3 ms·

> yes there was small study in Minnesota that said exactly that. https://www.lrrb.org/pdf/200550.pdf https://www.lrrb.org/pdf/200550.pdf Again, a citation to a

> yes there was small study in Minnesota that said exactly that. https://www.lrrb.org/pdf/200550.pdf https://www.lrrb.org/pdf/200550.pdf Again, a citation to a specific passage would be helpful. But the executive summary seems to say exactly the opposite of what you claim: > Generally speaking, the results support the notion that people value bicycle facilities, in that they are willing to incur additional time costs in order to use higher quality facilities. In particular, people value having striped bike lanes. The incremental value of this improvement is much greater than the incremental value of moving the facility off-road entirely. The presence of facilities also appears to be associated with higher amounts of riding, although the precise nature of the impact is still unclear. From this research, it appears that a facility can increase the amount of riding in an area even up to one and a half miles from the ends of the facility, but it is not clear whether the effect is larger for residents that are closer than this.

dominotw 4y ago
> In terms of facilities and their impact on biking frequency, this survey found only a small relationship between proximity to facilities and the likelihood of cycling, within a radius of a mile or so. > Somewhat to the chagrin of many officials excited about the prospects of using community design to induce—or even enable—physical activity, this analysis suggests an uphill battle lies ahead. Anyways, perhaps you can cite your sources behind your claims that you say are obvious. Surely public policy like building bike lanes has to have some solid data behind instead of just wishful thinking.
- pdabbadabba 4y ago
  Honestly, I don't feel the need to provide a source to support the claim that, if you decrease the costs of doing something, more people will do it. (Though, as I said a few posts ago, that's not to make any claim about the size of the effect, or whether adding bike lanes is enough on its own to make a difference.) If you want a citation, the Minnesota study seems like it supports exactly what I am saying. > The presence of facilities also appears to be associated with higher amounts of riding, although the precise nature of the impact is still unclear. From this research, it appears that a facility can increase the amount of riding in an area even up to one and a half miles from the ends of the facility, but it is not clear whether the effect is larger for residents that are closer than this. Here are some more: * https://www.vox.com/2014/6/5/5782472/study-bike-lanes-really-do-increase-biking https://www.vox.com/2014/6/5/5782472/study-bike-lanes-really... (Haven't found the original study yet--the article's link seems to be broken. But the charts tell the story.) > But when 2,283 of the cyclists in these lanes were surveyed, 10 percent of them said they would have taken another mode of travel (i.e. car, public transit, by foot, etc.) if the lane hadn't been built. Another 1 percent said they wouldn't have taken the trip at all. * https://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Bike-Lanes-and-Other-Determinants-of-Capital-Bikeshare-Trips-Buck-et-al-12-3539.pdf https://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Bike-Lanes-and-... > This study finds a significant correlation between the presence of bicycle lanes and Capital Bikeshare usage, and also highlights the importance of population density and mixed-uses in encouraging ridership. * https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2024399118 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2024399118 (Studies Europeans, though I don't see any reason why incentives would work on europeans and not at all on Americans--though maybe one would expect the effect size to be somewhat smaller in proportion to Americans' lower level of fitness) > We find robust evidence for substantial short-run increases in cycling in European cities due to new provisional cycling infrastructure. It bears repeating, though, that this isn't just about bike lanes.

dominotw 4y ago

> In terms of facilities and their impact on biking frequency, this survey found only a small relationship between proximity to facilities and the likelihood of cycling, within a radius of a mile or so. > Somewhat to the chagrin of many officials excited about the prospects of using community design to induce—or even enable—physical activity, this analysis suggests an uphill battle lies ahead. Anyways, perhaps you can cite your sources behind your claims that you say are obvious. Surely public policy like building bike lanes has to have some solid data behind instead of just wishful thinking.

pdabbadabba 4y ago
Honestly, I don't feel the need to provide a source to support the claim that, if you decrease the costs of doing something, more people will do it. (Though, as I said a few posts ago, that's not to make any claim about the size of the effect, or whether adding bike lanes is enough on its own to make a difference.) If you want a citation, the Minnesota study seems like it supports exactly what I am saying. > The presence of facilities also appears to be associated with higher amounts of riding, although the precise nature of the impact is still unclear. From this research, it appears that a facility can increase the amount of riding in an area even up to one and a half miles from the ends of the facility, but it is not clear whether the effect is larger for residents that are closer than this. Here are some more: * https://www.vox.com/2014/6/5/5782472/study-bike-lanes-really-do-increase-biking https://www.vox.com/2014/6/5/5782472/study-bike-lanes-really... (Haven't found the original study yet--the article's link seems to be broken. But the charts tell the story.) > But when 2,283 of the cyclists in these lanes were surveyed, 10 percent of them said they would have taken another mode of travel (i.e. car, public transit, by foot, etc.) if the lane hadn't been built. Another 1 percent said they wouldn't have taken the trip at all. * https://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Bike-Lanes-and-Other-Determinants-of-Capital-Bikeshare-Trips-Buck-et-al-12-3539.pdf https://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Bike-Lanes-and-... > This study finds a significant correlation between the presence of bicycle lanes and Capital Bikeshare usage, and also highlights the importance of population density and mixed-uses in encouraging ridership. * https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2024399118 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2024399118 (Studies Europeans, though I don't see any reason why incentives would work on europeans and not at all on Americans--though maybe one would expect the effect size to be somewhat smaller in proportion to Americans' lower level of fitness) > We find robust evidence for substantial short-run increases in cycling in European cities due to new provisional cycling infrastructure. It bears repeating, though, that this isn't just about bike lanes.