Evaluating the impacts of new walking and cycling infrastructure on carbon dioxide emissions from motorized travel

A controlled longitudinal study

Christian Brand, Anna Goodman, David Ogilvie, Fiona Bull, Ashley Cooper, Andy Day, Nanette Mutrie, Jane Powell, John Preston, Harry Rutter

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Walking and cycling is widely assumed to substitute for at least some motorized travel and thereby reduce energy use and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. While the evidence suggests that a supportive built environment may be needed to promote walking and cycling, it is unclear whether and how interventions in the built environment that attract walkers and cyclists may reduce transport CO2 emissions. Our aim was therefore to evaluate the effects of providing new infrastructure for walking and cycling on CO2 emissions from motorized travel.A cohort of 1849 adults completed questionnaires at baseline (2010) and one-year follow-up (2011), before and after the construction of new high-quality routes provided as part of the Sustrans Connect2 programme in three UK municipalities. A second cohort of 1510 adults completed questionnaires at baseline and two-year follow-up (2012). The participants reported their past-week travel behaviour and car characteristics from which CO2 emissions by mode and purpose were derived using methods described previously. A set of exposure measures of proximity to and use of the new routes were derived.Overall transport CO2 emissions decreased slightly over the study period, consistent with a secular trend in the case study regions. As found previously the new infrastructure was well used at one- and two-year follow-up, and was associated with population-level increases in walking, cycling and physical activity at two-year follow-up. However, these effects did not translate into sizeable CO2 effects as neither living near the infrastructure nor using it predicted changes in CO2 emissions from motorized travel, either overall or disaggregated by journey purpose. This lack of a discernible effect on travel CO2 emissions are consistent with an interpretation that some of those living nearer the infrastructure may simply have changed where they walked or cycled, while others may have walked or cycled more but few, if any, may have substituted active for motorized modes of travel as a result of the interventions.While the findings to date cannot exclude the possibility of small effects of the new routes on CO2 emissions, a more comprehensive approach of a higher 'dosage' of active travel promotion linked with policies targeted at mode shift away from private motorized transport (such as urban car restraint and parking pricing, car sharing/pooling for travel to work, integrating bike sharing into public transport system) may be needed to achieve the substantial CO2 savings needed to meet climate change mitigation and energy security goals.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)284-295
Number of pages12
JournalApplied Energy
Volume128
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sep 2014

Keywords

  • Impact evaluation
  • Infrastructure
  • Longitudinal analysis
  • Transport
  • Walking and cycling

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Building and Construction
  • Energy(all)
  • Mechanical Engineering
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Cite this

Evaluating the impacts of new walking and cycling infrastructure on carbon dioxide emissions from motorized travel : A controlled longitudinal study. / Brand, Christian; Goodman, Anna; Ogilvie, David; Bull, Fiona; Cooper, Ashley; Day, Andy; Mutrie, Nanette; Powell, Jane; Preston, John; Rutter, Harry.

In: Applied Energy, Vol. 128, 01.09.2014, p. 284-295.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Brand, Christian ; Goodman, Anna ; Ogilvie, David ; Bull, Fiona ; Cooper, Ashley ; Day, Andy ; Mutrie, Nanette ; Powell, Jane ; Preston, John ; Rutter, Harry. / Evaluating the impacts of new walking and cycling infrastructure on carbon dioxide emissions from motorized travel : A controlled longitudinal study. In: Applied Energy. 2014 ; Vol. 128. pp. 284-295.
@article{b4381bba8d764ce9b4bb1316b9c26c01,
title = "Evaluating the impacts of new walking and cycling infrastructure on carbon dioxide emissions from motorized travel: A controlled longitudinal study",
abstract = "Walking and cycling is widely assumed to substitute for at least some motorized travel and thereby reduce energy use and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. While the evidence suggests that a supportive built environment may be needed to promote walking and cycling, it is unclear whether and how interventions in the built environment that attract walkers and cyclists may reduce transport CO2 emissions. Our aim was therefore to evaluate the effects of providing new infrastructure for walking and cycling on CO2 emissions from motorized travel.A cohort of 1849 adults completed questionnaires at baseline (2010) and one-year follow-up (2011), before and after the construction of new high-quality routes provided as part of the Sustrans Connect2 programme in three UK municipalities. A second cohort of 1510 adults completed questionnaires at baseline and two-year follow-up (2012). The participants reported their past-week travel behaviour and car characteristics from which CO2 emissions by mode and purpose were derived using methods described previously. A set of exposure measures of proximity to and use of the new routes were derived.Overall transport CO2 emissions decreased slightly over the study period, consistent with a secular trend in the case study regions. As found previously the new infrastructure was well used at one- and two-year follow-up, and was associated with population-level increases in walking, cycling and physical activity at two-year follow-up. However, these effects did not translate into sizeable CO2 effects as neither living near the infrastructure nor using it predicted changes in CO2 emissions from motorized travel, either overall or disaggregated by journey purpose. This lack of a discernible effect on travel CO2 emissions are consistent with an interpretation that some of those living nearer the infrastructure may simply have changed where they walked or cycled, while others may have walked or cycled more but few, if any, may have substituted active for motorized modes of travel as a result of the interventions.While the findings to date cannot exclude the possibility of small effects of the new routes on CO2 emissions, a more comprehensive approach of a higher 'dosage' of active travel promotion linked with policies targeted at mode shift away from private motorized transport (such as urban car restraint and parking pricing, car sharing/pooling for travel to work, integrating bike sharing into public transport system) may be needed to achieve the substantial CO2 savings needed to meet climate change mitigation and energy security goals.",
keywords = "Impact evaluation, Infrastructure, Longitudinal analysis, Transport, Walking and cycling",
author = "Christian Brand and Anna Goodman and David Ogilvie and Fiona Bull and Ashley Cooper and Andy Day and Nanette Mutrie and Jane Powell and John Preston and Harry Rutter",
year = "2014",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.04.072",
language = "English",
volume = "128",
pages = "284--295",
journal = "Applied Energy",
issn = "0306-2619",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluating the impacts of new walking and cycling infrastructure on carbon dioxide emissions from motorized travel

