Bijlage 6 Effecten impact lucht geluidskwaliteit

Unlike the central role of high-quality infrastructure in achieving physical safety, achieving social safety often requires addressing broader societal issues. Ensuring social safety necessarily requires looking beyond an infrastructure-only approach. To do this, transport policy makers need to co-ordinate with other relevant authorities and engage with other relevant stakeholders to address these factors relevant to their mandates but outside of their remits.

Considering the potential deterrent of fear, violence and stress All things considered, it is possible to ensure safe, secure and enjoyable walking and cycling in cities. But this cannot be achieved by only providing new infrastructure for pedestrians and cyclists. It is necessary to critically examine the underlying violence that constricts daily mobility. People want to feel safe and secure as they move through the city. Although high-quality infrastructure is part of the solution, it is not enough to ensure that city dwellers can move through the city securely and without being subjected to all manner of violence. For that to occur, it is necessary to engage with deeper system leverage points (Abson et al., 2017), changing both the incentives and other rules of the system, as well as the underlying paradigm out of which the current cardominated system arises. In doing so, it is possible to respond to many of the barriers to walking or cycling, particularly in the context of developing economies, that discourage their use (see e.g. Mogaji, 2022). When discussing the violence experienced on the roads, it is essential to note that not all violence is deviant, departing from usual and accepted standards or even necessarily intending to cause harm.

As Ruggiero points out: “Systemic violence refers to the harm people suffer from the social structure and the institutions sustaining and reproducing it” (2019). Systemic violence and its impacts extend beyond transport and mobility. However, victimhood, fear, uncertainty, or feeling unsafe can significantly condition a person’s mobility. It can lead to avoiding or forgoing trips, altering modal and routing choices, or limiting the time at which trips are taken (see e.g. Ceccato and Loukaitou-Sideris, 2022; Giménez-Nadal, Echeverría and Molina, 2023; Kash, 2019). In this sense, systemic violence and fear mediate daily mobility by modifying or constricting travel intents and desires (see Figure 9). Pedestrians, users of micromobility (including bicycles) and people who combine these modes with collective transport tend to be the most exposed to these risks. This is due to the lower speeds at which they travel with little to no protective envelopes. As a result, they are exposed for longer periods of time, increasing the likelihood of being subjected to violence while travelling in public. Women, in particular, face frightening and violent everyday situations that constrain their mobility (Allen et al. 2018; Stark and Meschik, 2018). This includes unwanted sexual attention and harassment which can be visual (e.g. leering), verbal (e.g. catcalling), physical (e.g.

touching), obscene (e.g. exhibitionism) and intimidating (e.g. blocking of the way) (Quiñones, 2020). While there is some evidence that women and men similarly perceive injury and collision risks, the risk of being verbally abused and bullied while cycling is much higher among women (Graystone, Mitra and Hess, 2022). In London, a recent survey also found that 9 out of 10 women faced verbal abuse and road aggression, with 93% reporting that drivers had used their vehicles to intimidate them (London Cycling Campaign, 2023).

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN CITIES © OECD/ITF 2024

39

CREATING SAFE AND INVITING CITIES TO WALK AND CYCLE REQUIRES ADDRESSING BROADER SOCIETAL ISSUES

Figure 9. How systemic violence mediates daily mobility

Source: ITF (2023).

Additionally, there is evidence that women make more walking trips than men in a variety of different contexts (Goel et al., 2023) and are often more reliant on public transport, where they are further exposed to gender-based violence while waiting in stations and stops and on transport vehicles (Ceccato and Paz, 2017; Chowdhury and van Wee, 2020). Other racialised groups, including members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, queer/questioning (LGBTQ+) community, are also subjected to gendermotivated violence that impacts their mobility (Lubitow et al., 2017; Weintrob et al., 2021). Importantly, planners and transport professionals often play down the reality women face when travelling. Some consider it a non-problem that does not merit their attention or is outside their purview (Kash, 2020). However, the evidence is clear that the issue of violence and harassment against women in public spaces is a global phenomenon, particularly sexual harassment. In the 27 EU member countries, for instance, according to the 2019 EU Fundamental Rights Survey (FRA, 2019), 22% of recent violent incidents of a sexual nature faced by women occurred in the street, a square, park, car park, or other public place. By contrast, men reported that 40% of their violent encounters that were not sexual occurred in these locations.

