IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i6p2545-d1360325.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bicycle Infrastructure Design Principles in Urban Bikeability Indices: A Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • Tufail Ahmed

    (UHasselt, The Transportation Research Institute (IMOB), Martelarenlaan 42, 3500 Hasselt, Belgium)

  • Ali Pirdavani

    (UHasselt, The Transportation Research Institute (IMOB), Martelarenlaan 42, 3500 Hasselt, Belgium
    UHasselt, Faculty of Engineering Technology, Agoralaan, 3590 Diepenbeek, Belgium)

  • Geert Wets

    (UHasselt, The Transportation Research Institute (IMOB), Martelarenlaan 42, 3500 Hasselt, Belgium)

  • Davy Janssens

    (UHasselt, The Transportation Research Institute (IMOB), Martelarenlaan 42, 3500 Hasselt, Belgium)

Abstract

Bicycling is a sustainable form of micromobility and offers numerous health and environmental benefits. Scientific studies investigating bikeability have grown substantially, especially over the past decade. This paper presents a systematic literature review of the developed urban bikeability indices (BIs). The paper provides insight into the scientific literature on bikeability as a tool to measure bicycle environment friendliness; more importantly, the paper seeks to know if the BIs consider bicycle infrastructure design principles. Data extraction included identifying the geographical location, essential indicators, sample size and distribution, data source, the unit of analysis, measurement scale, methods used to weigh indicators, and identification of studies using bicycle design principles in BIs. The database search yielded 1649 research articles using different keywords and combinations, while 15 studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. The studies were found to be conducted in various geographical locations. The unit of analysis for developing the index varied across studies, from street segments or bicycle lanes to zones within the city or even the entire city. The most commonly utilized method in developing urban BIs was a scoring and weighting system to weigh the indicators. The weighting methods include an equal weight system, survey-based and literature review-based methods, expert surveys, the analytic hierarchy process, and a weighted linear combination model. The essential criterion is bicycle infrastructure, such as bike lanes, routes, and bicycle paths as 14 studies considered it for the construction of the BIs. The review findings suggest a lack of consideration of all five bicycle infrastructure design principles, as only three studies considered them all, while others only included a subset. Safety and comfort are the most commonly considered principles, while coherence is the least considered principles in the BIs. It is crucial to consider all five bicycle infrastructure design principles to create a bicycle-friendly environment and attract more people to this sustainable mode of transportation.

