietsberaad 2008).


Shifts from automobile to non-motorized transportation can be particularly effective at Energy Conservation and Emission Reductions by reducing short motor vehicle trips which have high per-mile fuel consumption and emission rates. As a result, each 1% shift of mileage from automobile to non-motorized modes tends to reduce energy consumption and pollution emissions by 2-4%. A short pedestrian or cycle trip often replaces a longer automobile trip (for example, consumers may choose between shopping at a local store or driving to a major shopping center).


Safety impacts vary depending on circumstances and perspective: although non-motorized modes tend to have higher casualty rates per passenger-mile, this is offset by reduced risk to other road users, reduced total mileage, and improved health from aerobic exercise (Safety Impacts of TDM). A major study found that Danish workers who regularly commute by bicycle have a 40% reduction in mortality compared with people who do not cycle to work (Andersen, et al, 2000), which suggests that the incremental risks of bicycle transportation are outweighed by health benefits, at least for experienced adult cyclists riding in a bicycle-friendly community.


Costs consist primarily of program and facility expenses. See Evaluating Non-motorized Transport chapter for more discussion of benefits and costs.


Table 2          Benefit Summary




Congestion Reduction


Reduces automobile travel.

Road & Parking Savings


Reduces automobile travel.

Consumer Savings


Reduces automobile travel.

Transport Choice


Increases choice for people who can walk or cycle.

Road Safety


Mixed crash impacts. Overall beneficial to public health.

Environmental Protection


Reduces automobile travel.

Efficient Land Use


Reduces automobile travel. Encourages higher-density.

Community Livability


Reduces automobile travel, improves street environment.

Rating from 3 (very beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.



Equity Impacts

Most people can walk or cycle, although many cannot use these modes for transportation because they live in automobile-dependent areas. Programs that promote cycling and walking for transportation can benefit lower-income and transportation disadvantaged people by increasing public acceptance and support of non-motorized travel. These programs may require subsidies, although these are usually smaller than per-trip subsidies for automobile travel (such as free automobile parking).


Table 3          Equity Summary




Treats everybody equally.


Some people who cannot cycle may feel excluded.

Individuals bear the costs they impose.


May require subsidies, but often less than for a car trip.

Progressive with respect to income.


Many lower-income people cycle for transport.

Benefits transportation disadvantaged.


Many non-drivers cycle for transport.

Improves basic mobility.



Rating from 3 (very beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.




Walking and cycling promotion is appropriate in almost any geographic area, and can be particularly effective in areas with pedestrian and bicycle friendly environments. Such programs can be sponsored by local governments, business associations, neighborhood associations or educational organizations.


Table 4          Application Summary





Large urban region.


Federal government.


High-density, urban.


State/provincial government.


Medium-density, urban/suburban.


Regional government.




Municipal/local government.


Low-density, rural.


Business Associations/TMA.


Commercial center.


Individual business.


Residential neighborhood.




Resort/recreation area.


Neighborhood association.


College/university communities.




Ratings range from 0 (not appropriate) to 3 (very appropriate).




Incentive to Use Alternative Modes



Relationships With Other TDM Strategies

This strategy is closely related to Non-motorized Transport Planning, Managing Non-motorized Facilities, Public Bike Systems, Bike/Transit Integration and Individual Actions for Efficient Transportation. It supports and is supported by Commute Trip Reduction, School Trip Management, Campus Transportation Management, and other strategies that provide incentives to reduce automobile travel.




A public agency or non-profit organization usually organizes these programs. They are often supported as part of Commute Trip Reduction, Transportation Management Associations and Transportation Demand Management programs. Some national organizations such as the League of American Bicyclists (which sponsors National Bike to Work Month) provide planning and marketing resources. Media and corporate support can be important.



Barriers To Implementation

These programs require organizational leadership and funding. There is seldom opposition to such programs, but some people may be skeptical of their benefits.



Best Practices

Organizations listed below have experience operating various types of cycling and walking campaigns, and provide resources for developing local programs. Cleary and McClintock (2000) provide recommendations for employee cycling program development. Best practices include:


·         Create a clear, consistent and positive message about the benefits of non-motorized travel.


·         Use promotional campaigns as part of an overall program to improve walking and cycling conditions. Identify and overcome barriers to non-motorized transport, including bottlenecks in the street system, lack of education resources, lack of bicycle parking, and inadequate support from employers.


·         Find opportunities for cooperation with other organizations, including recreation, public health, community development, schools, tourist promotion and neighborhood organizations.


·         Work with local planners, employers and employees who cycle to design and improve cycling facilities and services. Include people who current do not cycle in program development to help identify and overcome the barriers they perceive to cycle transportation.


·         Use cycling, walking and recreational organizations to enlist volunteers.


·         Emphasize cycling skills and safety education.



Wit and Humor

A couple were riding a tandem bicycle on a tour of the countryside. Late in the afternoon the stoker (rider in the back position) asked the captain (rider in the front) how they are doing.

“I’ve got some good news, and some bad news,” said the captain.

“What’s the bad news?” asked the stoker.

“We’re lost,” was the reply.

“What’s the good news?” asked the stoker.

“We’re making good time,” replied the captain.



Examples and Case Studies

The “Bicycling and Walking Benchmarking Report” (ABW 2010) provides examples of successful walking and cycling encouragement programs.


Bike Facility Impacts on Ridership (Zahabia, et al. 2016)

Researchers studied factors that affect cycling in Montreal, Canada, and the effect of new cycling infrastructure on transport-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. They found a significant increase in bicycle commuting over the 10 years, from 2.8% 5.3% in urban areas and from 1.4% to 3.0% in suburban areas. The analysis indicates a statistically significant association between the index of bicycle infrastructure accessibility and bike mode choice – an increase of 10% in the accessibility index results in a 3.7% increase in the ridership. Based on this analysis the model predicts that a 7% increase in bicycle network length reduces commute GHG emissions by close to 2%.


National Bike to Work Month (www.bikeleague.org)

The League of American Bicyclists has declared May to be National Bike Month since 1956. The League also promotes Bike to Work Week and Bike-to-Work Day. They invite communities, corporations, clubs, and individuals to join in sponsoring bicycling activities during the month of May in order to increase awareness and acceptance of bicycling. The League produces a National Bike Month Event Organizer’s Kit, to help individuals and organizations that promote these events.



Reducing Car Use in European Cities (Buehler, et al. 2016)

Munich, Berlin, Hamburg, Vienna, and Zurich – the largest cities in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland – have significantly reduced the car share of trips over the past 25 years in spite of high motorisation rates. The key to their success has been a coordinated package of mutually reinforcing transport and land-use policies that have made car use slower, less convenient, and more costly, while increasing the safety, convenience, and feasibility of walking, cycling, and public transport. The mix of policies implemented in each city has been somewhat different. The German cities have done far more to promote cycling, while Zurich and Vienna offer more public transport service per capita at lower fares. All five of the cities have implemented roughly the same policies to promote walking, foster compact mixed-use development, and discourage car use. Of the car-restrictive policies, parking management has been by far the most important. The five case study cities demonstrate that it is possible to reduce car dependence even in affluent societies with high levels of car ownership and high expectations for quality of travel.