While this exposure to violence impacts mobility and conditions how and when people travel, the impacts are much more pronounced among women in Europe, with 64% reporting avoiding going to places if there were no other people around and 57% reporting avoiding certain streets or specific areas for fear of assault or harassment (see Figure 10). The use of these avoidance strategies is highest among young women aged 16-29 but remains higher for women of all ages than men of any age.

40

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN CITIES © OECD/ITF 2024

CREATING SAFE AND INVITING CITIES TO WALK AND CYCLE REQUIRES ADDRESSING BROADER SOCIETAL ISSUES

Figure 10. Strategies for avoiding assault or harassment in the European Union, by gender

Source: FRA (2019).

Marginalised and racialised groups also face significant barriers and negative repercussions while moving in many cities. Within racialised systems, members of racialised groups, particularly young racialised men, face systemic violence and biased policing. They are more often stopped by police (Baumgartner, Epp and Shoub, 2018) and tend to suffer greater consequences for alleged wrongdoing. As a result, in many contexts, these men tend to face additional barriers to travel actively due to a confluence of factors, including a higher risk of being subjected to “stop and search” policing (Osei and Aldred, 2023).

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN CITIES © OECD/ITF 2024

41

HOW TO RE-CENTRE MOBILITY SPACES ON PEOPLE

How to re-centre mobility spaces on people This report recommends a series of actions to improve the quality of walking and cycling in urban mobility, and to ensure transport policies centred on walking and cycling have broad positive societal impacts. These recommendations can help cities move beyond moto-normativity. Much of the discussion around mobility transitions has focused on changing the engine types of existing vehicle types rather than fundamentally changing the vehicles themselves (ITF, 2023). However, a transition to greener vehicle fleets without systematically rethinking how the population travels and changing the form factor of the vehicles used would not address much of the violence that is perpetuated in the system. However, a transition to greener vehicle fleets would not address much of the violence perpetuated in today's transport system without systematically rethinking how the population travels and the form factors of the vehicles used to travel. Importantly, this complex system of violence would remain in place even if the transport sector is fully decarbonised. The negative impacts of moto-normativity are not limited to the adverse environmental effects of internalcombustion-engine (ICE) vehicles. Much of the structural violence accompanying private ICE vehicles also accompanies zero-emission vehicles (Hosseini and Stefaniec, 2023).

For instance, road-traffic violence and the injuries and death caused by vehicle users would continue to occur in the absence of tailpipe emissions. Similarly, the stress and emotional impacts associated with actively travelling and interacting with motorised traffic will continue regardless of the motorised vehicle or engine type, and even with the development of autonomous vehicles. A systemic change that facilitates more or higher quality walking and cycling will require policy makers acting decisively to seize policy moments when they arise and leverage the momentum to try to change the underlying aims of the system. A clear example of this was seen during the pandemic. Many cities had begun re-allocating urban space away from its exclusive use by cars and towards a more diverse range of uses and users prior to the disruptions caused by Covid-19, but the pandemic accelerated this trend. It also led many public authorities to start to re-allocate mobility space previously reserved for motorised transport for other purposes. This provided alternatives for people to exercise and interact safely under varying levels of confinement, social distancing, and restrictions on indoor and group activities.

Authorities focused much of their attention on pedestrianising different road segments and rapidly deploying infrastructure for active wheeled mobility in the form of new cycle lanes and boulevards. They have also re-allocated space for non-mobility uses (e.g. restaurant seating replacing roadside parking). This extraordinary re-allocation of space was widespread, occurring in every continent and at least 60 countries (Combs and Pardo, 2021). Public authorities were able to implement these changes because of the significant disruption to mobility and activity patterns under extraordinary confinement measures. In many cities and countries, trips and working commutes were considerably reduced during the pandemic, particularly among higher-income and educational groups (for an overview, see ITF, 2023a). In many instances, cities were able to fast-track the implementation of existing long-range plans for deploying cycling and walking infrastructure with little public opposition. These cities, such as Paris, were able to accelerate already existing cycling plans and institutional frameworks for walking or cycling and implement changes in a more coherent manner (Verlinghieri and Aldred, 2023). However, even where long-range 42

