IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i23p16421-d1290746.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of the Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory Method to Assess Factors Influencing the Development of Cycling Infrastructure in Cities

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Trembecka

    (Faculty of Geo-Data Science, Geodesy, and Environmental Engineering, AGH University of Krakow, 30-059 Krakow, Poland)

  • Grzegorz Ginda

    (Faculty of Management, AGH University of Krakow, 30-059 Krakow, Poland)

  • Anita Kwartnik-Pruc

    (Faculty of Geo-Data Science, Geodesy, and Environmental Engineering, AGH University of Krakow, 30-059 Krakow, Poland)

Abstract

Sustainable development and environmental considerations have resulted in many cities around the world recognising the importance of non-motorised modes of transport. Problems related to the proper development and maintenance of cycling infrastructure have already been the subject of various studies. However, they have mainly dealt with the identification of factors influencing the development of cycle paths and the optimisation of the design of safe and comfortable cycle routes. The influence of individual factors on each other and on the development of cycling infrastructure has not been studied. The research aims of this article are to identify which factors influence the development of bicycle infrastructure, their role and interdependence, and their prioritisation. It also looks at whether there are differences between the opinions of bicycle users and experts professionally involved in the development of bicycle paths in assessing the importance of the factors indicated. As a result of the study, eight factors influencing the development of bicycle infrastructure were identified. Based on the opinions of cyclists and experts, the nature of each factor was analysed. Taking into account the complex relationships between the factors, the key factors contributing to the development of bicycle infrastructure were shown: (1) the planning of bicycle paths, taking into account the separation of individual paths and their continuity, consistency, and length; (2) legal regulations promoting cycling in terms of transportation policy; (3) the elimination of obstacles; and (4) the design of bicycle paths, taking into account the safety, space management, terrain, and attractiveness of the surroundings. The results for both groups of respondents were compared. They indicate that both groups of respondents reported the same factors as the most important, with the only differences being in the order of the importance of the factors. The academic value of this work lies in showing the usability of the underrated original version of DEMATEL methodology in the considered area for key factors. The practical significance of this paper is the provision of a rather simple, yet reliable, tool for addressing the complexity of interrelated issues that make the development of urban infrastructure a cumbersome task.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Trembecka & Grzegorz Ginda & Anita Kwartnik-Pruc, 2023. "Application of the Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory Method to Assess Factors Influencing the Development of Cycling Infrastructure in Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-27, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:23:p:16421-:d:1290746
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/23/16421/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/23/16421/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dinara MAMRAYEVA & Larissa TASHENOVA, 2017. "Prospects Of Bicycle-Sharing In Urban Tourism In The Republic Of Kazakhstan: Myth Or Reality?," Transport Problems, Silesian University of Technology, Faculty of Transport, vol. 12(2), pages 65-76, June.
    2. Srđan Dimić & Dragan Pamučar & Srđan Ljubojević & Boban Đorović, 2016. "Strategic Transport Management Models—The Case Study of an Oil Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-27, September.
    3. Shaheen, Susan & Guzman, Stacey & Zhang, Hua, 2010. "Bikesharing in Europe, the Americas, and Asia: Past, Present, and Future," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt79v822k5, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    4. Sheng-Li Si & Xiao-Yue You & Hu-Chen Liu & Ping Zhang, 2018. "DEMATEL Technique: A Systematic Review of the State-of-the-Art Literature on Methodologies and Applications," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-33, January.
    5. Sarthak Sahu & Saket Shanker & Aditya Kamat & Akhilesh Barve, 2023. "India’s public transportation system: the repercussions of COVID-19," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 435-478, June.
    6. Ralph Buehler & John Pucher, 2012. "Cycling to work in 90 large American cities: new evidence on the role of bike paths and lanes," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 409-432, March.
    7. Shaheen, Susan A & Guzman, Stacey & Zhang, Hua, 2010. "Bikesharing in Europe, the Americas, and Asia: Past, Present and Future," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt6qg8q6ft, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    8. Margherita Pazzini & Leonardo Cameli & Claudio Lantieri & Valeria Vignali & Giulio Dondi & Thomas Jonsson, 2022. "New Micromobility Means of Transport: An Analysis of E-Scooter Users’ Behaviour in Trondheim," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-17, June.