Table 5            Policies that Promote Walking and Cycling



Car-free pedestrian zones

Vienna, Munich, and Zurich introduced pedestrian zones in the 1970s; considerable expansion since then, with city cores now mostly car-free

Number of pedestrian zones: Munich (22), Hamburg (20), and Berlin (16)

Total length of pedestrian streets and plazas: Munich (6 km), Hamburg (7 km), Zurich (11 km)

Total area of pedestrian zones in 2014: Hamburg (103,223 m2); Vienna (295,938 m2, tripled since 1990)

Traffic calming

All five cities have traffic calmed (speed limit of 30km/h or less) an increasing percentage of streets over time, especially since 1990

Percentage of roadway network traffic calmed: Munich (85%), Berlin (78%), Vienna (75%), Zurich (50%), Hamburg (50%)

All cities have plans to traffic-calm almost all residential streets in future years

Play streets/home zones

Munich, Hamburg, and Berlin have many “play streets” (speed limit of 10km/h or less) in neighbourhoods, but cities do not have statistics about their number and extent because they are often part of overall traffic-calming schemes

Vienna tripled the length of its “play streets” from 11 km in 1990 to 32 km in 2013

Shared streets/encounter zones

Length of shared streets, with a speed limit of 20 km/h: Zurich (17 km) and Vienna (3 km)

Berlin has three shared street pilot projects. Hamburg has planned for at least one “shared space” in each of the seven

city districts

Improving walking facilities

Widening of sidewalks and improvement of sidewalk surface, lowering of curbs, better street furniture, trees and shrubs, and human-scale lighting

Improvements in street crossings and intersections: highly visible zebra stripes with improved lighting, raised crosswalks

at intersections to slow cars, median refuge islands, pedestrian-activated crossing lights, and curb extensions to shorten the length of the road crossing by widening the sidewalk at crosswalks

Reduced wait times for pedestrian crossing lights and more time for pedestrians to cross

Mid-block cut-through walkways for pedestrians on long blocks

Signage and accessibility for all

Improved directional signs for pedestrians indicating the direction and distance to important locations

In Hamburg’s central city, signs at 300 locations indicate directions and distance to various points of interest, cultural attractions, rail transit stations, and ferry terminals

Berlin improved signage for children to guide them to school and other destinations

Removal of barriers to facilitate access by people in wheelchairs, walking baby carriages, and anyone with a mobility disability

Wheelchair accessibility is a goal in every new roadway, sidewalk, and plaza construction project

Education and enforcement

Mandatory traffic education in most schools

Rigorous training and testing of motorists to obtain a driver’s licence

Most residents obey no-walk signals due to training in schools and enforcement by police and parents

Strict enforcement of traffic laws for motorists to protect pedestrians, including speed limits, parking, and yielding to pedestrians

Bike route networks

Expansion of bikeway networks 1990–2012: 190–1200 km in Vienna; 750–1400 km in Munich; 150–340 km in Zurich

Hamburg and Berlin mainly focused on upgrading and widening existing facilities and improving intersection treatments to enhance safety along their already extensive bike networks mostly built from 1960 to 1990 (1700 km in Hamburg; 3500 km in Berlin)

Km of bike routes per 100,000 inhabitants: Hamburg, Berlin, Munich (100 km), Zurich (85 km), and Vienna (67 km)

On-road bike lanes

In Berlin on-street bike lanes increased from 50 km in 2002 to 174 km in 2012; combination bus–bike lanes rose from 50 to 80 km

Hamburg has built over 100 km of on-street bike lanes since 2000, with more planned

About 40% of Munich’s bicycle network are painted on-street bike lanes (500 km) compared to 25% of Vienna’s network (300 km)

Traffic calming, bicycle priority streets, and shared-use paths

Many bike routes on lightly travelled, traffic-calmed residential streets

All five cities have raised the share of their roadway network that is traffic calmed to 30 km/h or less

All five cities permit bi-directional cycling on many one-way traffic-calmed streets, often with special signage alerting motorists of cyclists riding in the opposite direction

Number of bicycle priority streets with minimal car traffic and cyclist right of way over the entire street: Munich (55), Berlin (16), and Hamburg (7)

In all five cities, there are extensive mixed-use paths shared by cyclists and pedestrians, especially in parks and agricultural areas within the city (e.g. 260 km in Munich)

Signage and branding of bike routes

Varying street markings, pavement colour, and route designations depending on type of route

Munich has 4000 signs at over 750 intersections, indicating direction, distance, route number, and connections 60% of Zurich’s bike routes have uniformly designed directional signs for bikes

Berlin and Hamburg are building specially marked radial bike routes for long-distance bike trips from the outer portions of the city to the centre

Route planning

Online bike route planners enable the choice of optimal routes based on preferences of the traveller regarding directness of route, speed, on-road vs. off-road facilities, and the availability of bike parking and bike sharing facilities, conveniently accessed via smartphone technology

Bike sharing

Munich, Berlin, and Hamburg have versions of German railway’s (DB) Call-a-Bike programme with 1260, 1750, and 1650 bicycles, respectively. Hamburg and Berlin have 129 and 130 docking stations for bikes, while Munich has a free-floating system without docking stations, where bikes can be returned to any major intersection in the middle ring of the city

Munich and Berlin each has 300 NextBike bike sharing bikes in addition to DB’s Call-a-Bikes

Vienna’s CityBike system offers 1200 bikes at 96 docking stations

In Vienna the first hour of bike use is free, compared to only the first 30 minutes for the Call-a-Bike and Next Bike systems

Zurich’s bike-rental programme is free of charge and offers a variety of 300 bicycles, including e-bikes, cargo bikes, and bicycles with children’s seat

Bike parking

Number of bike parking spaces (2012): Munich (33,000 bike parking spaces in public spaces and 50,000 bike parking spaces at public transport stops throughout the region), Berlin (26,600 bike parking spaces at U-Bahn and S-Bahn rail stations), Hamburg (26,000 bike parking spaces at 235 bike-and-ride lots along rail lines), Vienna (32,000 bike racks in public spaces), Zurich (17,200 bike racks in public spaces and 2,400 bike parking spaces at train stations)

Full-service bike parking stations and secure lockers: Hamburg (1 full-service bike parking station, 6 bike parking garages at key rail stations, and 710 secure bike lockers), Berlin (1 full-service bike parking station with 566 spaces in Bernau), Zurich (2100 bike parking spaces in 5 bike stations and 300 secure bike lockers at train stations)

Zoning ordinances require that newly constructed buildings above a certain size provide a prescribed minimum number of bike parking spaces, based either on the number of residential apartments or the number of workers in commercial buildings

Hamburg has 340 bike parking sheds (12 parking spaces each) in neighbourhoods throughout the city to provide sheltered, secure bike parking for an annual fee of 250 Euros

Promotional events and education

Traffic safety lessons in schools, first in the classroom, then on special training test tracks, and then on regular streets – often supervised by police officers

Voluntary cycling training courses specially adapted for adults, seniors, and new residents or immigrants from countries without a tradition of cycling

Large promotional public bicycling events

Mass bike rides: Berlin’s annual “Sternfahrt” attracted 200,000 bicyclists in 2014; Hamburg’s “Sternfahrt” attracted 20,000 riders in 2014

As part of Munich’s campaign to become Germany’s cycling capital, the city offers special bike tours for new residents, bike fashion shows, bike-theme film competitions, car-free roads in the city centre for night bike rides in the summer, and bike flea markets, where used bikes can be sold and purchased

