Qiao Zhao , Meghan Winters , Trisalyn Nelson , Karen Laberee , Colin Ferster , Kevin Manaugh
{"title":"谁能使用加拿大的自行车基础设施?社会公平分析","authors":"Qiao Zhao , Meghan Winters , Trisalyn Nelson , Karen Laberee , Colin Ferster , Kevin Manaugh","doi":"10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2024.102109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Canadian cities have made significant investments in cycling infrastructure to support uptake in active transportation. Who has spatial access to supportive infrastructure is an important equity question: lack of access to safe infrastructure for cycling may limit who has an option to use a bicycle to meet their transportation needs (to access employment, educational, social, or other essential services) as well as who may achieve the physical and mental health benefits possible through physical activity. Our aim is to measure spatial access to cycling infrastructure in Canadian cities, and to provide a broad, national understanding of inequitable access to cycling infrastructure for equity-deserving populations (children, seniors, recent immigrants, visible minorities, and people with low incomes). Accordingly, we used a national dataset of cycling infrastructure (Can-BICS), which summarizes the quantity of cycling infrastructure for all dissemination areas in Canada, and 2016 Census data to estimate associations between area-level sociodemographic characteristics and access to cycling infrastructure. In unadjusted associations, equity-deserving groups (i.e., recent immigrants and people with low incomes) had better access to cycling infrastructure. Pearson coefficients highlighted variations in the equity of cycling infrastructure across cities. Overall, access was more equitable across equity-deserving groups in large cities, compared to mid-sized and small cities. After adjusting for covariates related to urban form and mode share, access to cycling infrastructure was higher in areas with more seniors, more recent immigrants, more visible minorities, and more people with low incomes, but lower in areas with more children. More importantly, there are still a substantial number of people from equity-deserving groups living in areas with very low levels of cycling infrastructure. For example, ∼ 1.5 million children under the age of 14 (31% of children), 1.5 million older adults (31%), 1.4 million visible minorities, and 0.5 million people with low income (20%) live in dissemination areas with the lowest level of cycling infrastructure. These results highlight the need to understand which populations stand to gain by cycling infrastructure investments and which populations are being left behind. This methodology represents a useful tool for information transport policy initiatives to advance bicycle equity at a national scale.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48241,"journal":{"name":"Computers Environment and Urban Systems","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0198971524000383/pdfft?md5=b1ea9f354d63f16bdaed6e34fce13b0e&pid=1-s2.0-S0198971524000383-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Who has access to cycling infrastructure in Canada? A social equity analysis\",\"authors\":\"Qiao Zhao , Meghan Winters , Trisalyn Nelson , Karen Laberee , Colin Ferster , Kevin Manaugh\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2024.102109\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Canadian cities have made significant investments in cycling infrastructure to support uptake in active transportation. Who has spatial access to supportive infrastructure is an important equity question: lack of access to safe infrastructure for cycling may limit who has an option to use a bicycle to meet their transportation needs (to access employment, educational, social, or other essential services) as well as who may achieve the physical and mental health benefits possible through physical activity. Our aim is to measure spatial access to cycling infrastructure in Canadian cities, and to provide a broad, national understanding of inequitable access to cycling infrastructure for equity-deserving populations (children, seniors, recent immigrants, visible minorities, and people with low incomes). Accordingly, we used a national dataset of cycling infrastructure (Can-BICS), which summarizes the quantity of cycling infrastructure for all dissemination areas in Canada, and 2016 Census data to estimate associations between area-level sociodemographic characteristics and access to cycling infrastructure. In unadjusted associations, equity-deserving groups (i.e., recent immigrants and people with low incomes) had better access to cycling infrastructure. Pearson coefficients highlighted variations in the equity of cycling infrastructure across cities. Overall, access was more equitable across equity-deserving groups in large cities, compared to mid-sized and small cities. After adjusting for covariates related to urban form and mode share, access to cycling infrastructure was higher in areas with more seniors, more recent immigrants, more visible minorities, and more people with low incomes, but lower in areas with more children. More importantly, there are still a substantial number of people from equity-deserving groups living in areas with very low levels of cycling infrastructure. For example, ∼ 1.5 million children under the age of 14 (31% of children), 1.5 million older adults (31%), 1.4 million visible minorities, and 0.5 million people with low income (20%) live in dissemination areas with the lowest level of cycling infrastructure. These results highlight the need to understand which populations stand to gain by cycling infrastructure investments and which populations are being left behind. This methodology represents a useful tool for information transport policy initiatives to advance bicycle equity at a national scale.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48241,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Computers Environment and Urban Systems\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0198971524000383/pdfft?md5=b1ea9f354d63f16bdaed6e34fce13b0e&pid=1-s2.0-S0198971524000383-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Computers Environment and Urban Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0198971524000383\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers Environment and Urban Systems","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0198971524000383","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Who has access to cycling infrastructure in Canada? A social equity analysis
Canadian cities have made significant investments in cycling infrastructure to support uptake in active transportation. Who has spatial access to supportive infrastructure is an important equity question: lack of access to safe infrastructure for cycling may limit who has an option to use a bicycle to meet their transportation needs (to access employment, educational, social, or other essential services) as well as who may achieve the physical and mental health benefits possible through physical activity. Our aim is to measure spatial access to cycling infrastructure in Canadian cities, and to provide a broad, national understanding of inequitable access to cycling infrastructure for equity-deserving populations (children, seniors, recent immigrants, visible minorities, and people with low incomes). Accordingly, we used a national dataset of cycling infrastructure (Can-BICS), which summarizes the quantity of cycling infrastructure for all dissemination areas in Canada, and 2016 Census data to estimate associations between area-level sociodemographic characteristics and access to cycling infrastructure. In unadjusted associations, equity-deserving groups (i.e., recent immigrants and people with low incomes) had better access to cycling infrastructure. Pearson coefficients highlighted variations in the equity of cycling infrastructure across cities. Overall, access was more equitable across equity-deserving groups in large cities, compared to mid-sized and small cities. After adjusting for covariates related to urban form and mode share, access to cycling infrastructure was higher in areas with more seniors, more recent immigrants, more visible minorities, and more people with low incomes, but lower in areas with more children. More importantly, there are still a substantial number of people from equity-deserving groups living in areas with very low levels of cycling infrastructure. For example, ∼ 1.5 million children under the age of 14 (31% of children), 1.5 million older adults (31%), 1.4 million visible minorities, and 0.5 million people with low income (20%) live in dissemination areas with the lowest level of cycling infrastructure. These results highlight the need to understand which populations stand to gain by cycling infrastructure investments and which populations are being left behind. This methodology represents a useful tool for information transport policy initiatives to advance bicycle equity at a national scale.
期刊介绍:
Computers, Environment and Urban Systemsis an interdisciplinary journal publishing cutting-edge and innovative computer-based research on environmental and urban systems, that privileges the geospatial perspective. The journal welcomes original high quality scholarship of a theoretical, applied or technological nature, and provides a stimulating presentation of perspectives, research developments, overviews of important new technologies and uses of major computational, information-based, and visualization innovations. Applied and theoretical contributions demonstrate the scope of computer-based analysis fostering a better understanding of environmental and urban systems, their spatial scope and their dynamics.