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN CITIES © OECD/ITF 2024

HOW TO RE-CENTRE MOBILITY SPACES ON PEOPLE

plans did not exist, the significant reduction in motorised traffic allowed cities to (at least temporarily) redistribute some space from cars and to people walking, cycling or otherwise using public space. Pandemic-related mobility reductions and space reallocation successfully reminded citizens of what it felt and looked like to have fewer cars in cities and use public space in different ways. Nevertheless, the focus on rapid deployment of infrastructure meant that many infrastructure changes were not conducive to safe and enjoyable travel once motorised traffic returned to pre-pandemic levels. Even cities that were better positioned to implement solutions more coherently still suffered from many of these same shortcomings as other less well-prepared cities. While this highlights how policy makers can use policy opportunity windows, it also highlights how much more work is needed to achieve long-lasting systemic changes to the way mobility systems in cities are organised. Re-centring cities on people and moving the focus from attempting to optimise motorised vehicle throughput to one that aims to create a friendlier, more liveable city where society can benefit from walking and cycling in safe and secure conditions requires important changes to transport policy making.

Focus policies on improving the quality of walking and cycling in cities Increasing walking and cycling in cities is a worthy policy goal that can have many positive outcomes. However, the focus of initiatives and interventions should extend beyond the sole discussion of modal shares, increased active travel, and physical activity benefits. Instead, they should centre on improving the quality of walking and cycling in cities. They should also ensure that walking and cycling policies contribute to increasing liveability, counteract social exclusion (particularly, but not limited to, transport-related exclusion), enhance cohesiveness, and support more just urban outcomes. The call for a general increase in walking and cycling can be misguided and shows a lack of awareness of the diverse lived experiences of different individuals and groups worldwide – especially where active travel is already the dominant travel mode, as it is in many cities worldwide. For the same reasons, it is problematic to couch this argument solely or mainly on the potential positive health outcomes associated with physical activity benefits. The health benefits that active mobility provides are substantial and widespread. However, this argument is most salient for the Global North and the wealthier and more affluent population segments in other regions.

Discussions of the importance of increasing physical activity or ensuring that people walk and cycle more often or for longer can fall on deaf ears in places where, and among individuals whose, daily mobility is already often too physically taxing. This is especially the case among large segments of the population in the Global South and disadvantaged groups in the Global North, who cannot afford to rely on private motorised transport for their travel and do not have the luxury of working in non-physical labour. Under these conditions, and given the social capital associated with aspirations of car ownership, these calls can be seen as out of touch and elitist. They can also perpetuate the idea that walking or cycling is not for everyone. Focusing on improving conditions for active mobility is much more inclusive and would benefit more people. Ensuring the dignity, safety and wellbeing of those already walking and cycling, even under adverse conditions, would benefit society while responding to the needs of those currently most disadvantaged in their mobility.

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN CITIES © OECD/ITF 2024

43

HOW TO RE-CENTRE MOBILITY SPACES ON PEOPLE

Democratise mobility space to ensure citizens can safely and securely travel in more ways The current unequal allocation of space, and the implicit and explicit prioritisation of car travel embedded in moto-normative policies and views, result in unjust outcomes for society. Moto-normative policies particularly disadvantage and expose other road users to elevated physical and emotional risks, negatively impact well-being and contribute to the exclusion of those who cannot fully participate in motorised hypermobility. Pedestrians suffer the most under these conditions, but the negative impacts extend across society. Furthermore, the car has only achieved and maintained this position through a systematic marginalisation of all other public space uses and allocation. As a result, improving the quality of walking and cycling in cities must involve restorative measures that re-democratise public space and provide residents with feasible and dignified alternatives for their mobility regardless of their capabilities, motivations or preferences. A democratic mobility system would allow citizens to travel in more ways without compromising their safety and comfort. In such a system, participation and inclusion are not predicated on access to private motorised transport. Nor should mobility be constrained to prioritise car drivers.