Vienna has a special mobility agency for coordination of bicycle promotion

Zurich installed 36 free air pumps around the city for cyclists

Staffing and funding

Munich had 11 full-time city staff working on bicycling issues in 2014. Between 2009 and 2014, the city tripled its annual expenditures on cycling infrastructure and programmes from 1.5 million Euros to 4.5 million Euros. From 1992 to 2014, the city invested 32 million Euros in cycling. In 2015, the city council decided to increase funding for cycling to 10 million per year

Zurich recently adopted a new master plan for cycling which includes about 50 different measures, improving cycling infrastructure as well as expanding various pro-bike programmes with approved funding of 110 million Euros over the

next decade

Berlin increased annual expenditures on cycling infrastructure and programmes from one million Euros in 1995 to 15 million Euros in 2015



Employee Bicycle Travel Reimbursement

Some employers, such as the state of California offer employee travel reimbursement for cycling (www.dpa.ca.gov/job-info/short-term-travel/personal-vehicle-mileage-reimbursement.htm ). Such programs often provide a much lower reimbursement rate than for automobile travel, although it actually makes sense to apply the same rate to cycling and driving, since food energy is relatively costly and employers should not favor driving over cycling, although they may want to limit the amount of time that cyclists can bill for travel time using driving as the baseline. For example, if a car trip takes 20 minutes and cycling takes 30 minutes, the cyclist would only be able to charge the first 20 minutes of their trip as work time, the rest would be their personal time.



Prioritizing Urban Walkability

Badam (2009) argues that efforts to accommodate growing motor vehicle ownership in Indian cities, by expanding roadways and adding flyovers, harms residents overall by reducing pedestrian access. Instead, he recommends roadway design and management that favors active over motorized traffic. He states,

" Unfortunately, pedestrian infrastructure is often poorly designed and implemented; besides, there appears to be an increasing tendency, in the name of providing pedestrian infrastructure, to make inappropriate, and needlessly expensive, technological choices, by way of, for example, pedestrian over-bridges and underpasses. There might indeed be situations in which such facilities may be called for, but what is needed is not a few pedestrian over-bridges or underpasses, which is what would be possible given their very high cost, but for pedestrians (and cyclists) to be able to cross roads conveniently and safely, at grade, across the city, and to make it possible for them to do so at low cost. Apart from the unattractiveness and very limited utility – from the point of view of pedestrians – of a small number of over-bridges and underpasses, there is a more fundamental issue. Underlying such facilities is the assumption that motor vehicle traffic is primary, and something which pedestrians should not disrupt."



Eugene Encourages Bicycle Transportation (www.eugene-or.gov)

Eugene, Oregon has a well-planned and well used cycling network that includes 28 miles of off-street paths, 78 miles of on-street bicycle lanes, and 4 bicycle/pedestrian bridges spanning the Willamette River. This results in 8% of commute trips by bicycle.



Bicycle Commuting Contest (Climate Solutions, 2005)

The Thurston County, Washington Bicycle Commuter Contest encourages individuals to bicycle to work, school, and to run errands throughout the month of May. The contest has been a participatory event for Thurston County residents and employees since 1988. The goal of the Bicycle Commuter Contest is to promote cycling as an efficient, non-polluting method of travel. Participants keep track of how often and how far they commute by bicycle, and win prizes in a variety of categories. In 1999 574 participants rode a total of nearly 15,000 miles. Individuals and teams compete to see who can:

·         Ride the most miles.

·         Ride the most number of days in their age category.

·         Tally more total miles than any other team.

·         Ride the most days per team-member (advantage to smaller teams).

·         Compile the most days ridden by all members (advantage to larger teams).

·         Compile the most days ridden by first-time participants (advantage to teams that recruit first-time riders).



Canadian Policies Increase Cycling (Pucher and Buehler, 2006)

Pucher and Buehler (2006) find that despite a colder climate, Canadians cycle about three times more than Americans. Reasons for this difference include Canada’s higher urban densities and mixed-use development, shorter trip distances, lower incomes, higher costs of owning, driving and parking a car, safer cycling conditions, and more extensive cycling infrastructure and training programs. The researchers point out that most of these factors result from differences in transport and land-use policies, and not from intrinsic differences in history, culture or resource availability. They suggest that it is possible to significantly increase cycling levels in the United States by adopting Canadian policies that have promoted cycling and enhanced its safety.



Bike To Work Week Campaign (www.biketoworkvictoria.bc.ca)

A Bike-to-Work-Week campaign is held annually in Victoria, British Columbia. In 2000 it included:


·         A bicycle commuting contest with more than 200 teams at different worksites competing in various classes to see which can achieve the most bicycle commuters. All participants are eligible for prizes and drawings.


·         A friendly contest between drivers and cyclists determines who gets the first cup of hot coffee at a downtown coffee shop without violating traffic rules.


·         Free, bicycle skills training workshops for employees who want to learn more about bicycle commuting.


·         An elementary school literary competition between bikes and cars. Cycling and driving parents leave the school at a specified time, travel to the downtown public library, check out a book and return to the school while following all the rules of the road. Students that estimate the closest time differences between the two modes are eligible to win great bike prizes.


·         A Bike-to-Work-Week non-profit organization that plans and coordinates activities.



Go For Green (www.goforgreen.ca)

Go for Green is a national non-profit, charitable organization encouraging Canadians to pursue healthy, outdoor physical activities while being good environmental citizens. It encourages active transportation (walking and cycling). It sponsors the Commuter Challenge and school transport management programs. Go For Green provides information and materials, including newsletters, report, case studies and merchandize (logo shirts and hats).



Cycle-Friendly Employers’ Project (Cleary and McClintock, 2000)

A regional program in Nottingham, UK implemented in 1996, called “Cycle-Friendly Employers” included a number of improvements and incentives to encourage bicycle commuting, including workplace shower and changing facilities, workplace bicycle storage, cycle mileage allowances for short journeys (15 pence per mile), company pool bikes, public information, promotion (e.g., special events for cycle commuters), and a Bicycle Users Group to provide feedback from participants. Employers reported an increase in cycle commuting, and that most provisions for cycling are well used. More employees cycle more often. This resulting increase in cycle commuting stimulated additional bicycle facility improvements by local governments. The program is credited with increasing cycle commuting in the region by 19.5%, during which areas without such programs had a small decrease in bicycle travel.



Bethlehem, PA Bicycle Commuter Facility (www.car-free.org)

The Bethlehem Bicycle Commuter Facility affords its members access to bicycle tools, a shower facility, work sink, bathroom, washer/dryer unit, secure bicycle parking and a bike wash. There is a $400 annual fee for membership, half of which is payable by 20 hours of community service. There is a $100 security deposit for the keys.



Copenhagen Free Bike Program (www.cios.com)

In 1995, the Free City-Bike Program was implemented by the City of Copenhagen. One thousand specially designed free City-Bikes were stationed at 120 stands around the City at train and subway stations, parking lots and large housing blocks. The bikes were also stationed around common final destinations, such as office buildings, shopping districts, parks and other tourist attractions. For a deposit of only 20 Dkr. (US$3), anyone can take a bike and cycle wherever they want, within downtown (restricted area). When the bike is returned to any bike stand within the area, the user gets their deposit back. There are now more than 2,000 bikes in the program.



