{"title":"是什么影响了人们对骑行基础设施的偏好?国家偏好调查","authors":"Lucas Meyer de Freitas, Kay W. Axhausen","doi":"10.1007/s11116-025-10624-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>We examine the difference in preferences among different cyclist groups, being the first to examine differences in cycling infrastructure preferences among s-pedelec, e-bike and conventional bike riders. We also examine how the cycling frequency of individuals shapes these preferences. To do so we develop a stated-preference choice experiment varying cycling infrastructure and car traffic features impacting cycling for both main and neighborhood streets. We find that while the sign of the preferences is the same for all cyclist types and is consistent with previous findings from the literature on cycling infrastructure preferences, e-bikers and especially s-pedelec riders do have a lower willingness to pay (WTP) for improvements of cycling infrastructure and are more comfortable in sharing the street space with cars. E-bikers do have similar preferences as conventional cyclists for the most important safety-related elements, i.e. for cycling paths instead of cycling lanes on main streets and “cycling-street” designation of neighborhood streets. For these same features, the WTP decreases with cycling frequency, less frequent cyclists valuing such elements more. At the same time, those who cycle less have a lower WTP for car traffic related features. </p>","PeriodicalId":49419,"journal":{"name":"Transportation","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What influences cycling infrastructure preferences? A stated-preference survey\",\"authors\":\"Lucas Meyer de Freitas, Kay W. Axhausen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11116-025-10624-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>We examine the difference in preferences among different cyclist groups, being the first to examine differences in cycling infrastructure preferences among s-pedelec, e-bike and conventional bike riders. We also examine how the cycling frequency of individuals shapes these preferences. To do so we develop a stated-preference choice experiment varying cycling infrastructure and car traffic features impacting cycling for both main and neighborhood streets. We find that while the sign of the preferences is the same for all cyclist types and is consistent with previous findings from the literature on cycling infrastructure preferences, e-bikers and especially s-pedelec riders do have a lower willingness to pay (WTP) for improvements of cycling infrastructure and are more comfortable in sharing the street space with cars. E-bikers do have similar preferences as conventional cyclists for the most important safety-related elements, i.e. for cycling paths instead of cycling lanes on main streets and “cycling-street” designation of neighborhood streets. For these same features, the WTP decreases with cycling frequency, less frequent cyclists valuing such elements more. At the same time, those who cycle less have a lower WTP for car traffic related features. </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49419,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transportation\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transportation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-025-10624-7\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, CIVIL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-025-10624-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
What influences cycling infrastructure preferences? A stated-preference survey
We examine the difference in preferences among different cyclist groups, being the first to examine differences in cycling infrastructure preferences among s-pedelec, e-bike and conventional bike riders. We also examine how the cycling frequency of individuals shapes these preferences. To do so we develop a stated-preference choice experiment varying cycling infrastructure and car traffic features impacting cycling for both main and neighborhood streets. We find that while the sign of the preferences is the same for all cyclist types and is consistent with previous findings from the literature on cycling infrastructure preferences, e-bikers and especially s-pedelec riders do have a lower willingness to pay (WTP) for improvements of cycling infrastructure and are more comfortable in sharing the street space with cars. E-bikers do have similar preferences as conventional cyclists for the most important safety-related elements, i.e. for cycling paths instead of cycling lanes on main streets and “cycling-street” designation of neighborhood streets. For these same features, the WTP decreases with cycling frequency, less frequent cyclists valuing such elements more. At the same time, those who cycle less have a lower WTP for car traffic related features.
期刊介绍:
In our first issue, published in 1972, we explained that this Journal is intended to promote the free and vigorous exchange of ideas and experience among the worldwide community actively concerned with transportation policy, planning and practice. That continues to be our mission, with a clear focus on topics concerned with research and practice in transportation policy and planning, around the world.
These four words, policy and planning, research and practice are our key words. While we have a particular focus on transportation policy analysis and travel behaviour in the context of ground transportation, we willingly consider all good quality papers that are highly relevant to transportation policy, planning and practice with a clear focus on innovation, on extending the international pool of knowledge and understanding. Our interest is not only with transportation policies - and systems and services – but also with their social, economic and environmental impacts, However, papers about the application of established procedures to, or the development of plans or policies for, specific locations are unlikely to prove acceptable unless they report experience which will be of real benefit those working elsewhere. Papers concerned with the engineering, safety and operational management of transportation systems are outside our scope.