Who rides and who is left behind: a multilevel analysis of new cycling infrastructure use in three Canadian cities

Yichun Du, Kevin Manaugh, Meghan Winters, Paul Hess and Raktim Mitra

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 2026, vol. 211, issue C

Abstract: Despite ongoing expansions of cycling infrastructure in cities across the western world, few studies have examined how people engage with multiple new cycling facilities across cities. Using an online travel survey (n = 2,690) in Vancouver, Toronto, and Montréal linked to 46 cycling facilities built between 2020 and 2022, we assess how residential proximity shapes the probability of using these facilities, and together with proximity, how the attributes of facilities as well as individual sociodemographic characteristics associate with use, including differences across gender and income. Logistic and weighted Bayesian cross-classified multilevel models show strong distance decay that each additional kilometre is associated with 24% lower odds of use. Distance decay is steeper for lower-income riders and for women and gender-diverse respondents than for higher-income riders and men, indicating that proximity is a stronger barrier for groups historically underrepresented in cycling. Odds of use are lower for older adults, women and gender-diverse respondents; higher for non-single households, newcomers, and those working from home less frequently. New facilities with network connectivity of multiple nodes see higher use. The odds of use is higher in urban than suburban areas for middle-income respondents. Among higher-income respondents, protected cycle tracks are linked to greater use, whereas more nearby existing dedicated cycling infrastructure within 1 km of residence is correlated with lower use. Findings suggest that comparable amount of new infrastructure may not translate into comparable use across populations. Accounting for proximity, facility attributes, and sociodemographic differences can support more equitable, demand-responsive infrastructure planning.

Keywords: Active transportation planning; Cycling infrastructure; Accessibility; Transportation equity; Distance decay; Cyclingbehaviour (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2026
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856426002703
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:transa:v:211:y:2026:i:c:s0965856426002703

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
https://shop.elsevie ... _01_ooc_1&version=01

DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2026.105129

Access Statistics for this article

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice is currently edited by John (J.M.) Rose

More articles in Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().