Loaner Bicycles (TA, 1998)

The Downtown Management Commission of Boulder, CO, has made available 100 bicycles and 50 helmets for residents and tourists; all that’s required is a credit card as a deposit. Champlain College in Burlington, VT, gives bikes to students who agree not to keep a car on campus.



Employer-Funded Commuter Bikes (TA, 1998)

The Nabisco bakery in Buena Park, CA, gives new bicycles to employees who commute to work three out of five days for a six-month period. Those who commute on their own bikes are given $300, the cost of a moderately priced new bike. Ten percent of the plant’s 480 workers now commute regularly by bicycle, helping Nabisco satisfy the Los Angeles area’s anti-pollution rules. “These commuters have become biking enthusiasts,” reports Nabisco transportation coordinator Byron Kemp. “For them, biking is now an important social activity, and they regularly participate in fun rides on weekends.”


Apple Computer provides free use of mountain bikes for employees at its Cupertino, CA, facility, as part of a Commuter Alternatives program. The chemical company Ciba-Geigy was able to avoid building a new garage at a facility in Switzerland by encouraging its employees to ride to work. Any worker willing to give up his or her parking space was given a new bicycle, an option 230 employees chose.



Cross-Continent Run Teaches Exercise and Education (Audrey Van Eerden, Victoria)

Each September I presented the idea of a cross-continent run to my elementary students. They were given a few days to think about it and then they voted on paper. The concept is simple.  Each day an average size class of 25-30 students walks, jogs or runs one kilometre every school day. The class records the cumulative distance and marks the location on a map of Canada. A “thousand” party celebrates each 1000 kilometres with a film or stories and pictures about where we are at that point in the run. The proudest celebration is when we symbolically dip our toes in ocean water to signify crossing 4500km from ocean to ocean.


The activity provides many benefits. The children gain confidence in their ability to achieve a set goal and that confidence transfers to other areas of achievement. The students and teacher are energized by the physical activity at the start of the day. An honour system allows students to contribute additional kilometres that they run outside of school. Math skills were used to calculate the growing results and students enjoyed learning about places in Canada as we run by. We used variety to make our run interesting. Some days we included various guests. We tried racewalking and skipping and pursuit (a game when runners stay in single file and the last runner sprints to the lead and then slows to a jog, and then the next runner sprints to the lead, and so on.) Most importantly we actively contributed to our health and we felt good when we returned to our classroom.



National Vision for Active Transport (ALGA 2010)

The Australian Vision For Active Transport, is a report produced by the Australian Local Government Association, Bus Industry Confederation, Cycling Promotion Fund, National Heart Foundation of Australia and International Association of Public Transport that identifies specific active transport goals and implementation strategies. These include:



Neighborhood Design Affects Walking Activity

A study comparing neighborhood features and travel activity by the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC 2008) found that the highest proportion of pedestrian trips (18%) is found in areas where a path is relatively more direct to nearby retail and recreational destinations on foot than by car. The lowest proportion (10%) of trips occur on foot in places where there is a low degree of pedestrian connectivity. By comparison, places with both high levels of pedestrian and vehicle connectivity have only about 14% mode share on foot. These results suggest that the relative connectivity of pedestrian and vehicular modes is an important predictor of the choice to walk.



BikeWell (www.movingtheeconomy.ca/cs_bikewell.html)

BikeWell works with employers, corporations and institutions to promote clean transport and “Wellness,” a holistic concept based on healthy living and environmentally friendly transport. BikeWell’s programs integrate green/clean transport into holistic human settlement and employment scenarios, which include:

·         An employee based initiative that starts with road and cycling safety and maintenance.

·         Encouraging students to develop projects which incorporate cycling as a means to reduce transport barriers.

·         Bulk purchase to lower the cost of bicycles for participants.

·         Cycle tours as an income-generating activity.

·         Encouraging employers to purchase bicycles and allow employees to pay for the bikes over time by direct payroll deductions or savings schemes.

·         Community and employer health and safety day events.


BikeWell, initially developed by the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) and South African partners, offers corporate and other sponsors the opportunity to start their own bicycle wellness program for employees as well as sponsoring initiatives for the less fortunate. PEER Africa and Kutlwanong Civic Integrated Housing Trust (KCIHT) are the principal implementing arm of the program in South Africa and both have launched projects for their staff. Letters of interest have been received from several large institutions keen to introduce the program into their corporate wellness programs.


BikeWell differs from traditional bike give-away projects in several key areas:

·         Integration of a train-the-trainer concept.

·         Integration of the health and safety aspects of the program, including activities for populations considered to be at high risk for HIV.

·         Provision of new bikes fitted with proper safety equipment.

·         The focus on empowering historically disadvantaged bike dealers like KCIHT.


In addition the program links cycling to small business and institutions. For example, the program allows the KCIHT staff the opportunity to earn a living through promotion of cycling events, and lowers the transport costs and time for staff to get to work. PEER Africa staff technician Richard Ramphiri uses his company sponsored bike on the job between construction sites and for personal use to travel to and from his home.



University of Florida Bicycle Safety Education and Enforcement Programs (www.dso.ufl.edu/stg/Traffic_Safety.html)

The University Police Department’s Bicycle Safety Education Program is designed to promote a greater awareness of the duties and responsibilities associated with the operation of bicycles in the greater campus traffic mix. The goal of the program is to provide members of the university community with a desirable combination of education, encouragement, enforcement and facilities necessary to gain voluntary acceptance and compliance with bicycle safety standards and the law.


In conjunction with the Alachua County Traffic Court, the Community Services Division began conducting a twice-weekly Bicycle Traffic Safety School. This portion of the program allows bicyclists who violate traffic laws while on the university campus the opportunity to attend a safety school in lieu of paying the assessed fine. The school is designed to provide an educational alternative to the payment of traffic fines, thus creating an incentive to learn more about safe bicycling. The school is also available to anyone interested in obtaining a greater awareness of the duties and responsibilities associated with the operation of bicycles in the campus traffic mix.


When a person receives a bicycle traffic citation, they have 30 days from the citation date to exercise one of the following options: pay the fine ($70.00 for a moving violation or $36 for a nonmoving or equipment violation); appeal the citation to the Alachua County Traffic Court; or in lieu of the fine, enroll and complete attendance at the University Police Department’s Bicycle Traffic Safety School within 30 days. Classes are currently scheduled on Tuesdays from 7:00 to 8:30 pm and Saturdays from 9:00 to 10:30 am.



Pedestrian Paradise

By Jay Walljasper, Utne Reader

 April 30, 2004


One of the local characters in the small city where I grew up was Judge Green. A giant man, probably 6 feet 7, he was widely admired around town, in part because he had been star of the only Urbana High School team ever to make it to the championship game of the Illinois state basketball tournament. I remember him as a cheerful man who greeted everyone with a smile. But he had one trait that made him seem a bit peculiar: He walked to work every day. If you drove down Broadway Avenue at certain hours, you couldn’t miss his towering figure striding along the sidewalk.


One day, home from college and already an ardent environmentalist, I was walking uptown myself when it dawned on me that Judge Green’s home was only a few blocks from the courthouse ­ hardly more than half a mile. I was shocked. The man many folks thought eccentric (and I thought heroic) for not driving to work each day was covering a distance that would be nothing to pedestrians in Europe, or most other places outside the United States. How sad, I sighed. There really is no hope that Americans will ever get out of their cars if a half-mile walk looks to them like an Olympic endurance event.