Unless there are specific reasons not to do so, every part of an urban region should be developed and organised so that the advantages of not owning a car are at least equal to the advantages of owning a car (Gilbert, 1998; OECD, 2002). Moto-normativity can be perpetuated through pluralistic ignorance (see O’Gorman, 1986), or a mistaken shared belief about the degree to which the public (or particular groups) agree or disagree with an idea. This creates a mismatch where actions can be in direct opposition to the preferences of the person making the decision (as well as the majority’s preferences). A particular alternative, such as the car, is so entrenched that citizens and policy makers overestimate how much this matches the preferences of others. With this context-based approach in mind, four basic strategies emerge to build effective pro-active mobility policies. These relate to crucial outcomes that must be considered together but introduced according to local contexts and circumstances. Secure and maintain existing levels of active mobility

Active travel already represents a significant number of trips in many contexts. This is especially the case for walking but also true for cycling. However, active travel is sometimes burdensome and experienced as a constraint. It is burdensome because it is pushed to the margins of urban space, increasingly occupied by space-inefficient, costly and fast vehicles. Public authorities must seek to maintain much of this activity while rendering it less burdensome and better able to contribute to people living fulfilled lives. Avoid excessive motorisation

Many countries and cities are not highly motorised but are on a trajectory to become so. This strategy applies to low but swiftly motorising contexts and seeks to shift that trajectory to a car-light city.

44

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN CITIES © OECD/ITF 2024

HOW TO RE-CENTRE MOBILITY SPACES ON PEOPLE

Reduce car dependence

Many urban areas have been designed to facilitate car use, which has locked in high levels of car dependence. The use of cars delivers individual and collective benefits, but dependence on cars erodes these benefits above certain thresholds. In these cases, it is hard to increase the uptake of active mobility actively and effectively without addressing and reducing car dependence. While measures to increase active mobility may be seen as “additive”, they cannot succeed at the scale often targeted without concomitant “subtractive” policies aiming to curb car use (including fiscal treatment, space allocation and direct/indirect subsidies). Improve and increase the uptake of active mobility

These strategies and measures specifically seek to increase attractiveness, lower the cost, improve safety, and otherwise incentivise or guide the uptake of active mobility. They are the “additive” component that must be tethered to “subtractive” actions. Most policies in favour of active mobility (e.g. infrastructure, speed management, education) fall within this space.

Incorporate violence reduction as a critical transport policy goal Efforts to reduce car dependency must address the systemic violence embedded in moto-normative cities. In terms of vehicular violence, slower speeds, changes in traffic prioritisation (e.g. fietstraats, cycling streets in the Netherlands that are designed as a bicycle route but on which cars are also allowed, but not prioritised, and where car use is limited by the character and design of the street) and restrictions on how and where cars can be used are essential. Car drivers are implicated in most of the deaths, injuries and material losses associated with traffic crashes. These incidents also have a significantly negative mental impact on people, contributing to stressful everyday conditions for many. Maximum speeds can be reduced, creating a safer and more pleasant environment for all city inhabitants without negatively impacting the average speeds at which drivers currently travel in many cities. Urban network densities often naturally slow down traffic to the point where average urban car travel speeds remain low, even where posted maximum speeds remain high. As such, reducing maximum speeds through a combination of legal frameworks and physical redesign would make the cities safer for all and even come at minimal to no cost to the average driver.

Such travel speed management is fully embedded within Safe Systems principles (ITF, 2008; 2022c). A recent historical analysis of mobility protests in the Netherlands by Bruno, Dekker and Lemos (2021) argues that the country was successful in pivoting to a less car-centric approach to mobility while increasing active mobility in large part because activists successfully lobbied to give cyclists the rights to the space they had before the city prioritised car traffic. These efforts resulted in car-restricting infrastructure, including redesigning the infrastructure to accommodate bicycles and car-free centres, and developingshared-use, low-speed streets where pedestrians are prioritised. Car-restricting measures are crucial because car users tend to be much more inert travellers, more likely to maintain their mode choice even when faced with changes to travel times, travel costs and life events (e.g. La Paix et al., 2022). Beyond reducing travel speeds to counter the risk of vehicular violence, policy makers will need to make efforts to ensure people of all races, genders and social groups can move through the city without being subjected to violence of any kind. Transport policies alone will not be enough, but any mobility policy

