Measuring cycling and cyclability
Cycling can receive more attention than walking in travel surveys since it is not perceived as a negligible default mode of mobility in most cases. However, cycling needs to be also discussed beyond numbers, with more focus on cyclability.
The data-driven approach is a common place when looking at cycling activities in cities. Cycling heatmaps provided by cycling apps, such as Strava and Bike Citizens, have been widely used to gain insights on urban cycling. While this approach provides much-needed knowledge on the quantitative and spatial data, it needs to be complemented by other means of verification to ensure equal representation of bike users and their use cases. Some apps are more used for athletic and recreational cycling and, therefore, might misrepresent cycling as a mode of transport for daily activities like walking and cycling to work or school or cargo-bike delivery.
Qualitative assessments are also widely used by urban practitioners, many of which are collected using the Bicycle User Experience (BUX) tools. They provide a participatory, site-focused and culturally-sensitive insight on cycling. One constraint of such methods is that they are demanding in terms of time and human resources, especially when many neighbourhoods or diverse cycling contexts need to be covered.
A more policy-oriented approach is the self-assessment tools geared towards cities and local governments. CIVITAS’ international cycling community of practice offers a self-assessment tool for the community members to assess the planning, promotion and public participation in cycling.
To have a holistic overview of urban cycling, a mixed approach that covers multi-level aspects as well as the qualitative and quantitative sides of cycling is needed.
