Can curbside bicycle lanes buffer COVID-19 ridership losses? A case study from Melbourne, Australia

IF 6.8 1区 工程技术 Q1 ECONOMICS Transportation Research Part A-Policy and Practice Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-14 DOI:10.1016/j.tra.2025.104438
Alexa Delbosc , Zi Sheng Goh , Mahsa Naseri , Tim Powers
{"title":"Can curbside bicycle lanes buffer COVID-19 ridership losses? A case study from Melbourne, Australia","authors":"Alexa Delbosc ,&nbsp;Zi Sheng Goh ,&nbsp;Mahsa Naseri ,&nbsp;Tim Powers","doi":"10.1016/j.tra.2025.104438","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Many cities implemented temporary or permanent improvements in safe cycling infrastructure during COVID-19 in a bid to encourage cycling. However, many studies found that cycling during COVID-19 was primarily for recreation and exercise. In contrast, cycling for commuting declined, largely because commuting overall (especially into cities) was partially replaced by working from home. In 2020 and 2021, the City of Melbourne fast-tracked a range of cycling infrastructure upgrades in an effort to attract more workers back into the city using this sustainable transport mode. The upgrades were relatively modest – ranging from extending curb-protected lanes through a single intersection, to replacing a few kilometres of painted lane with a protected bike lane. This study examines how patterns of bicycle riding have changed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, using bicycle count data from 15 automatic counters within 5 km of Melbourne’s city center. In addition, this paper isolates the impact of COVID-era infrastructure upgrades against the backdrop of huge fluctuations in bike riding from 2019 to 2022. Multi-level generalized linear modelling found that weekday bicycle counts were significantly dampened during lockdown and remain below pre-COVID levels on weekdays and at sites on off-road bicycle paths. However, when controlling for lockdown stage and seasonality, the average daily count at sites near upgraded infrastructure were 7.4 % higher (855 per day) than counts from sites that were never, or not yet, near upgrades (796 per day). This increase is notable given that almost all counter locations saw declines in bicycle counts even through 2022. These findings are particularly relevant for cities that are grappling with whether to continue with temporary or long-term cycling infrastructure upgrades. This study suggests that even relatively modest upgrades to cycling networks can have a measurable impact on cycling rates.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49421,"journal":{"name":"Transportation Research Part A-Policy and Practice","volume":"195 ","pages":"Article 104438"},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation Research Part A-Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856425000667","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Many cities implemented temporary or permanent improvements in safe cycling infrastructure during COVID-19 in a bid to encourage cycling. However, many studies found that cycling during COVID-19 was primarily for recreation and exercise. In contrast, cycling for commuting declined, largely because commuting overall (especially into cities) was partially replaced by working from home. In 2020 and 2021, the City of Melbourne fast-tracked a range of cycling infrastructure upgrades in an effort to attract more workers back into the city using this sustainable transport mode. The upgrades were relatively modest – ranging from extending curb-protected lanes through a single intersection, to replacing a few kilometres of painted lane with a protected bike lane. This study examines how patterns of bicycle riding have changed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, using bicycle count data from 15 automatic counters within 5 km of Melbourne’s city center. In addition, this paper isolates the impact of COVID-era infrastructure upgrades against the backdrop of huge fluctuations in bike riding from 2019 to 2022. Multi-level generalized linear modelling found that weekday bicycle counts were significantly dampened during lockdown and remain below pre-COVID levels on weekdays and at sites on off-road bicycle paths. However, when controlling for lockdown stage and seasonality, the average daily count at sites near upgraded infrastructure were 7.4 % higher (855 per day) than counts from sites that were never, or not yet, near upgrades (796 per day). This increase is notable given that almost all counter locations saw declines in bicycle counts even through 2022. These findings are particularly relevant for cities that are grappling with whether to continue with temporary or long-term cycling infrastructure upgrades. This study suggests that even relatively modest upgrades to cycling networks can have a measurable impact on cycling rates.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
路边自行车道能否缓解COVID-19客流量损失?来自澳大利亚墨尔本的案例研究
在新冠疫情期间,许多城市对安全骑行基础设施进行了临时或永久性的改善,以鼓励骑行。然而,许多研究发现,在COVID-19期间骑自行车主要是为了娱乐和锻炼。相比之下,骑自行车上下班的人减少了,很大程度上是因为通勤(尤其是进城)部分被在家工作所取代。在2020年和2021年,墨尔本市快速进行了一系列自行车基础设施升级,以吸引更多的工人使用这种可持续的交通方式回到城市。升级的幅度相对较小——从在一个十字路口增加保护路沿的车道,到用保护自行车道取代几公里的涂漆车道。这项研究利用墨尔本市中心5公里内15个自动计数器的自行车计数数据,研究了自行车骑行模式在应对COVID-19大流行时的变化。此外,本文将2019年至2022年自行车骑行量大幅波动的背景下,隔离了covid - 19时代基础设施升级的影响。多层次广义线性模型发现,在封锁期间,工作日的自行车数量明显减少,在工作日和越野自行车道上的自行车数量仍低于疫情前的水平。然而,在控制封锁阶段和季节性因素后,靠近升级基础设施的站点的平均每日计数(每天855例)比从未或尚未接近升级的站点的平均每日计数(每天796例)高出7.4%。考虑到几乎所有柜台的自行车数量直到2022年都在下降,这一增长是值得注意的。这些发现对于那些正在努力解决是继续进行临时还是长期自行车基础设施升级的城市尤为重要。这项研究表明,即使对自行车网络进行相对适度的升级,也会对骑行率产生可衡量的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.20
自引率
7.80%
发文量
257
审稿时长
9.8 months
期刊介绍: Transportation Research: Part A contains papers of general interest in all passenger and freight transportation modes: policy analysis, formulation and evaluation; planning; interaction with the political, socioeconomic and physical environment; design, management and evaluation of transportation systems. Topics are approached from any discipline or perspective: economics, engineering, sociology, psychology, etc. Case studies, survey and expository papers are included, as are articles which contribute to unification of the field, or to an understanding of the comparative aspects of different systems. Papers which assess the scope for technological innovation within a social or political framework are also published. The journal is international, and places equal emphasis on the problems of industrialized and non-industrialized regions. Part A''s aims and scope are complementary to Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Part C: Emerging Technologies and Part D: Transport and Environment. Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review. Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. The complete set forms the most cohesive and comprehensive reference of current research in transportation science.
期刊最新文献
Assessing the impact of the Paris 2024 Olympic Games on bicycle lane utilization with electric bike-sharing data Evaluating the carbon emission impacts of shifting to ride-pooling: A user group perspective Is the mixed use city of short distances equally shorter for everybody? Evidence from the universe of Czech commuters Beyond direct flights: higher-order connectivity in China’s international air cargo network Optimal railway freight subsidy scheme for hinterland container transportation network considering carbon tax and shippers’ choice behavior
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1