Walking, in many ways, is still viewed as an exotic and slightly odd habit. Try this experiment some time at a party or other gathering: Announce that you are walking home. I’ll bet you, two-to-one odds, that someone will offer a ride, even if you live just three blocks away and it’s a sunny 80 degrees outside. This is a generous gesture, of course, seen by most folks as similar to giving a glass of water to someone who says they’re thirsty. Why walk if you could go in a car?


 But the answer to that question is becoming more complicated than it used to be. The net effect of two hundred and fifty million Americans always taking the car results in polluted skies, congested roads, global warming, burgeoning obesity and a growing sense of isolation in most American communities.


Our decision to drive made over and over again, has eliminated the option to walk in many places. Many kids, old people, poor people, and disabled people are living under a form of house arrest, unable to go anywhere without finding someone to chauffeur them. Sidewalks are seen as an unnecessary luxury in most suburbs, and 60 years of traffic “improvements” on America’s streets have rendered many other communities unfit for pedestrians. The simplest human acts ­ buying groceries, going to school, visiting friends ­ now depend upon climbing into a car. People today even drive somewhere to take a walk because the streets around their homes feel inhospitable.


Yet one thing has changed for the better since I was a kid in the days of cheap gas, open roads, and plentiful parking. Increasing numbers of Americans ­ seeing a future of traffic jams, soulless sprawl, and never-ending wars for oil ­ are looking for ways to get out of the driver’s seat. Even at a time when politicians in Washington are allocating billions for another round of mega-highway construction and pop culture celebrates the sexy supremacy of Hummer drivers, there is an emerging movement to reclaim our right to take a walk.


All across the land, people are speaking up, organizing meetings, fighting city hall and, in some cases, working with city hall to make streets safer and more pleasant for pedestrians. They’ve gotten crosswalks painted in some places, streets narrowed in others, stop signs and speed bumps installed, zoning ordinances changed to promote pedestrian-friendly development, and plans created to help kids walk or bike to school.


These issues reach deep into the heart of people’s lives. Two neighbors bump into one another on the sidewalk and start talking about planting more flowers along the street, turning an empty storefront into a coffee shop or lobbying the city council to add bike lanes to that busy road. In small but important ways, these people are changing the face of America block by block.


This is a classic grassroots movement, with no clearly identifiable leaders. But a number of the people most active in the cause have been inspired by a former seminary student, magazine editor and window washer from Brisbane, Australia named David Engwicht. Marked-up copies of Engwicht’s books, Reclaiming Our Cities and Towns and Street Reclaiming (both New Society Publishers), are passed from hand to hand at community meetings and potlucks across North America.


Engwicht’s message is as simple as it radical. For nearly all of human history, he declares, streets belonged to everybody. Kids played there, dogs slept there, people stopped there to flirt or gossip. But over recent decades, beginning in Detroit and spreading over much of the world, streets have been seized for the exclusive use of cars and trucks. Most communities have never recovered from this theft. Deprived of our neighborhood gathering spots, we’ve retreated to the backyard or indoors to avoid the noise, smell and danger of speeding traffic. In the process, we’ve withdrawn from one another.


“Traffic Calming,” the booklet Engwicht wrote to make the case against road widening, not only turned the tide in his hometown; it took on a life of its own. He expanded it into the book Reclaiming Our Cities and Towns, which inspired a group of neighbors and me to organize resistance to the proposed widening of an already unsafe street near our homes in Minneapolis. At a public meeting, we outlined Engwicht’s ideas about traffic calming, quoting from the book and noting that streets could be redesigned so people and cars could share the space. Road-widening projects had been opposed around town many times before, but rarely stopped because city officials succeeded in branding opponents as “anti-progress.” We, however, were able to win over the crowd by articulating a vision of what we were for, rather than just what we were against. The city dropped its plans to widen the avenue that very night.


Engwicht suggests we treat the street as our “outdoor living room” and find ways it can be used for more than just transportation of people and goods. He now believes that traffic-calming efforts must encourage vital public life just as much as discourage speeding traffic. “Kids playing on the sidewalk or beautiful canopies of trees over the streets slow traffic more than speed bumps,” he told me. “There are all kinds of fun things a neighborhood can do to accomplish this. When I get back home, I am going to put a bench in my front yard to get people to stop awhile, and maybe help kids on the block create scarecrows to put up along our street. Drivers will definitely slow down to look at that.”


Anyone joining the burgeoning movement to make America more walkable soon discovers the key issue is not urban planning or transportation priorities but love. Places we love become places that we hang out, and those are always the best places for walking. Fred Kent, president of the Project for Public Spaces (PPS), means that almost literally. “If I had to summarize our work in one image,” he says, leading me through a maze of Asian shops along Canal Street in New York, “it would be a couple smooching on a park bench.”


Kent actually has thousands of pictures of people hugging and kissing on city streets on file among the hundreds of thousands of photos he has shot in 30 years as a tireless advocate for public places. His deep love for street life became apparent when I visited the PPS office last year. Every time we sat down to talk, Kent suggested we take a walk, so for several days I trailed him through the streets of New York as he snapped photos, pointed out favorite spots, and shouted answers to my questions above the hubbub of the city.


“Isn’t it fun when you don’t know where you’re going to wind up?” Kent asked with a grin as we wandered past an Italian bakery, antique toy store and guitar shop near the PPS office, stopping to talk with two well-dressed and slightly tipsy couples from Auburn, Alabama, who were enjoying their walk through Greenwich Village as much as we were.


Inspired by William H. Whyte, a noted journalist and author who invented a “smile index” to measure the quality of urban spaces, Kent founded PPS in 1975 with environmental designer Kathleen Madden and architect Steve Davies to draw attention to the importance of creating and preserving congenial public settings where people can walk, talk, and just enjoy themselves. The group gained international acclaim for its part in the revival of Bryant Park, the backyard of the New York Public Library, once overrun with drug dealers and now one of New Yorkers most beloved places to pass time.


With a staff of 24, PPS worked in 31 states and 11 countries last year, joining with local citizen groups, public officials, foundations and businesses to engage in what they call “placemaking.” This means taking every opportunity to promote public life and pedestrian activity by careful attention to how streets, parks, buildings, transportation options and public markets work. Through workshops, seminars, a participatory “Place Game” they’ve created, and a book, How to Turn a Place Around, PPS offers a grassroots approach to help people make their communities more livable and lovable.


“Those who live in a place are the experts on that place,” Kent told me. “They know more than architects, urban planners, traffic engineers, landscape architects, and real estate agents about what will make that place thrive. But often they are not even asked about their ideas.”


The central point of PPS’s work, everyone involved with the organization will tell you, is that projects need to be “place-driven.” By that, they mean that any effort to improve a place should not be viewed strictly as a question of transportation access, or crime control, or economic development, or affordable housing, or architectural excellence. These are worthy goals, but they cannot be achieved if too little attention is devoted to creating a vital place where people will want to live, work, visit, or walk ­ a place they will care about, that they will love.


