IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v103y2022i7p1732-1749.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A multilevel analysis of the determinants of the attitude toward separate cycle paths in Taiwan

Author

Listed:
  • Huang‐Ting Yan
  • Yu‐Chin Hsu
  • Yu‐Hung Chang

Abstract

Objective This study examines why people support a policy for separate cycle paths but oppose the necessary means for its implementation—the narrowing of vehicle lanes and reduction of roadside parking spaces. Methods This study used cross‐sectional data from the 2009 Taiwan Bicycle Use Survey, covering 23 counties (n = 9236) and applying multilevel multinomial logistic regression models. Results Not in my backyard (NIMBY) or not in my interest (NIMI) were likely to agree on building separate cycle paths but disagree on the means for its implementation. While NIMBYs may support the policy if they are reasonably compensated with a much larger road area and an adequate number of parking spaces, NIMIs’ attitudes are more favorable if their government has sufficient financial resources to fund the proposal. Conclusion Local governments need to apply a compensation approach or have more funds to change the public's attitude toward the implementation of policies involving bikeway infrastructure.

Suggested Citation

  • Huang‐Ting Yan & Yu‐Chin Hsu & Yu‐Hung Chang, 2022. "A multilevel analysis of the determinants of the attitude toward separate cycle paths in Taiwan," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(7), pages 1732-1749, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:103:y:2022:i:7:p:1732-1749
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.13231
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13231
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.13231?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Broach, Joseph & Dill, Jennifer & Gliebe, John, 2012. "Where do cyclists ride? A route choice model developed with revealed preference GPS data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1730-1740.
    2. Shen, Qing & Chen, Peng & Pan, Haixiao, 2016. "Factors affecting car ownership and mode choice in rail transit-supported suburbs of a large Chinese city," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 31-44.
    3. Bargain, Olivier & Aminjonov, Ulugbek, 2020. "Trust and compliance to public health policies in times of COVID-19," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    4. Rachel Aldred & Bridget Elliott & James Woodcock & Anna Goodman, 2017. "Cycling provision separated from motor traffic: a systematic review exploring whether stated preferences vary by gender and age," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 29-55, January.
    5. Brownstone, David & Ghosh, Arindam & Golob, Thomas F. & Kazimi, Camilla & Van Amelsfort, Dirk, 2003. "Drivers' willingness-to-pay to reduce travel time: evidence from the San Diego I-15 congestion pricing project," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 373-387, May.
    6. Margalit, Yotam, 2013. "Explaining Social Policy Preferences: Evidence from the Great Recession," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(1), pages 80-103, February.
    7. Carola Braun, 2017. "Not in My Backyard: CCS Sites and Public Perception of CCS," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(12), pages 2264-2275, December.
    8. Liu, Zhilin & Liao, Lu & Mei, Ciqi, 2018. "Not-in-my-backyard but let’s talk: Explaining public opposition to facility siting in urban China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 471-478.
    9. Fairbrother, Malcolm, 2019. "When Will People Pay to Pollute? Environmental Taxes, Political Trust and Experimental Evidence from Britain," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(2), pages 661-682, April.
    10. Groothuis, Peter A. & Groothuis, Jana D. & Whitehead, John C., 2008. "Green vs. green: Measuring the compensation required to site electrical generation windmills in a viewshed," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 1545-1550, April.
    11. Ying Liang, 2016. "Trust in Chinese Government and Quality of Life (QOL) of Sichuan Earthquake Survivors: Does Trust in Government Help to Promote QOL?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 127(2), pages 541-564, June.
    12. Eren Inci & Jos van Ommeren & Martijn Kobus, 2017. "The external cruising costs of parking," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(6), pages 1301-1323.
    13. Meghan Winters & Gavin Davidson & Diana Kao & Kay Teschke, 2011. "Motivators and deterrents of bicycling: comparing influences on decisions to ride," Transportation, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 153-168, January.
    14. Upreti, Bishnu Raj, 2004. "Conflict over biomass energy development in the United Kingdom: some observations and lessons from England and Wales," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 785-800, April.
    15. Steinbach, Rebecca & Green, Judith & Datta, Jessica & Edwards, Phil, 2011. "Cycling and the city: A case study of how gendered, ethnic and class identities can shape healthy transport choices," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(7), pages 1123-1130, April.
    16. Weingast, Barry R., 2009. "Second generation fiscal federalism: The implications of fiscal incentives," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 279-293, May.
    17. Iosif Botetzagias & Chrisovaladis Malesios & Anthi Kolokotroni & Yiannis Moysiadis, 2015. "The role of NIMBY in opposing the siting of wind farms: evidence from Greece," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(2), pages 229-251, February.
