01623030

Component

https://doi.org/10.3141/2662-14

Following global guidelines, several cities are investing in urban cycling. Cities are in different stages of cycling development and have adopted different approaches and packages of policies that are likely to be most effective at each stage. Urban cycling plans include investment in infrastructure, promotion, and education supporting the adoption of active modes for urban mobility. Some investments aim to meet current cyclists’ needs and others those of potential bicycle adopters. With respect to urban cyclists, several studies propose typologies, usually related to frequency, trip purpose, or motivation. This paper compares a set of cyclist typologies and the corresponding categorization methods and reviews 20 studies that considered different cyclists’ profiles. Most studies relied on expert judgment approaches or rule-based decisions; five considered multivariate analysis techniques for clustering groups, on the basis of data from surveys. Despite the variety of group categorizations, commonalities were found in most cases and divided cyclists into three main types: current cyclists (typically more proficient riders), potential cyclists (willing but not convinced), and noncyclists (unaware of or unwilling to shift to cycling). Dividing the population of potential cyclists into different typologies can better inform the different stages of planning for cycling infrastructure development by targeting more accurately the needs and requirements of different types of users. This is a key element in the management of a cycling network and cycling infrastructure, which are intended to be built on the basis of effective solutions and decisions to achieve desirable bicycle modal shares of regular trips.

01656974

17-00579

English

pp 125–133

2017

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board

9780309460415

Digital/other

Figures (2) ; References (43) ; Tables (2)

City planning; Classification; Cyclists; Market segmented groups; Modal split; Nonmotorized transportation; Urban areas

Typology

Pedestrians and Bicyclists; Planning and Forecasting; Safety and Human Factors

PRP, TRIS, TRB, ATRI

Dec 8 2016 10:06AM

• Bicycle Backlash: Qualitative Examination of Aggressive Driver–Bicyclist Interactions
• Classification Criteria and Application of Level of Service for Bicycle Lanes in China
• Comparing Crowdsourced Near-Miss and Collision Cycling Data and Official Bike Safety Reporting
• Current Efforts to Make Bikeshare More Equitable: Survey of System Owners and Operators
• Cycling in Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Route Choice Behavior and Implications for Infrastructure Planning
• Dwelling Type Matters: Untangling the Paradox of Intensification and Bicycle Mode Choice
• Enhancing Cycling Safety at Signalized Intersections: Analysis of Observed Behavior
• Existence and Use of Low-Pollution Route Options for Observed Bicycling Trips
• How Do People Cycle in Amsterdam, Netherlands? Estimating Cyclists’ Route Choice Determinants with GPS Data from an Urban Area
• Impact of Bike Facilities on Residential Property Prices
• Impacts of Level of Traffic Stress on Bikeshare Ridership in the Case of Capital Bikeshare in Montgomery County, Maryland
• Investigation of Alternative Bicycle Pavement Markings with the Use of a Bicycle Simulator
• Keep ’Em Separated: Desire Lines Analysis of Bidirectional Cycle Tracks in Montreal, Canada
• Low-Stress Bicycle Network Mapping: The District of Columbia’s Innovative Approach to Applying Level of Traffic Stress
• Mind the Gap: Assessing the Impacts of Bicycle Accessibility and Mobility on Mode Share in Washington, D.C.
• Observations of Public Bikesharing: Experiences from Ningbo, China
• The Reach of Bicycling in Rural, Small, and Low-Density Places
• Where Do Bikeshare Bikes Actually Go? Analysis of Capital Bikeshare Trips with GPS Data