“The single thing that makes a place a good place is that it is interesting,” Kent explained as we strolled down Fifth Avenue toward Central Park. “And that’s the same with a good place to walk. I love to walk down this street not because of the fancy shops. I love it because there’s always a surprise, a sense of serendipity, great people-watching, and moments of just pleasure.”


“Of course,” he added as we step into the Plaza Hotel to look over the elegant lobby and use the bathroom, “I like Chinatown more. It has all the life of Fifth Avenue but with different accents and price tags. And Mulberry Street in Little Italy ­ it’s so nice and alive and messy. There is nothing you could do to make that place any more interesting.”


A few minutes later, as we headed up Madison Avenue to explore the Upper East Side, I looked over at Kent, his face shining with the energy and excitement of a kid on the first day of summer vacation, and thought, for the first time in years, of Judge Green back in my hometown. A reserved Midwesterner rather than an ebullient Easterner, Judge Green nonetheless had the same wide, sincere smile on his face as he strolled through the streets of Urbana. Then it dawned on me: The way to get people out of their cars, something I had been wondering about since college, is not to chide them about ruining the environment or shame them about being fat but to show them how much fun, and how much of life itself, they are missing by not walking. And how much more fun we’d all have if we created better places for everyone across America to take a walk.



Bogotá Bicycling Programs (www.bicycleaccount.org)

Bogotá, Columbia’s reputation as a bike-friendly city dates to the late 1990s with two mayors that promoted bicycles as a viable mode of transportation and developed bikeways and other infrastructures. Bogotá currently has 392 km (243 miles) of bikeways. The development of bikeways and other infrastructures is crucial to bicycle promotion. The city is now constructing in-road bike lanes, and is integrating bicycles with Bus Rapid Transit. As a result:



Ciclovia and Recreovia (www.streetfilms.org/archives/ciclovia)

Every Sunday more than 70 miles of Bogota, Columbia streets are closed to motor vehicle traffic so residents can walk, bike, run, skate, recreate, picnic, and visit with family, neighbors & strangers. Nearly 1.8 million Colombians use the Ciclovia and Recreovia to de-stress, get healthy, and connect personally with their fellow citizens. Young or old, rich or poor, pedestrian or cyclist - in Bogotá everyone loves the Ciclovia. This program encourages share living, civility and urbanism.



Velib Paris Bicycle Rental (www.velib.paris.fr)

In 2007 the city of Paris launched a new self-service bicycle rental system called Velib. The system provides approximately 20,000 rental bikes at approximately 1,400 stations located around the city. To access the bikes, riders can purchase a one-day card for 1 euro, a weekly card for 5 euros, or an annual card for 29 euros. For each trip, the first half-hour of use is free, the second half-hour costs 1 euro, at third half hour costs 2 euros, and each addition half-hour after that costs  4 euros. Example: a 25 minute trip = 0 euros, a 50 minute trip = 1 euro, an hour and 15-minute ride = 3 euros. This price structure is designed to encourage frequent use of the bikes for short trips. Each Velib’ parking station is equipped with muni-meters to purchase one and 7-day passes and to pay any additional charges once the bike is dropped off. The Velib’ meters also provides information on other station locations. Paris also has over 371 km (230 miles) of cycling lanes.



Increased Non-Motorized Transport Investments (http://nashvillempo.org/plans_programs/rtp)

Because a portion of U.S. Federal transport funding is partly based on health, air quality, injury prevention and equity objectives, regional and local governments are increasing their investment in non-motorized transport. For example, the 2035 Nashville Area Regional Transportation Plan, approved in 2010, sets aside 15% of Federal funding for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure and education.



Bicycle Friendly Communities (www.bikeleague.org/programs/bicyclefriendlyamerica)

The League of American Bicyclists’ (www.bikeleague.org) Bicycle Friendly Community Program provides incentives, assistance, and award recognition for communities that actively support bicycling. In total the program identified four states, more than one hundred cities and towns, and approximately one hundred businesses considered outstanding in their efforts to accommodate and encourage cycling. The annual report describes the highlights and accomplishments of each awarded jurisdiction and organization.



A New Approach to Improving Cycling; Bicycle Diversion Training Programs

by Eleanor Lippman, California Association of Bicycling Organizations Newsletter, CommuniCABO, Fall 2000


We all know that bicyclists are expected to operate their bicycles by the same rules of the road as do motorists. Both bicyclists and motorists have equal responsibility to follow all laws and regulations in the vehicle code. 


However, the question of what to do about bicycle scofflaws often comes up. Should police actively enforce the laws and ticket bicyclists for infractions of the vehicle code?


Several cities have looked at the statistics pertaining to bicycle collisions and have concluded that deaths and injuries to cyclists can be significantly reduced by education and training bicyclists as compared to merely recommending the use of a bicycle helmet.


Since studies clearly show that bicyclists are solely at fault in about half of the reported crashes resulting in injury or death, some police departments are addressing the issue directly using a refreshingly new concept called Bicycle Diversion Training programs.


Rather than police issuing tickets to bicyclists leaving riders no option but to pay hefty fines (and possibly have the infraction appear on their driving records), some cities are using the Bicycle Diversion Training Program to change the behavior of bicyclists.


How does Bicycle Diversion Training Program work? Police (ideally police who are trained cyclists and understand how the vehicle code applies to bicycles) issue tickets to bicyclists who break traffic laws. Instead of paying a fine (running a red light results in a fine of $271) or making a court appearance, the cyclist is offered the opportunity to attend a safety training workshop. Training is designed for the age level of the bicyclist; it includes rules of the road, common traffic events and proper response, equipment and clothing that contributes to bicycle safety. In some cases, training includes videos and practical exercises including the use of mock cities or actual trips on city streets. Training ends with a test to emphasize important teaching points and participants who complete the program are given a gift that relates to safety (such as a helmet or headlight). The goal is to provide training to change behavior rather than to be punitive.


Bicycle Diversion Training Programs are established and effective. Tempe, Arizona, University of Ca lifornia at Davis through their Transportation and Parking Services, Huntington Beach, California, as well as Walnut Creek and Brentwood in Contra Costa County California, have adopted Bicycle Diversion Training Programs. The advocates among us would do well to spread the word to public officials to encourage all local jurisdictions to develop their own programs.


We can make a difference by contacting local officials and encouraging them to establish:   

·         An education program for bicyclists.

·         A program that in lieu of paying a traffic fine or going to court, bicyclists can attend an education program and finally.

·         An end to police turning a blind eye to illegal and unsafe bicycling practices.


Thanks to Robert Raburn of the East Bay Bicycle Coalition for providing information for this article.



References And Resources For More Information


ABW (2010 and 2012), Bicycling and Walking in the U.S.: Benchmarking Reports, Alliance for Biking & Walking, (www.peoplepoweredmovement.org); at www.peoplepoweredmovement.org/benchmarking.


ALR (2013), How to Increase Cycling for Daily Travel, Active Living Research (www.activelivingresearch.org); at www.activelivingresearch.org/dailybiketravel.


ALGA (2010). An Australian Vision For Active Transport, Australian Local Government Association, Bus Industry Confederation, Cycling Promotion Fund, National Heart Foundation of Australia and International Association of Public Transport; at www.alga.asn.au/policy/transport/ActiveTransport_Draft_5.pdf.


