Sustainable Cities and Communities

Living Edition
| Editors: Walter Leal Filho, Anabela Marisa Azul, Luciana Brandli, Pinar Gökcin Özuyar, Tony Wall

Non-motorized Transport: Walking and Cycling

  • Matt BiggarEmail author
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71061-7_1-1

Synonyms

Definitions

Non-motorized transport includes walking, cycling, and variations of small-wheeled, human-powered transportation modes. With the exception of walking, these modes utilize non-motorized vehicles such as bicycles, skateboards, push scooters, wheelchairs, and rickshaws. This entry focuses on the two primary non-motorized, or active, modes – walking and cycling for transport.

Walking and cycling for transport is defined as walking and cycling to get to and from places (Turrell et al. 2014) that provide substantial health benefits for users from increased physical activity (Mueller et al. 2015). Places, or destinations, for walking and cycling include work, home, stores, recreational settings, and other everyday life places. Walking and cycling are a form of exercise, but moving in these ways purely for exercise is not included in this definition. Walkability and bikeabilityrefer...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Aboelata M, Yanez E, Kharrazi R (2017) Vision Zero: a health equity road map for getting to zero in every community. Prevention Institute, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  2. Bamberg S, Fujii S, Friman M, Gärling T (2011) Behaviour theory and soft transport policy measures. Transp Policy 18(1):228–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Biehl A, Chen Y, Sanabria-Veaz K, Uttal D, Stathopoulos A (2019) Where does active travel fit within local community narratives of mobility space and place? Transp Res A Policy Pract 123:269–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biggar M, Ardoin NM (2017a) Community context, human needs, and transportation choices: a view across San Francisco Bay Area communities. J Transp Geogr 60:189–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Biggar M, Ardoin NM (2017b) More than good intentions: the role of conditions in personal transportation behaviour. Local Environ 22(2):141–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brand C, Anable J, Morton C (2019) Lifestyle, efficiency and limits: modelling transport energy and emissions using a socio-technical approach. Energ Effic 12(1):187–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Buehler R, Pucher J (2011) Sustainable transport in Freiburg: lessons from Germany’s environmental capital. Int J Sustain Transp 5(1):43–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Buehler R, Pucher J (2012) Walking and cycling in Western Europe and the United States: trends, policies, and lessons. Tr News 280:43–70Google Scholar
  9. Calthorpe P (1993) The next American metropolis: ecology, community, and the American dream. Princeton Architectural Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Carr LJ, Dunsiger SI, Marcus BH (2010) Walk score™ as a global estimate of neighborhood walkability. Am J Prev Med 39(5):460–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cervero R, Duncan M (2003) Walking, bicycling, and urban landscapes: evidence from the San Francisco Bay Area. Am J Public Health 93(9):1478–1483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cervero R, Kockelman K (1997) Travel demand and the 3Ds: density, diversity, and design. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ 2(3):199–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chatterjee K, Sherwin H, Jain J (2013) Triggers for changes in cycling: the role of life events and modifications to the external environment. J Transp Geogr 30:183–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Corbett JB (2005) Altruism, self-interest, and the Reasonable Person Model of environmentally responsible behavior. Sci Commun 26(4):368–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Darnton A (2004) The impact of sustainable development on public behaviour: report 1 of desk research. Sustainable Development Unit of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the Government of United KingdomGoogle Scholar
  16. DeYoung R (1985) Satisfaction from conservation activities in North America. Environ Conserv 12(3):259–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. DeYoung R (2000) New ways to promote proenvironmental behavior: expanding and evaluating motives for environmentally responsible behavior. J Soc Issues 56(3):509–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ewing R, Cervero R (2010) Travel and the built environment: a meta-analysis. J Am Plan Assoc 76(3):265–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ferreira A, Bertolini L, Næss P (2017) Immotility as resilience? A key consideration for transport policy and research. Appl Mobil 2(1):16–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Flamm B (2009) The impacts of environmental knowledge and attitudes on vehicle ownership and use. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ 14(4):272–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fleisher A, Wier ML, Hunter M (2016) A vision for transportation safety: framework for identifying best practice strategies to advance vision zero. Transp Res Rec 2582(1):72–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gilderbloom J, Grooms W, Mog J, Meares W (2016) The green dividend of urban biking? Evidence of improved community and sustainable development. Local Environ 21(8):991–1008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Goodall C (2010) How to live a low-carbon life: the individual’s guide to tackling climate change. Earthscan, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Haskell WL, Lee I-M, Pate RR, Powell KE, Blair SN, Franklin BA, … Bauman A (2007) Physical activity and public health: updated recommendation for adults from the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Circulation 116(9):1081Google Scholar
  25. Helliwell JF, Putnam RD (2004) The social context of well-being. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci 359:1435–1446Google Scholar
  26. Herrman TaLR (2015) What is livability? Sustainable cities initiative. University of Oregon, Eugene, OregonGoogle Scholar
  27. IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: mitigation of climate change: Working Group III Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  28. Kania J, Kramer M (2013) Embracing emergence: how collective impact addresses complexity. Stanf Soc Innov Rev 21:1–8Google Scholar
