Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Jan 2;37(1):29-55.
doi: 10.1080/01441647.2016.1200156. Epub 2016 Jul 14.

Cycling provision separated from motor traffic: a systematic review exploring whether stated preferences vary by gender and age

Affiliations

Cycling provision separated from motor traffic: a systematic review exploring whether stated preferences vary by gender and age

Rachel Aldred et al. Transp Rev. .

Abstract

In this paper, we represent a systematic review of stated preference studies examining the extent to which cycle infrastructure preferences vary by gender and by age. A search of online, English-language academic and policy literature was followed by a three-stage screening process to identify relevant studies. We found 54 studies that investigated whether preferences for cycle infrastructure varied by gender and/or by age. Forty-four of these studies considered the extent of separation from motor traffic. The remainder of the studies covered diverse topics, including preferred winter maintenance methods and attitudes to cycle track lighting. We found that women reported stronger preferences than men for greater separation from motor traffic. There was weaker evidence of stronger preferences among older people. Differences in preferences were quantitative rather than qualitative; that is, preferences for separated infrastructure were stronger in some groups than in others, but no group preferred integration with motor traffic. Thus, in low-cycling countries seeking to increase cycling, this evidence suggests focusing on the stronger preferences of under-represented groups as a necessary element of universal design for cycling.

Keywords: Cycling; age; equity; gender; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Summary of evidence management strategy.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Articles by year.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Gender and preferences for separated infrastructure, by sample size (minus one study with missing sample size).
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Age and preferences for separated infrastructure, by sample size.

References

    1. Akar G., Fischer N., Namgung M. Bicycling choice and gender case study: The Ohio State University. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation. 2013a:347–365. doi: 10.1080/15568318.2012.673694. - DOI
    1. Akar G., Fischer N., Namgung M. Why women bicycle less? Case study: The Ohio State University. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation. 2013b:347–365. doi: 10.1080/15568318.2012.673694. - DOI
    1. Aldred R. Adults’ attitudes towards child cycling: A study of the impact of infrastructure. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research. 2015:92–115.
    1. Aldred R., Crosweller S. Investigating the rates and impacts of near misses and related incidents among UK cyclists. Journal of Transport & Health. 2015;(3):379–393. doi: 10.1016/j.jth.2015.05.006. - DOI
    1. Aldred R., Woodcock J., Goodman A. Does more cycling mean more diversity in cycling? Transport Reviews. 2015 doi: 10.1080/01441647.2015.1014451. - DOI