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN CITIES © OECD/ITF 2024

45

HOW TO RE-CENTRE MOBILITY SPACES ON PEOPLE

should explicitly consider how it can reduce violence and ensure that it does not perpetuate existing conditions that facilitate systemic violence. In the transport field, policies to reduce insecurity and violence are varied and are usually controversial because they are seen as either ineffective, shallow (i.e. not addressing the underlying issue) or actually creating the potential for further victimisation (e.g. increasing already biased policing). Gender-segregated or women-only transportation solutions, which have become popular this century in an attempt to create safer mobility spaces for women, provide a good example of anti-violence transport policies (Dunckel-Graglia, 2013a). Variations of women-only cars on metro lines, buses and trains, as well as women-only rickshaws, taxis and other ridesharing services, have been incorporated in a broad range of different contexts, including Bangladesh, Brazil, India, Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Nepal, Mexico, Taiwan and the United Arab Emirates (Dunckel-Graglia, 2013a, 2013b; Joshi, Roy, Mowri and Bailey, 2022; Shah, 2018). Such initiatives are often seen as controversial (Joshi et al., 2022) and have also been criticised as superficial solutions that do not address the underlying issues.

This is despite the fact that they are often very popular among women and acknowledged as necessary and effective short-term fixes in some contexts (Gekoski et al., 2015). Similarly, some critics have identified such measures as a barrier to gendersensitive design, which would allow women and girls to actually and fully move freely through cities (see e.g. Shah, 2018). These critics have instead called for addressing the underlying causes of this violence. These interventions highlight the challenge of reducing violence and the need for a multi-pronged approach to meet this goal. Policy makers must balance short-term wins that reduce some of the violence citizens currently face (e.g. women-only cars on public transport) against a longer-term vision and strategies that ensure change in the system itself. Changes to individual, specific policy parameters must be accompanied by a larger change to the aims of the system itself if systemic change is to occur. By incorporating violence reduction as a critical transport policy goal and explicitly considering reduced violence as a potential co-benefit of transport policy appraisal, policy makers can guide policies that contribute towards people being able to travel safely and enjoyably.

Remove car blinders from project appraisal and consider a broader range of alternatives Car “blinders” manifest themselves through broader cognitive processing and awareness formation concerning which uses and users of shared urban space are seen or not. They are prevalent in a variety of different contexts, including cities with low motorisation rates that still design their streetscapes for the private car and not for walking and public or informal transport, which are the majority forms of travel in most cases. These blinders are also prevalent in transport appraisal processes to the detriment of society. Ensuring that car “blinders” are not embedded in transport appraisal requires a vision-led approach to policy making that expands the scope of considered projects. It also calls for careful consideration and selection of appraisal frameworks and variables that explicitly aim to capture a broader range of impacts, that evaluates the benefits to specific groups of interest (e.g. vulnerable or underprivileged groups), and where decision makers are cognisant of the limitations of any of the chosen frameworks. Transport appraisals must explicitly evaluate the benefits and disbenefits to vulnerable populations and other groups of interest. This is particularly critical when performing economic evaluations.

Without doing so, aggregate appraisal frameworks can champion solutions that exacerbate inequities by favouring smaller travel time savings of wealthier car drivers over more considerable benefits for others.

46

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN CITIES © OECD/ITF 2024

HOW TO RE-CENTRE MOBILITY SPACES ON PEOPLE

Similar to the practice already in place for broader strategic priorities (e.g. local economic growth), when recommending a project at the conclusion of the appraisal, policy makers should be required to explain how vulnerable road users were considered during the process.

Remove moto-normative policies to increase the effectiveness of active mobility policies Long-term strategic plans that explicitly prioritise walking and cycling are necessary to improve city walking and cycling. Such strategies should include clear objectives ensuring that city transport plans systematically account for the needs of road users who are not car drivers. One is to expand transport appraisal to account for a broader set of priorities (ITF, 2022b) but it is also necessary to consider the existing legal and policy frameworks and change what is not working. It is not enough to add new policies and measures; existing policies must also be reconsidered and removed. People systematically overlook subtractive changes. In a set of experiments, Admas et al. (2021) found evidence that people tended to try to “add” components to improve things, with fewer tending to propose eliminating, or subtracting components to reach their goal. However, embedding new pro-walking and pro-cycling policies without modifying and removing existing frameworks that define the aim, allocation and use of mobility space around maximising (motorised) vehicle throughput and flows is unlikely to improve the conditions of pedestrians and cyclists. Nor are they likely to improve the general well-being of the population.

