4.4 Article

Who Are Public Bicycle Share Programs Serving? An Evaluation of the Equity of Spatial Access to Bicycle Share Service Areas in Canadian Cities

Journal

TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD
Volume 2672, Issue 36, Pages 42-50

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0361198118783107

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Public bicycle share users are predominantly Caucasian, employed, and have higher incomes and education levels, as compared to the general population. This has prompted bicycle share operators and researchers to increasingly consider equity in bicycle share program access and uptake. The location of bicycle share docking stations has been cited as a major barrier to uptake among lower socioeconomic groups. This study aimed to assess spatial access to bicycle share programs in Canadian cities by comparing the socioeconomic characteristics of dissemination areas inside and outside the bicycle share service areas. We obtained locations of bicycle share stations for the five existing programs in Canada: Vancouver, Hamilton, Toronto, Ottawa-Gatineau, and Montreal. We used the material component of the Pampalon Deprivation Index (2011) as a measure of socioeconomic status for each dissemination area, calculating city-specific quintiles. We compared the distribution of deprivation for dissemination areas inside the bicycle share service area, compared with outside the service area. We found that advantaged areas have better access to bicycle share infrastructure in Vancouver, Toronto, Ottawa-Gatineau, and Montreal, and conversely, that disadvantaged areas have better access in Hamilton. This analysis indicates that in most cities, substantial effort is needed to expand service areas to disadvantaged areas in order to increase spatial access for lower socioeconomic populations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available