Lars Bo Andersen, et al (2000), “All-Cause Mortality Associated With Physical Activity During Leisure Time, Work, Sports and Cycling to Work,” Archives of Internal Medicine, Vol. 160, No. 11 (http://archinte.ama-assn.org/issues/v160n11/full/ioi90593.html), pp. 1621-1628.


Tony Arnold (2017), Framework for Cycling Communications, Australian Bicycle Council (www.bicyclecouncil.com.au); at www.bicyclecouncil.com.au/files/publication/ABC_FrameworkForCyclingCommunications.pdf.


Austroads (2014), Low Cost Interventions to Encourage Cycling: Selected Case Studies, AP-T281-14, Austroads (www.austroads.com.au); at www.onlinepublications.austroads.com.au/items/AP-T281-14.


Madhav G. Badam (2009), “Urban Transport Policy as if People and the Environment Mattered: Pedestrian Accessibility the First Step,” Economic & Political Weekly, Vol. XLIV, No. 33, 15 August 2009; at https://casi.sas.upenn.edu/sites/casi.sas.upenn.edu/files/iit/Badami%202009.pdf


Bike Commuter (www.bikecommuter.com) is a website that provides resources and encouragement for using cycling as a transportation mode.


Bicycle Information Center (www.bicyclinginfo.org) provides information on non-motorized transport planning and programs.


Bicycle Policy Audit (www.bypad.org) is a European Union research project to develop guidance for optimizing municipal and regional cycling policies. 


BikePlan Source (www.bikeplan.com) provides resources to help improve community bicycling conditions.


Andrea Broaddus, Todd Litman and Gopinath Menon (2009), Training Document On "Transportation Demand Management, Sustainable Urban Transport Project (www.sutp.org) and GTZ (www.gtz.de).


Rick Browning (1999), End-0f-The-Trip Facility Design Program, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (www.deq.state.or.us). This is a set of excellent information sheets on bicycle parking facilities that are now at the Victoria Transport Policy Institute website:

“Installing Secure and Convenient Bike Racks” (www.vtpi.org/bp1.pdf

“Providing Covered Bike Parking” (www.vtpi.org/bp2.pdf)

“Bike Parking in Public Areas” (www.vtpi.org/bp3.pdf)

“Indoor Bicycle Parking” (www.vtpi.org/bp4.pdf)

“Lockers, Showers and Changing Rooms” (www.vtpi.org/bp5.pdf)


Ralph Buehler, John Pucher, Regine Gerike and Thomas Götschi (2016) “Reducing Car Dependence in the Heart of Europe: Lessons From Germany, Austria, and Switzerland,” Transport Reviews (http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2016.1177799).  


Victoria Bike To Work Society (www.biketoworkvictoria.ca).


Ted Buehler and Susan Handy (2008), “Fifty Years of Bicycle Policy in Davis, California,” Transportation Research Record 2074, Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org), pp. 52–57; at www.des.ucdavis.edu/faculty/handy/Davis_bike_history.pdf.


Ralph Buehler and John Pucher (2012), “Cycling To Work In 90 Large American Cities: New Evidence On The Role Of Bike Paths And Lanes,” Transportation, Vol. 39, No. 2, pp. 409-432, DOI: 10.1007/s11116-011-9355-8.


J. Cleary and Hugh McClintock (2000), “Evaluation of the Cycle Challenge Project: A Case Study of the Nottingham Cycle-Friendly Employers’ Project, Transport Policy, Vol. 7, No. 2, April 2000, pp. 117-125.


CMHC (2008), Giving Pedestrians an Edge - Using Street Layout to Influence Transportation Choice, Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation (www03.cmhc-schl.gc.ca); at www03.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/b2c/catalog/product.do?next=cross#.


DFT (various years), Traffic Advisory Leaflets: Cycle Facilities, Department for Transport (www.roads.dft.gov.uk/roadnetwork/ditm/tal/cycle/index.htm). Various information resources related to cycling promotion and planning.


Jennifer Dill and John Gliebe (2008), Understanding and Measuring Bicycling Behavior: A Focus on Travel Time and Route Choice, Oregon Transportation Research and Education Consortium (OTREC); at www.lulu.com/items/volume_64/5687000/5687029/1/print/OTREC-RR-08-03_Dill_BicyclingBehavior_FinalReport.pdf.


Richard Dowling, et al. (2008), Multimodal Level Of Service Analysis For Urban Streets, NCHRP Report 616, Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org); at http://trb.org/news/blurb_detail.asp?id=9470; User Guide at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_w128.pdf. This describes ways to evaluate roadway design impacts on various modes (walking, cycling, driving and public transit).


Michelle Ernst and Lilly Shoup (2009), Dangerous by Design: Solving the Epidemic of Preventable Pedestrian Deaths (and Making Great Neighborhoods), Transport for America (http://t4america.org); at http://t4america.org/docs/dangerousbydesign/dangerous_by_design.pdf.


FHWA (2012), Report to the U.S. Congress on the Outcomes of the Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program, Federal Highway Administration (www.fhwa.dot.gov); at www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/ntpp/2012_report/final_report_april_2012.pdf.


FHWA (2014), Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program: Continued Progress in Developing Walking and Bicycling Networks – May 2014 Report, John A Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, USDOT (www.fhwa.dot.gov); at www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/ntpp/2014_report/hep14035.pdf.


Fietsberaad (2009), Cycling in the Netherlands, Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management (www.minvenw.nl) and Fietsberaad (Expertise Centre for Cycling Policy) (www.bicyclecouncil.org); at www.fietsberaad.nl/library/repository/bestanden/CyclingintheNetherlands2009.pdf.


Thomas Gotschi and Kevin Mills (2008), Active Transportation for America: A Case for Increased Federal Investment in Bicycling and Walking, Rail-To-Trails Conservancy (www.railstotrails.org); at www.railstotrails.org/ATFA.


GTZ SUTP and the Interface for Cycling Expertise (2009), Cycling-inclusive Policy Development: A Handbook, Sustainable Urban Transport Project (www.sutp.org); at www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1462&Itemid=1&lang=uk.


Healthy Transportation Network (www.healthytransportation.net) is a government-sponsored program to works with local communities to encourage bicycle and pedestrian transportation, encourage safety and help create communities that are walkable and bicycle-friendly.


LAB (2010), Bicycle Friendly America, League of American Bicyclists (www.bikeleague.org); at www.bikeleague.org/programs/bicyclefriendlyamerica. This annual report identifies U.S. states and communities that provide safe accommodation for cycling and encourage cycling for transportation and recreation.


Peter Lagerwey, et al. (2015), Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation Along Existing Roads—ActiveTrans Priority Tool Guidebook, NCHRP Report 803, Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org); at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_803.pdf.


Todd Litman (2003), “Economic Value of Walkability,” Transportation Research Record 1828, Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org), pp. 3-11; at www.vtpi.org/walkability.pdf.


Todd Litman (2004), Whose Roads?; Defining Bicyclists’ and Pedestrians’ Right to Use Public Roadways, Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org); at www.vtpi.org/whoserd.pdf. .


Todd Litman (2006), “Managing Diverse Modes and Activities on Non-motorized Facilities: Guidance for Practitioners,” ITE Journal, Vol. 76, No. 6 (www.ite.org), June 2006, pp. 20-27; based on Todd Litman and Robin Blair (2005), Managing Personal Mobility Devices (PMDs) On Non-motorized Facilities, Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org); at www.vtpi.org/man_nmt_fac.pdf.


