Elsevier

Preventive Medicine

Volume 63, June 2014, Pages 29-35
Preventive Medicine

Cycling for transport and recreation: Associations with socio-economic position, environmental perceptions, and psychological disposition

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.03.003Get rights and content

Highlights

  • 3.8% of participants, aged 40–65 years, cycled for utility in the previous week.

  • Utility and recreation-only cycling correlates differed.

  • Socioeconomic factors correlated differently and psychological factors similarly.

  • Neighborhood environment perceptions correlated only with utility cycling.

  • Tailored approaches are required to encourage utility versus recreational cycling.

Abstract

Objective

Interest is growing in promoting utility cycling (i.e., for transport) as a means of incorporating daily physical activity (PA) into people's lives, but little is known about correlates of utility cycling. Our primary aim was to examine cross-sectional relationships between socio-economic characteristics, neighborhood environment perceptions and psychological disposition with utility cycling (with or without additional recreational cycling). A secondary aim was to compare these relationships with those for recreation-only cycling.

Method

Baseline survey data (2007) from 10,233 participants in HABITAT, a multilevel longitudinal study of PA, sedentary behavior, and health in Brisbane adults aged 40–65 years, were analyzed using multinomial regression modeling.

Results

Greater income, habitual PA, and positive beliefs about PA were associated with utility and recreation-only cycling (p < 0.05). Always having vehicle access and not in the labor force were associated with recreation-only cycling (p < 0.05). Some or no vehicle access, part-time employment, and perceived environmental factors (little crime, few cul-de-sacs, nearby transport and recreational destinations) were associated with utility cycling (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Our findings suggest differences in associations between socio-economic, neighborhood perceptions and psychological factors and utility and recreation-only cycling in Brisbane residents aged 40–65 years. Tailored approaches appear to be required to promote utility and recreational cycling.

Introduction

Governments in low cycling countries are promoting utility cycling (cycling for transport) as a means of incorporating physical activity (PA) into people's daily lives and consequently improving their health (Oja et al., 2011) and reducing carbon dioxide emissions (Rojas-Rueda et al., 2011). In Australia, the National Cycling Strategy presents priority government actions for increasing cycling (Ausroads Ltd., 2010). Actions include promoting utility cycling, improving bicycle infrastructure and end-of-trip facilities, and integrating cycling needs in transport and land use planning (Ausroads Ltd., 2010). Census data indicate that such actions may be effective: from 2006 to 2011 the percentage of Australians traveling to work by bicycle increased by 15% (Australian Bicycle Council, 2013). However, bicycle mode share to work remains low, 1.3% (Australian Bicycle Council, 2013), similar to rates in the U.S. and UK but low compared with some European countries (Pucher and Buehler, 2012).

According to the ecological models (Sallis et al., 2006), strategies to increase utility cycling must be multi-level, accounting for individual factors as well as the social and physical environmental contexts. Evidence about the relationship between individual characteristics and utility cycling is growing (Beenackers et al., 2012, Bopp et al., 2012, Heinen et al., 2009, Titze et al., 2007, Titze et al., 2008, Titze et al., 2010): utility cycling is associated with younger age and being male in low cycling countries like Australia (Bopp et al., 2012, Garrard et al., 2008, Sahlqvist et al., 2013, Titze et al., 2010, Winters et al., 2007). There are inconsistent findings for socio-economic characteristics like income (Heinen et al., 2009). The evidence supporting associations between psychological factors and utility cycling is also limited but suggests that constructs from the Theory of Planned Behavior (e.g., attitude) influence decisions to cycle to work (Heinen et al., 2009). Of the subjective environment, the perceived presence of destinations has received the most attention as a correlate of commuting cycling (Beenackers et al., 2012, Heinen et al., 2009).

Studies examining utility cycling correlates have compared utility cyclists with non-utility cyclists. This is problematic because non-utility cyclists include recreation-only cyclists, who are likely to have different perceptions about cycling than non-cyclists. Our primary aim was to use an ecological model to examine cross-sectional associations between utility cycling (with or without additional recreational cycling) and socio-economic characteristics, perceptions of the neighborhood environment, and psychological disposition, with non-cyclists serving as the referent group. A secondary aim was to compare these associations with those for recreation-only cycling.

Section snippets

Sample and procedure

Baseline data from HABITAT, a study of PA, sedentary behavior, and health in adults aged 40–65 years and residing in Brisbane, Australia, in 2007, were used for these analyses. As reported previously (Burton et al., 2009), a multi-stage probability sampling design was developed to select a stratified random sample of Census Collector's Districts (CCDs), and within each CCD, adults aged 40–65 years were randomly selected. CCDs are used by the Australian Bureau of Statistics to collect census data

Results

Of 11,036 eligible participants, two were excluded based on age; 238 (2.2%) were excluded because they were missing cycling data; and 563 (5.1%) were excluded because they were missing data on predictor variables (≤ 2.0% of data from any predictor were missing). Thus, data from 10,233 were included in the analysis. Excluded participants were more likely to be female, single, in low income households, and not in the labor force (p  0.001), and less likely to have favorable perceptions of their

Discussion

This study examined the separate and joint associations between socio-economic, perceived environment and psychological factors and utility cycling, after modeling recreation-only cycling behavior separately. In this large representative sample of Brisbane adults aged 40–65 years, 3.8% of participants reported utility cycling in the previous week. This is more than the 1.3% reported previously for commuting to work in Brisbane or the 0.09% to 3.1% in other Australia's capital cities (Australian

Conflicts of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the present paper.

Acknowledgments

This study is funded by three (Australian) National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) grants (ID 339718, 497236, 1047453). Professor Billie Giles-Corti is supported by a NHMRC Principal Research Fellowship (ID 1004900). Professor Gavin Turrell is supported by a NHMRC Senior Research Fellowship (ID 1003710).

References (29)

  • Ausroads Ltd

    The Australian National Cycling Strategy 2011–2016

    (2010)
  • Australian Bicycle Council

    Australian Census 2011 Travel to Work by Bicycle Only

    (2013)
  • Bartley Consulting Pty Ltd

    Walking and Cycling: Census Analysis (DOT3906 2/09)

    (2008)
  • N.W. Burton et al.

    HABITAT: a longitudinal multilevel study of physical activity change in mid-aged adults

    BMC Public Health

    (2009)
  • Cited by (75)

    • Assessing the effects of the built environment and microclimate on cycling volume

      2023, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment
    • The impact of crime and crime-related experiences, worries, and perceptions on travel behavior

      2023, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text