  29. Kaplan S (2000) New ways to promote proenvironmental behavior: human nature and environmentally responsible behavior. J Soc Issues 56(3):491–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kaplan S, Kaplan R (2009) Creating a larger role for environmental psychology: the Reasonable Person Model as an integrative framework. J Environ Psychol 29(3):329–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Larouche R, Mammen G, Rowe DA, Faulkner G (2018) Effectiveness of active school transport interventions: a systematic review and update. BMC Public Health 18(1):206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Litman T (2010) Quantifying the benefits of nonmotorized transportation for achieving mobility management objectives, vol 28. Victoria Transport Policy Institute, VictoriaGoogle Scholar
  33. Litman T (2012) Evaluating non-motorized transportation benefits and costs. Victoria Transport Policy Institute, VictoriaGoogle Scholar
  34. Maizlish N, Woodcock J, Co S, Ostro B, Fanai A, Fairley D (2013) Health co-benefits and transportation-related reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in the San Francisco Bay Area. Am J Public Health 103(4):703–709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Martin A, Goryakin Y, Suhrcke M (2014) Does active commuting improve psychological wellbeing? Longitudinal evidence from eighteen waves of the British Household Panel Survey. Prev Med 69:296–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Morris EA, Guerra E (2014) Mood and mode: does how we travel affect how we feel? Transportation 42(1):25–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mueller N, Rojas-Rueda D, Cole-Hunter T, De Nazelle A, Dons E, Gerike R, … Nieuwenhuijsen M (2015) Health impact assessment of active transportation: a systematic review. Prev Med 76:103–114Google Scholar
  38. National Transportation Statistics (2016) US Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation StatisticsGoogle Scholar
  39. Pelletier JE, Laska MN, Nanney MS, Pratt R (2018) Cross-sector collaboration on Safe Routes to School policy advocacy and implementation: a mixed methods evaluation from Minnesota. J Transp Health 9:132–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pucher J, Dill J, Handy S (2010) Infrastructure, programs, and policies to increase bicycling: an international review. Prev Med 50:S106–S125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Putnam RD (2001) Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community. Simon and Schuster, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  42. Riggs W (2016) Inclusively walkable: exploring the equity of walkable housing in the San Francisco Bay Area. Local Environ 21(5):527–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rose L (2014) Community knowledge: the building blocks of collective impact. Philanthropist 26(1):75–82Google Scholar
  44. Ross A, Rodríguez A, Searle M (2017) Associations between the physical, sociocultural, and safety environments and active transportation to school. Am J Health Educ 48(3):198–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schneider RJ (2013) Theory of routine mode choice decisions: an operational framework to increase sustainable transportation. Transp Policy 25:128–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Servaas M (2000) The significance of non-motorised transport for developing countries: strategies for policy development. World Bank, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  47. Shaheen S, Cohen A (2019) Shared micromobility policy toolkit: docked and dockless bike and scooter sharing. Uinversity of California Transportation Sustainability Research Center, Berkeley, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  48. Shields K, Langer H, Watson J, Stelzner K (2009) European green city index: assessing the environmental impact of Europe’s major cities. Siemens AG, MunichGoogle Scholar
  49. Shoup DC (1997) Evaluating the effects of parking cash out: eight case studies. University of California Transportation Center, Berkeley, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  50. Shove E (2003) Converging conventions of comfort, cleanliness and convenience. J Consum Policy 26(4):395–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Shulman S, Deyette J, Ekwurzel B, Friedman D, Mellon M, Rogers J, Shaw S (2012) Cooler smarter: practical steps for low-carbon living. Island Press, Washington, DCCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Steg L, Gifford R (2005) Sustainable transportation and quality of life. J Transp Geogr 13(1):59–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Stewart OT (2018) Safe routes to school (SRTS). In: Children’s active transportation. Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, pp 193–203Google Scholar
  54. St-Louis E, Manaugh K, van Lierop D, El-Geneidy A (2014) The happy commuter: a comparison of commuter satisfaction across modes. Transport Res F: Traffic Psychol Behav 26:160–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Telfer B, Rissel C, Bindon J, Bosch T (2006) Encouraging cycling through a pilot cycling proficiency training program among adults in central Sydney. J Sci Med Sport 9(1–2):151–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Tumlin J (2011) Sustainable transportation planning: tools for creating vibrant, healthy, and resilient communities, vol 16. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  57. Turrell G, Hewitt B, Haynes M, Nathan A, Giles-Corti B (2014) Change in walking for transport: a longitudinal study of the influence of neighbourhood disadvantage and individual-level socioeconomic position in mid-aged adults. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 11(1):151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Walk Score Methodology (2019) Retrieved from https://www.walkscore.com/methodology.shtml
  59. Wilson L-A, Giles-Corti B, Turrell G (2012) The association between objectively measured neighbourhood features and walking for transport in mid-aged adults. Local Environ 17(2):131–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Winters M, Teschke K, Brauer M, Fuller D (2016) Bike Score®: associations between urban bikeability and cycling behavior in 24 cities. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 13(1):18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Zademach H-M, Musch A-K (2018) Bicycle-sharing systems in an alternative/diverse economy perspective: a sympathetic critique. Local Environ 23(7):734–746CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Connected to PlaceSan FranciscoUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Astrid Skjerven
    • 1
  1. 1.OsloMet -Oslo Metropolitan UniversityOsloNorway