Todd Litman (2012), Evaluating Complete Streets: The Value of Designing Roads For Diverse Modes, Users and Activities, Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org); at www.vtpi.org/compstr.pdf.


Todd Litman (2013), Evaluating Active Transport Benefits and Costs: Guide to Valuing Walking and Cycling Improvements and Encouragement Programs, Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org); at www.vtpi.org/nmt-tdm.pdf.


Living Streets (2011), Making The Case For Investment In The Walking Environment, Living Streets Program (www.livingstreets.org.uk), University of the West of England and Cavill Associates; at www.livingstreets.org.uk/index.php/tools/required/files/download?fID=1668.


Nancy McGuckin (2011), Biking in the U.S.: Trends from the National Household Travel Survey, National Bike Summit (www.travelbehavior.us/Nancy--ppt/Biking%20in%20the%20US%20PPT.pdf.


NACTO (2012), Urban Bikeway Design Guide, National Association of City Transportation Officials (www.nacto.org); at www.c4cguide.org.


Luc Nadal (2007), “Bike Sharing Sweeps Paris Off Its Feet,” Sustainable Transport, No. 19, Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (www.itdp.org), Fall 2007, pp. 8-13; at www.itdp.org/documents/st_magazine/ITDP-ST_Magazine-19.pdf.


PBIC, Image Library (www.pedbikeimages.org), by the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center (www.walkinginfo.org) provides an extensive collection of photographs related to walking and cycling.


Adele Peters (2015), These Historical Photos Show How Amsterdam Turned Itself Into A Bike Rider's Paradise, Fast Company (http://www.fastcoexist.com/3052699/these-historical-photos-show-how-amsterdam-turned-itself-into-a-bike-riders-paradise).


Richard Pratt, et al (2012), Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities, Chapter 16, Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes, TCRP Report 95, TRB (www.trb.org); at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_95c16.pdf.


John Pucher (2007), Cycling for Everyone: Key to Public and Political Support, keynote address at the 2007 National Bike Summit, League of American Bicyclists, Washington, DC, March 16, 2007; at www.policy.rutgers.edu/faculty/pucher/BikeSummit2007COMP_Mar25.pdf.


John Pucher and Ralph Buehler (2006), “Why Canadians Cycle More Than Americans: A Comparative Analysis Of Bicycling Trends And Policies,” Transport Policy, Vol. 13, May, 2006, pp. 265–279; at www.policy.rutgers.edu/faculty/pucher/TransportPolicyArticle.pdf.


John Pucher, Jennifer Dill and Susan Handy (2010), “Infrastructure, Programs and Policies To Increase Bicycling: An International Review,” Preventive Medicine, Vol. 48, No. 2, February; prepared for the Active Living By Design Program (www.activelivingresearch.org/resourcesearch/journalspecialissues); at http://policy.rutgers.edu/faculty/pucher/Pucher_Dill_Handy10.pdf.


John Pucher and Ralph Buehler (2011), Analysis of Bicycle Trends and Policies in Large North American Cities: Lessons For New York, University Transportation Research Center; at www.utrc2.org/research/assets/176/Analysis-Bike-Final1.pdf; summary at www.utrc2.org/research/assets/176/Bicycle-Brief1.pdf.


John Pucher, Ralph Buehler, and Mark Seinen (2011), “Bicycling Renaissance in North America? An Update and Re-Assessment of Cycling Trends and Policies,” Transportation Research A, Vol. 45, No. 8, pp. 451-475; at http://policy.rutgers.edu/faculty/pucher/TRA960_01April2011.pdf.


John Pucher and Ralph Buehler (2009), “Sustainable Transport that Works: Lessons from Germany,” World Transport Policy and Practice, Vol. 15, No. 1, May, pp. 13-46 (www.eco-logica.co.uk/pdf/wtpp15.1.pdf ).


John Pucher and Ralph Buehler (2016), “Safer Cycling Through Improved Infrastructure,” American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 106, No. 12, pp. 2089-1090; at http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.2016.303507.


PRESTO (Promoting Cycling for Everyone as a Daily Transport Mode) (www.presto-cycling.eu) is a project of the EU’s Intelligent Energy.


Inas Rashad (2007), Cycling: An Increasingly Untouched Source of Physical and Mental Health, Working Paper No. 12929, National Bureau Of Economic Research (www.nber.org); at www.nber.org/papers/w12929.


Collin Roughton, et al. (2012), Creating Walkable and Bikeable Communities: A User Guide to Developing Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plans, Center for Transportation Studies at Portland State University (www.ibpi.usp.pdx.edu); at www.ibpi.usp.pdx.edu/media/IBPI%20Master%20Plan%20Handbook%20FINAL%20(7.27.12).pdf.


Robert Salter, Subash Dhar and Peter Newman (2011), Technologies for Climate Change Mitigation: Transport Sector, Risø Centre on Energy, Climate and Sustainable Development, United Nations Environmental Program (www.uneprisoe.org); at http://tech-action.org/Guidebooks/TNAhandbook_Transport.pdf.


Laura Sandt, et al. (2015), A Resident’s Guide for Creating Safer Communities for Walking and Biking, Federal Highway Administration Office of Safety (http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov); at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/ped_cmnity/ped_walkguide/residents_guide2014_final.pdf.


Sam Swartz (2012), Steps to a Walkable Community: A Guide for Citizens, Planners, and Engineers, America Walks (www.americawalks.org/walksteps).


TC (2011), Active Transportation in Canada: A Resource and Planning Guide, Transport Canada (www.tc.gc.ca); at www.fcm.ca/Documents/tools/GMF/Transport_Canada/ActiveTranspoGuide_EN.pdf.


Philip Verma, José Segundo López and Carlosfelipe Pardo (2015), Bogotá Bicycle Account (www.bicycleaccount.org); at http://despacio.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Bogota-2014-Bicycle-account-summary.pdf


Jay Walljasper (2013), Walking As A Way Of Life Movement For Health & Happiness, Everybody Walks ( (www.everybodywalk.org); at www.everybodywalk.org/media_assets/WalkingAsAWayOfLife1_Final.pdf.


Mark Wardman, Miles Tight and Matthew Page (2007), “Factors Influencing The Propensity To Cycle To Work,” Transportation Research, Vol. 41, Issue 4 (www.elsevier.com/locate/tra), pp. 339-350; at http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/2448/1.


Seyed Amir H. Zahabia, et al. (2016), “Exploring the Link Between the Neighborhood Typologies, Bicycle Infrastructure and Commuting Cycling Over Time and the Potential Impact on Commuter GHG emissions,” Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 47, Pages 89–103; summary at www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S136192091630270X.


Charles V. Zegeer, Laura Sandt and Margaret Scully (2009), How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Accident Plan, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. Federal Highway Administration; at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/docs/fhwasa0512.pdf.

This Encyclopedia is produced by the Victoria Transport Policy Institute to help improve understanding of Transportation Demand Management. It is an ongoing project. Please send us your comments and suggestions for improvement.




Encyclopedia Homepage

Send Comments


Victoria Transport Policy Institute

Web page: www.vtpi.org       Email: info@vtpi.org

1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC,  V8V 3R7,  CANADA

Phone & Fax 250-360-1560

“Efficiency - Equity - Clarity”