Suggested Citation

  • Tufail Ahmed & Ali Pirdavani & Geert Wets & Davy Janssens, 2024. "Bicycle Infrastructure Design Principles in Urban Bikeability Indices: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-23, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:6:p:2545-:d:1360325
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/6/2545/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/6/2545/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giulia Reggiani & Tim Oijen & Homayoun Hamedmoghadam & Winnie Daamen & Hai L. Vu & Serge Hoogendoorn, 2022. "Understanding bikeability: a methodology to assess urban networks," Transportation, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 897-925, June.
    2. Tufail Ahmed & Ali Pirdavani & Davy Janssens & Geert Wets, 2023. "Utilizing Intelligent Portable Bicycle Lights to Assess Urban Bicycle Infrastructure Surfaces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-22, March.
    3. Khaled Shaaban, 2020. "Why Don’t People Ride Bicycles in High-Income Developing Countries, and Can Bike-Sharing Be the Solution? The Case of Qatar," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-18, February.
    4. Debra K. Kellstedt & John O. Spengler & Jay E. Maddock, 2021. "Comparing Perceived and Objective Measures of Bikeability on a University Campus: A Case Study," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, June.
    5. Tufail Ahmed & Mehdi Moeinaddini & Meshal Almoshaogeh & Arshad Jamal & Imran Nawaz & Fawaz Alharbi, 2021. "A New Pedestrian Crossing Level of Service (PCLOS) Method for Promoting Safe Pedestrian Crossing in Urban Areas," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-18, August.
    6. Lina Wahlgren & Peter Schantz, 2014. "Exploring Bikeability in a Suburban Metropolitan Area Using the Active Commuting Route Environment Scale (ACRES)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-25, August.
    7. Tijana Đorđević & Nemanja Tomić & Dajana Tešić, 2023. "Walkability and Bikeability for Sustainable Spatial Planning in the City of Novi Sad (Serbia)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1, February.
    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. Muhammad Ijaz & Lan Liu & Yahya Almarhabi & Arshad Jamal & Sheikh Muhammad Usman & Muhammad Zahid, 2022. "Temporal Instability of Factors Affecting Injury Severity in Helmet-Wearing and Non-Helmet-Wearing Motorcycle Crashes: A Random Parameter Approach with Heterogeneity in Means and Variances," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-24, August.
    2. Mona Nabil Demaidi & Khaled Al-Sahili, 2021. "Integrating SDGs in Higher Education—Case of Climate Change Awareness and Gender Equality in a Developing Country According to RMEI-TARGET Strategy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-21, March.
    3. Dan Andersson & Lina Wahlgren & Karin Sofia Elisabeth Olsson & Peter Schantz, 2023. "Pedestrians’ Perceptions of Motorized Traffic Variables in Relation to Appraisals of Urban Route Environments," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-27, February.
    4. Thanapol Promraksa & Thaned Satiennam & Wichuda Satiennam & Patiphan Kaewwichian & Nopadon Kronprasert, 2022. "Factors Influencing Stopping Locations of Motorcycle Riders on Signalized Urban Intersection Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-16, November.
    5. Jacek Oskarbski & Krystian Birr & Karol Żarski, 2021. "Bicycle Traffic Model for Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-36, September.
    6. Mohammed Saleh Alfawzan & Ahmad Aftab, 2022. "Efficiency Assessment of New Signal Timing in Saudi Arabia Implementing Flashing Green Interval Complimented with Law Enforcement Cameras," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-15, November.
    7. Jonas Schmid-Querg & Andreas Keler & Georgios Grigoropoulos, 2021. "The Munich Bikeability Index: A Practical Approach for Measuring Urban Bikeability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, January.
    8. Fernando Fonseca & Paulo Ribeiro & Carolina Neiva, 2023. "A Planning Practice Method to Assess the Potential for Cycling and to Design a Bicycle Network in a Starter Cycling City in Portugal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-17, March.
    9. Tufail Ahmed & Ali Pirdavani & Davy Janssens & Geert Wets, 2023. "Utilizing Intelligent Portable Bicycle Lights to Assess Urban Bicycle Infrastructure Surfaces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-22, March.
    10. Alex Antonio Florindo & Ligia Vizeu Barrozo & Gavin Turrell & João Paulo dos Anjos Souza Barbosa & William Cabral-Miranda & Chester Luiz Galvão Cesar & Moisés Goldbaum, 2018. "Cycling for Transportation in Sao Paulo City: Associations with Bike Paths, Train and Subway Stations," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-12, March.
    11. Kalina Grzesiuk & Dorota Jegorow & Monika Wawer & Anna Głowacz, 2023. "Energy-Efficient City Transportation Solutions in the Context of Energy-Conserving and Mobility Behaviours of Generation Z," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-28, August.
    12. Zhehao Zhang & Thomas Fisher & Haiming Wang, 2023. "Walk Score, Environmental Quality and Walking in a Campus Setting," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-19, March.
    13. Arshad Jamal & Muhammad Ijaz & Meshal Almosageah & Hassan M. Al-Ahmadi & Muhammad Zahid & Irfan Ullah & Rabia Emhamed Al Mamlook, 2022. "Implementing the Maximum Likelihood Method for Critical Gap Estimation under Heterogeneous Traffic Conditions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-13, November.
    14. Bertha Santos & Sílvia Passos & Jorge Gonçalves & Isabel Matias, 2022. "Spatial Multi-Criteria Analysis for Road Segment Cycling Suitability Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-20, August.
    15. Khaled Shaaban & Khadija Abdur-Rouf, 2020. "Assessing Walking and Cycling around Schools," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-14, December.
    16. Danish Farooq & Sarbast Moslem & Arshad Jamal & Farhan Muhammad Butt & Yahya Almarhabi & Rana Faisal Tufail & Meshal Almoshaogeh, 2021. "Assessment of Significant Factors Affecting Frequent Lane-Changing Related to Road Safety: An Integrated Approach of the AHP–BWM Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-17, October.
    17. Mihaela-Iuliana Desculțu Grigore & Amalia Niță & Ionuț-Adrian Drăguleasa & Mirela Mazilu, 2024. "Geotourism, a New Perspective of Post-COVID-19-Pandemic Relaunch through Travel Agencies—Case Study: Bucegi Natural Park, Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-52, January.
    18. Cunha, Isabel & Silva, Cecília, 2023. "Assessing the equity impact of cycling infrastructure allocation: Implications for planning practice," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 15-26.
    19. Khaled Shaaban & Hassan Hamad, 2020. "Critical Gap Comparison between One-, Two-, and Three-Lane Roundabouts in Qatar," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-14, May.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:6:p:2545-:d:1360325. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.