Existing restrictive moto-normative policies must be removed when they constrict the system and modified if possible. New complementary policies should be created when needed. One clear example of subtractive policies supporting more diverse travel practices is redistributing onstreet parking spaces to other uses. Between 2005 and 2020, for instance, the city of Paris re-purposed approximately 20 000 on-street car parking spots for use as bicycle, e-kick scooter, motorcycle and moped and shared-use vehicle parking, as well as electric charging infrastructure (APUR, 2019; Ville de Paris, 2021). Similarly, the city of Amsterdam has also undertaken a comprehensive inventory of demands for the use of public space, re-purposing 5 461 on-street car parking spaces between 2019 and 2023 with a goal of removing 7 000-10 000 on-street car parking spaces by 2025 (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2020, 2023). Such policies are not necessarily “subtractive” in the sense that parking opportunities are being reduced for car users. Rather, they are being re-directed away from on-street parking to off-street parking (which is typically under-used) or peripheral parking facilities connected to other transport modes.

Ensure access to high-quality collective transport to enable better walking and cycling Walking (and, to a lesser extent, cycling) have limited geographic and temporal scales. However, the scale of today’s cities often requires longer-distance and faster travel to ensure access to important destinations, services and other opportunities. Although most journeys in urban contexts (including in town and village centres) are less than 5 km, high-quality collective transport with good geographic and temporal coverages is a powerful component of well-functioning cities where people not only walk and cycle but can do so without being disadvantaged. These disadvantages include limited access and being faced with difficult choices, such as forced car ownership (see Curl, Clark and Kearns, 2018; Mattioli, 2017), where a car is needed to satisfy everyday needs but imposes undue financial hardship.

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN CITIES © OECD/ITF 2024

47

HOW TO RE-CENTRE MOBILITY SPACES ON PEOPLE

Improving pedestrian conditions and effectively integrating cycling and public transport is vital to ensuring that accessibility is maintained while still encouraging more people to walk or cycle in an enjoyable, safe and secure manner. It also improves cities’ liveability and reduces urban transport’s environmental impact. Across different cities, large percentages of active travel, particularly walking trips, are part of public transport trips (Goel et al., 2023). Additionally, low-income groups are more likely to rely on collective transport for their travel. However, in many cities, the level of accessibility provided by public transport systems is lower for low-income communities (e.g. Pritchard, Zanchetta and Martens, 2022). The quality of public transport (including stops and stations), latent perceptions of walking and cycling, and the conditions of infrastructure and built environments influence travel decisions. Pedestrian spaces leading to and surrounding public transport stops and stations should be safe and welcoming. Seamless cycling infrastructure integration and secure bike parking alternatives at stations are also necessary.

Decouple active mobility to focus on the different needs of pedestrians and cyclists In policy discussions, walking and cycling are often grouped together under the “active mobility” banner. There are some good reasons for doing so. They are both physically active modes which can contribute to positive health outcomes. Additionally, walking and cycling are much more similar in terms of their space usage, speeds, and geographical scales than either is to cars. Therefore, at first glance, they would appear to be natural allies and similar enough to be discussed as if one. However, the differences outweigh the similarities if considering walking and cycling on their own merits rather than in contrast to the car. Policy goals focused on active mobility that do not clearly distinguish between walking and cycling risk obfuscating the issues that are unique to each mode. What is conducive to enjoyable walking is not always conducive to enjoyable cycling and vice-versa. An improperly designed pro-cycling or pro-walking policy can be counteractive to the other mode. Designing policy goals and advocating for “active mobility” as an umbrella term for walking, cycling and other modes can be strategically important.

However, this should not be taken to mean that any prowalking policy would also be pro-cycling, or vice-versa, or that a policy that encourages one can easily be used to promote the other. Authorities should identify clear underlying goals, policies and solutions that specifically address the needs of both while respecting the needs of the other. Additionally, conflicts between pedestrians and cyclists arise if they must compete for the limited space not used by cars. In cities with historically high shares of walking trips where there have been significant increases in cycling, such as Paris, there has been an increase in reported conflicts between both groups (see e.g. Verlinghieri and Aldred, 2023). Under these conditions, pedestrians are often the victims of violence by cyclists and car drivers alike.