    18. Hetherington, Marc J., 1998. "The Political Relevance of Political Trust," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 92(4), pages 791-808, December.
    19. Thomas Götschi & Jan Garrard & Billie Giles-Corti, 2016. "Cycling as a Part of Daily Life: A Review of Health Perspectives," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1), pages 45-71, January.
    20. J. Hunt & J. Abraham, 2007. "Influences on bicycle use," Transportation, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 453-470, July.
    21. James Ferris, 1983. "Demands for public spending: An attitudinal approach," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 135-154, January.
    22. Fishman, Elliot & Washington, Simon & Haworth, Narelle & Watson, Angela, 2015. "Factors influencing bike share membership: An analysis of Melbourne and Brisbane," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 17-30.
    23. Sanders, Rebecca L & Cooper, Jill F, 2013. "Do All Roadway Users Want the Same Things?," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt1zn7w26v, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anowar, Sabreena & Eluru, Naveen & Hatzopoulou, Marianne, 2017. "Quantifying the value of a clean ride: How far would you bicycle to avoid exposure to traffic-related air pollution?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 66-78.
    2. Rupi, Federico & Freo, Marzia & Poliziani, Cristian & Postorino, Maria Nadia & Schweizer, Joerg, 2023. "Analysis of gender-specific bicycle route choices using revealed preference surveys based on GPS traces," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 1-14.
    3. Felipe González & Carlos Melo-Riquelme & Louis Grange, 2016. "A combined destination and route choice model for a bicycle sharing system," Transportation, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 407-423, May.
    4. Houde, Maxime & Apparicio, Philippe & Séguin, Anne-Marie, 2018. "A ride for whom: Has cycling network expansion reduced inequities in accessibility in Montreal, Canada?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 9-21.
    5. Seungkyu Ryu, 2020. "A Bicycle Origin–Destination Matrix Estimation Based on a Two-Stage Procedure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-14, April.
    6. Bram Boettge & Damon M. Hall & Thomas Crawford, 2017. "Assessing the Bicycle Network in St. Louis: A PlaceBased User-Centered Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-18, February.
    7. Yeran Sun & Yunyan Du & Yu Wang & Liyuan Zhuang, 2017. "Examining Associations of Environmental Characteristics with Recreational Cycling Behaviour by Street-Level Strava Data," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-12, June.
    8. Teixeira, Inaian Pignatti & Rodrigues da Silva, Antônio Nélson & Schwanen, Tim & Manzato, Gustavo Garcia & Dörrzapf, Linda & Zeile, Peter & Dekoninck, Luc & Botteldooren, Dick, 2020. "Does cycling infrastructure reduce stress biomarkers in commuting cyclists? A comparison of five European cities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    9. Iwińska, Katarzyna & Blicharska, Malgorzata & Pierotti, Livia & Tainio, Marko & de Nazelle, Audrey, 2018. "Cycling in Warsaw, Poland – Perceived enablers and barriers according to cyclists and non-cyclists," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 291-301.
    10. Timothy Besley & Sacha Dray, 2022. "Trust as state capacity: The political economy of compliance," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2022-135, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    11. Costa-Font, Joan & Vilaplana-Prieto, Cristina, 2023. "Health System Trust and Compliance with COVID-19 Restrictions," IZA Discussion Papers 15961, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Elise Desjardins & Christopher D. Higgins & Darren M. Scott & Emma Apatu & Antonio Páez, 2022. "Correlates of bicycling trip flows in Hamilton, Ontario: fastest, quietest, or balanced routes?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 867-895, June.
    13. Hudde, Ansgar, 2022. "The unequal cycling boom in Germany," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    14. Russell, Marie & Davies, Cheryl & Wild, Kirsty & Shaw, Caroline, 2021. "Pedalling towards equity: Exploring women's cycling in a New Zealand city," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    15. Grimalda, Gianluca & Murtin, Fabrice & Pipke, David & Putterman, Louis & Sutter, Matthias, 2023. "The politicized pandemic: Ideological polarization and the behavioral response to COVID-19," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    16. Yeran Sun & Amin Mobasheri, 2017. "Utilizing Crowdsourced Data for Studies of Cycling and Air Pollution Exposure: A Case Study Using Strava Data," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-19, March.
    17. Dandan Xu & Yang Bian & Shinan Shu, 2020. "Research on the Psychological Model of Free-floating Bike-Sharing Using Behavior: A Case Study of Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-18, April.
    18. Lindsey Conrow & Siân Mooney & Elizabeth A Wentz, 2021. "The association between residential housing prices, bicycle infrastructure and ridership volumes," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 58(4), pages 787-808, March.
    19. McArthur, David Philip & Hong, Jinhyun, 2019. "Visualising where commuting cyclists travel using crowdsourced data," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 233-241.
    20. Zuo, Ting & Wei, Heng, 2019. "Bikeway prioritization to increase bicycle network connectivity and bicycle-transit connection: A multi-criteria decision analysis approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 52-71.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:103:y:2022:i:7:p:1732-1749. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.