T2 - A controlled longitudinal study

AU - Brand, Christian

AU - Goodman, Anna

AU - Ogilvie, David

AU - Bull, Fiona

AU - Cooper, Ashley

AU - Day, Andy

AU - Mutrie, Nanette

AU - Powell, Jane

AU - Preston, John

AU - Rutter, Harry

PY - 2014/9/1

Y1 - 2014/9/1

N2 - Walking and cycling is widely assumed to substitute for at least some motorized travel and thereby reduce energy use and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. While the evidence suggests that a supportive built environment may be needed to promote walking and cycling, it is unclear whether and how interventions in the built environment that attract walkers and cyclists may reduce transport CO2 emissions. Our aim was therefore to evaluate the effects of providing new infrastructure for walking and cycling on CO2 emissions from motorized travel.A cohort of 1849 adults completed questionnaires at baseline (2010) and one-year follow-up (2011), before and after the construction of new high-quality routes provided as part of the Sustrans Connect2 programme in three UK municipalities. A second cohort of 1510 adults completed questionnaires at baseline and two-year follow-up (2012). The participants reported their past-week travel behaviour and car characteristics from which CO2 emissions by mode and purpose were derived using methods described previously. A set of exposure measures of proximity to and use of the new routes were derived.Overall transport CO2 emissions decreased slightly over the study period, consistent with a secular trend in the case study regions. As found previously the new infrastructure was well used at one- and two-year follow-up, and was associated with population-level increases in walking, cycling and physical activity at two-year follow-up. However, these effects did not translate into sizeable CO2 effects as neither living near the infrastructure nor using it predicted changes in CO2 emissions from motorized travel, either overall or disaggregated by journey purpose. This lack of a discernible effect on travel CO2 emissions are consistent with an interpretation that some of those living nearer the infrastructure may simply have changed where they walked or cycled, while others may have walked or cycled more but few, if any, may have substituted active for motorized modes of travel as a result of the interventions.While the findings to date cannot exclude the possibility of small effects of the new routes on CO2 emissions, a more comprehensive approach of a higher 'dosage' of active travel promotion linked with policies targeted at mode shift away from private motorized transport (such as urban car restraint and parking pricing, car sharing/pooling for travel to work, integrating bike sharing into public transport system) may be needed to achieve the substantial CO2 savings needed to meet climate change mitigation and energy security goals.

AB - Walking and cycling is widely assumed to substitute for at least some motorized travel and thereby reduce energy use and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. While the evidence suggests that a supportive built environment may be needed to promote walking and cycling, it is unclear whether and how interventions in the built environment that attract walkers and cyclists may reduce transport CO2 emissions. Our aim was therefore to evaluate the effects of providing new infrastructure for walking and cycling on CO2 emissions from motorized travel.A cohort of 1849 adults completed questionnaires at baseline (2010) and one-year follow-up (2011), before and after the construction of new high-quality routes provided as part of the Sustrans Connect2 programme in three UK municipalities. A second cohort of 1510 adults completed questionnaires at baseline and two-year follow-up (2012). The participants reported their past-week travel behaviour and car characteristics from which CO2 emissions by mode and purpose were derived using methods described previously. A set of exposure measures of proximity to and use of the new routes were derived.Overall transport CO2 emissions decreased slightly over the study period, consistent with a secular trend in the case study regions. As found previously the new infrastructure was well used at one- and two-year follow-up, and was associated with population-level increases in walking, cycling and physical activity at two-year follow-up. However, these effects did not translate into sizeable CO2 effects as neither living near the infrastructure nor using it predicted changes in CO2 emissions from motorized travel, either overall or disaggregated by journey purpose. This lack of a discernible effect on travel CO2 emissions are consistent with an interpretation that some of those living nearer the infrastructure may simply have changed where they walked or cycled, while others may have walked or cycled more but few, if any, may have substituted active for motorized modes of travel as a result of the interventions.While the findings to date cannot exclude the possibility of small effects of the new routes on CO2 emissions, a more comprehensive approach of a higher 'dosage' of active travel promotion linked with policies targeted at mode shift away from private motorized transport (such as urban car restraint and parking pricing, car sharing/pooling for travel to work, integrating bike sharing into public transport system) may be needed to achieve the substantial CO2 savings needed to meet climate change mitigation and energy security goals.

KW - Impact evaluation

KW - Infrastructure

KW - Longitudinal analysis

KW - Transport

KW - Walking and cycling

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84900797689&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.04.072

DO - 10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.04.072

M3 - Article

VL - 128

SP - 284

EP - 295

JO - Applied Energy

JF - Applied Energy

SN - 0306-2619

ER -