48

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN CITIES © OECD/ITF 2024

HOW TO RE-CENTRE MOBILITY SPACES ON PEOPLE

Figure 11. Distribution of walking and cycling within active mode shares in the European Union Walking

Cycling

75%

50%

Netherlands

Finland

Denmark

Sweden

Belgium

Germany

Hungary

Austria

Luxembourg

Poland

Slovenia

EU 27 average

Czechia

Slovakia

Italy

Croatia

Cyprus

Lithuania

Estonia

Latvia

Ireland

Greece

France

Romania

Malta

Portugal

0%

Bulgaria

25%

Spain

% share of active mobility modes

100%

Note: Figure shows the relative rate of walking and cycling as a percentage of the total active mobility share. The overall active mobility shares differ from country to country. Source: Pisoni, Christidis and Navajas Cawood (2022).

Data from Europe highlights the difficulty of a one-size-fits-all-active-modes approach. As shown in Figure 11, there are very few countries in the EU where both cycling and walking rates are high. For instance, countries with high cycling rates (e.g. the Netherlands and Denmark) have some of the lowest walking rates among the EU 27 (Pisoni, Christidis, and Navajas Cawood, 2022). This highlights the fact that centring cities on active mobility is still a work in progress, even in cities or countries cited as exemplary with respect to high modal shares of cycling or walking. While there is some overlap in the measures that can induce behavioural change towards more walking or more cycling, policy changes that can lead to increases in cycling might at the same time constrain the likelihood of increased walking or vice versa. Most people walk (including mechanised and assisted walking or rolling with mobility aids such as wheelchairs) Most people walk. Walking trips are often short, with trips shorter than 500 metres typically performed on foot and seldom undertaken by bike (Schneider et al., 2022). They are also often undirected trips – that is, travel without a particular destination (or where the destination is ancillary to the travel and not the other way around) and which are undertaken for the purpose of the trip itself (Hook et al., 2022; Mokhtarian and Salomon, 2001).

As described by Mokhtarian and Salomon: “travel is the activity, movement is the object, and a destination, if there is one (or more) in the usual sense of the word, is to varying degrees incidental” (2001: 697). Walking is also often combined with other modes as part of larger trip chains. As such, walking trips are often omitted from mobility statistics or, if included, are undervalued because, on aggregate, the total kilometres seem low or insignificant. However, it should be noted that reframing how trips are measured (e.g. by giving greater weight to the frequency of travel or the temporal duration of the trips rather than the total kilometres travelled) can more clearly demonstrate the importance and centrality of walking in urban mobility.

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN CITIES © OECD/ITF 2024

49

HOW TO RE-CENTRE MOBILITY SPACES ON PEOPLE

Far fewer people cycle than walk. Cycling, like walking, is often used for undirected travel, although in some contexts the incidence of undirected walking trips has been found to be higher than for cycling (see Hook et al., 2022). However, cycling trips are often longer, making them more likely to be included in mobility statistics and surveys. In several high-cycling environments, Schneider et al. (2022) found that, on average, cycling trips were approximately 4 km long, with 50% being 2 km or shorter. Earlier studies had similar results. For example, Martens (2004) found that the majority of bike-and-ride users in the Netherlands, Germany, and the United Kingdom travelled between 2 and 5 km to transit stops, and La Paix Puello and Geurs (2015) found that commuters tend to prefer to cycle between 1 and 3.5 km to stations (5-15 minutes of cycling). These ranges can vary depending on local contexts, and the uptake of electric bicycles is expanding the typical, average and maximum distances travelled by bike in urban areas. In addition to the longer average distances travelled by bicycles, cyclists can travel at much higher speeds, reaching typical speeds of 15-18 km/h on conventional bicycles, above 20 km/h for pedelecs, and almost 30 km/h for speed pedelecs, with maximum speeds being even higher (Schleinitz et al., 2017; Twisk et al., 2021, 2022).

