A growing body of evidence links the built environment to physical activity levels, health outcomes, and transportation behaviors. However, little of this research has focused on cycling, a sustainable transportation option with great potential for growth in North America. This study examines associations between decisions to bicycle (versus drive) and the built environment, with explicit consideration of three different spatial zones that may be relevant in travel behavior: trip origins, trip destinations, and along the route between. We analyzed 3,280 utilitarian bicycle and car trips in Metro Vancouver, Canada made by 1,902 adults, including both current and potential cyclists. Objective measures were developed for built environment characteristics related to the physical environment, land use patterns, the road network, and bicycle-specific facilities. Multilevel logistic regression was used to model the likelihood that a trip was made by bicycle, adjusting for trip distance and personal demographics. Separate models were constructed for each spatial zone, and a global model examined the relative influence of the three zones. In total, 31% (1,023 out of 3,280) of trips were made by bicycle. Increased odds of bicycling were associated with less hilliness; higher intersection density; less highways and arterials; presence of bicycle signage, traffic calming, and cyclist-activated traffic lights; more neighborhood commercial, educational, and industrial land uses; greater land use mix; and higher population density. Different factors were important within each spatial zone. Overall, the characteristics of routes were more influential than origin or destination characteristics. These findings indicate that the built environment has a significant influence on healthy travel decisions, and spatial context is important. Future research should explicitly consider relevant spatial zones when investigating the relationship between physical activity and urban form.
Notes
Cites: Prev Med. 2001 Feb;32(2):191-20011162346
Cites: Am J Health Promot. 2010 Sep-Oct;25(1):40-720809831
Cites: Ann Behav Med. 2003 Spring;25(2):80-9112704009
Cites: Am J Public Health. 2003 Sep;93(9):1478-8312948966
Cites: Am J Public Health. 2003 Sep;93(9):1546-5112948978
Cites: Am J Health Promot. 2003 Sep-Oct;18(1):21-3713677960
Cites: Am J Health Promot. 2003 Sep-Oct;18(1):47-5713677962
Cites: Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004 Apr;36(4):725-3015064601
Cites: JAMA. 1999 Jan 27;281(4):327-349929085
Cites: Am J Prev Med. 2005 Feb;28(2 Suppl 2):117-2515694519
Cites: Health Place. 2007 Sep;13(3):588-60216935020
Cites: Environ Sci Technol. 2007 Apr 1;41(7):2422-817438795
Cites: Int J Health Geogr. 2007;6:4117883870
Cites: Health Place. 2008 Mar;14(1):85-9517590378
Cites: Int J Health Geogr. 2008;7:1018312660
Cites: Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008 Jul;40(7 Suppl):S550-6618562973
Cites: Health Educ Res. 2008 Aug;23(4):697-70817947248
Cites: Prev Med. 2008 Sep;47(3):252-918417199
Cites: J Public Health Policy. 2009;30 Suppl 1:S95-11019190585
Cites: Am J Prev Med. 2009 Apr;36(4 Suppl):S99-123.e1219285216
Cites: Health Place. 2009 Dec;15(4):1130-4119632875
Cites: Lancet. 2009 Dec 5;374(9705):1930-4319942277