Economic impacts on local businesses of investments in bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure: a review of the evidence
Jamey M. B. Volker and
Susan Handy
Transport Reviews, 2021, vol. 41, issue 4, 401-431
Abstract:
Local officials in North America frequently face opposition to new or expanded bicycle or pedestrian facilities. The most vocal opponents are usually motorists and local business owners who fear that the removal of or reductions in vehicular parking or travel lanes will reduce patronage from motorists and that any increased patronage from pedestrians or cyclists will not offset the lost revenues. A lack of direct evidence on the economic impacts of facilities on local businesses has made it difficult to support or debunk such fears. A lack of quantitative evidence in particular has prevented the incorporation of such impacts into cost–benefit analyses. The issue has received enough attention from researchers in recent years that a review of the evidence is now warranted. We reviewed the relevant literature and identified 23 studies, focusing on the US and Canada, that either (1) quantified and compared consumer spending between active travellers and automobile users (n = 8), or (2) quantified an economic impact to local businesses following the installation of bicycle or pedestrian facilities (n = 15). Taken together, the studies indicate that creating or improving active travel facilities generally has positive or non-significant economic impacts on retail and food service businesses abutting or within a short distance of the facilities, though bicycle facilities might have negative economic effects on auto-centric businesses. The results are similar regardless of whether vehicular parking or travel lanes are removed or reduced to make room for the active travel facilities. The studies also highlight best practices for designing future research. Ten of the 15 studies that quantified an economic impact to local businesses used both before-and-after data and comparison sites or other statistical controls for variables unrelated to the active travel facility “treatment;” six of those used statistical testing.
Date: 2021
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (7)
Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01441647.2021.1912849 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
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:taf:transr:v:41:y:2021:i:4:p:401-431
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/TTRV20
DOI: 10.1080/01441647.2021.1912849
Access Statistics for this article
Transport Reviews is currently edited by Professor David Banister and Moshe Givoni
More articles in Transport Reviews from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().