    9. De Vos, Jonas, 2018. "Do people travel with their preferred travel mode? Analysing the extent of travel mode dissonance and its effect on travel satisfaction," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 261-274.
    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. Mateo-Babiano, Iderlina & Bean, Richard & Corcoran, Jonathan & Pojani, Dorina, 2016. "How does our natural and built environment affect the use of bicycle sharing?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 295-307.
    2. Qianling Jiang & Sheng-Jung Ou & Wei Wei, 2019. "Why Shared Bikes of Free-Floating Systems Were Parked Out of Order? A Preliminary Study based on Factor Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-17, June.
    3. Kwiatkowski Michał Adam, 2018. "Urban Cycling as an Indicator of Socio-Economic Innovation and Sustainable Transport," Quaestiones Geographicae, Sciendo, vol. 37(4), pages 23-32, December.
    4. Li, Chunzhi & Xiao, Wei & Zhang, Dayong & Ji, Qiang, 2021. "Low-carbon transformation of cities: Understanding the demand for dockless bike sharing in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    5. Zhao, Pengjun & Li, Shengxiao, 2017. "Bicycle-metro integration in a growing city: The determinants of cycling as a transfer mode in metro station areas in Beijing," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 46-60.
    6. Gu, Tianqi & Kim, Inhi & Currie, Graham, 2019. "To be or not to be dockless: Empirical analysis of dockless bikeshare development in China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 122-147.
    7. Pucher, John & Buehler, Ralph & Seinen, Mark, 2011. "Bicycling renaissance in North America? An update and re-appraisal of cycling trends and policies," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 451-475, July.
    8. Alexandros Nikitas, 2019. "How to Save Bike-Sharing: An Evidence-Based Survival Toolkit for Policy-Makers and Mobility Providers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-17, June.
    9. Tomasz Bieliński & Łukasz Dopierała & Maciej Tarkowski & Agnieszka Ważna, 2020. "Lessons from Implementing a Metropolitan Electric Bike Sharing System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-21, November.
    10. Levy, Nadav & Golani, Chen & Ben-Elia, Eran, 2019. "An exploratory study of spatial patterns of cycling in Tel Aviv using passively generated bike-sharing data," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 325-334.
    11. Hyungkyoo Kim, 2020. "Seasonal Impacts of Particulate Matter Levels on Bike Sharing in Seoul, South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-17, June.
    12. Faghih-Imani, Ahmadreza & Eluru, Naveen, 2016. "A Latent Segmentation Multinomial Logit Approach to Examine Bicycle Sharing System Users' Destination Preferences," 57th Transportation Research Forum (51st CTRF) Joint Conference, Toronto, Ontario, May 1-4, 2016 319270, Transportation Research Forum.
    13. Zhou, Xiaolu & Wang, Mingshu & Li, Dongying, 2019. "Bike-sharing or taxi? Modeling the choices of travel mode in Chicago using machine learning," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1-1.
    14. Wang, Xize & Lindsey, Greg & Schoner, Jessica E. & Harrison, Andrew, 2016. "Modeling bike share station activity: Effects of nearby businesses and jobs on trips to and from stations," SocArXiv stav4, Center for Open Science.
    15. Chrysa Vizmpa & George Botzoris & Panagiotis Lemonakis & Athanasios Galanis, 2023. "Micromobility in Urban Trail Paths: Expanding and Strengthening the Planning of 15-Minute Cities," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-22, December.
    16. Virginie Boutueil & Luc Nemett & Thomas Quillerier, 2021. "Trends in Competition among Digital Platforms for Shared Mobility: Insights from a Worldwide Census and Prospects for Research," Post-Print hal-03388213, HAL.
    17. Mohammed Elhenawy & Hesham A. Rakha & Youssef Bichiou & Mahmoud Masoud & Sebastien Glaser & Jack Pinnow & Ahmed Stohy, 2021. "A Feasible Solution for Rebalancing Large-Scale Bike Sharing Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-19, December.
    18. Shahram Heydari & Garyfallos Konstantinoudis & Abdul Wahid Behsoodi, 2021. "Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on bike-sharing demand and hire time: Evidence from Santander Cycles in London," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-16, December.
    19. Parkes, Stephen & Mardsen, Greg & Shaheen, Susan PhD & Cohen, Adam, 2013. "Understanding the Diffusion of Public Bikesharing Systems: Evidence from Europe and North America," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt3qr9h2pr, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    20. Younes, Hannah & Nasri, Arefeh & Baiocchi, Giovanni & Zhang, Lei, 2019. "How transit service closures influence bikesharing demand; lessons learned from SafeTrack project in Washington, D.C. metropolitan area," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 83-92.

    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:15:y:2023:i:23:p:16421-:d:1290746. 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.