These new forms of cycling blur the line between active and motorised travel and allow certain groups to partake in hypermobility analogous to that which has accompanied the growth of car travel. They also extend the speed gap between cyclists and pedestrians, whose typical speeds are closer to 3-5 km/h depending on age, gender and physical health (Bohannon and Williams Andrews, 2011). Interest in cycling, particularly electric-assisted cycling, continues to increase in many parts of the world. This has led to a shift in focus, with more policy attention paid to increasing cycling speeds and efficiencies, as well as the economic footprint of cycling in cities (e.g. through the increase of cycling logistics). The trend towards ever more expensive e-bicycles as aspirational consumer goods has begun to mirror some of the moto-normative discourse associated with the private car. It is, therefore, essential to ensure that the growth in cycling spurred by its electric forms does not come at the expense of safe, secure and comfortable walking environments.

Tailor active mobility solutions to local contexts Infrastructure that does not adhere to best practices and feels unsafe can reduce the satisfaction of pedestrians and cyclists and deter other users. A recent critical literature review and meta-analysis of potential barriers to cycling in OECD countries (Pearson et al., 2023) highlighted that the most commonly cited barriers were related to safety and infrastructure. However, an infrastructure-centric approach that assumes that “if you build it, they will come” is not enough. Understanding people and their wants, needs, and contexts is necessary to increase walking and cycling where appropriate and, importantly, improve the quality and enjoyment of walking and cycling. Given the heterogeneity of contexts and conditions in which people travel, a cookie-cutter approach to delivering the benefits of walking and cycling is unlikely to be successful. In the best cases, the benefits may still be delivered as expected. In many cases, expected benefits may not fully materialise due to lowerthan-expected uptake. In other cases, the outcomes may be counter-intuitive and detrimental. Part of the problem arises from shoehorning active travel policies in a context that favours individual motorised mobility.

Because benefits are clear, but distributive effects are consequential to their maximisation, authorities must be mindful of adapting pro-active travel initiatives to local contexts and the expectations of potentially impacted populations. Cut-and-paste approaches may make sense for some measures in similar contexts or for specific measures in all contexts, but more often, successful pro-active mobility

50

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN CITIES © OECD/ITF 2024

HOW TO RE-CENTRE MOBILITY SPACES ON PEOPLE

policies have more to do with knitting multiple strands that are woven together, each stitch building on the last to create a cohesive whole. Walking and cycling can be tied to social identities. The cultural idea of who cycles and who walks, how they do it and how they are perceived is critical when discussing and designing potential pro-active mobility policies (Stehlin, 2019). Cycling, for instance, can be perceived as something that is not meant for all groups (Parsha and Martens, 2022; Osei and Aldred, 2023). This is further highlighted by quantitative findings where increases in cycling are often unequal, with certain groups cycling more than others (e.g. Hudde, 2022). In other contexts, local citizens have criticised active infrastructure as misguided and a harbinger of negative gentrifying impacts (Stehlin, 2015, 2019). Therefore, it is essential to clearly define policy goals and interventions to ensure desirable outcomes for the people most directly affected. Local populations are best positioned to understand their own needs and wants. Failing to include local communities in meaningful consultative or policy co-construction processes will likely ensure that policies will fail or will not reach their intended goals. What different groups respond to in different contexts varies.

For instance, in Chile, collaborative learning with students found that creating safer walking routes was not enough: to have a measured increase in participation, the routes needed to be perceived as “cool” (Sagaris and Lanfranco, 2019). In short, there are no panaceas. Solutions should be tailored to the local context and not be imported piecemeal from other contexts without careful consideration and adaptation. There has been a tendency to not look beyond infrastructure when trying to understand or develop pro-active travel polices worldwide. There has also been a tendency to ascribe moral superiority to cities or cultures with high levels of walking and cycling or, on the contrary, to blame a lack of walking and cycling on moral failures. Learning from other cities, regions, and countries is essential for developing good active mobility frameworks worldwide. However, governments should avoid top-down approaches and imported solutions without local engagement. Meaningful citizen engagement from the onset underpins successful walking and cycling policies.

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN CITIES © OECD/ITF 2024

51

REFERENCES

References Abson. D.J. et al. (2017), “Leverage points for sustainability transformation”, Ambio, Vol. 46/1, pp. 30-39, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-016-0800-y. Adams, G.S. et al. (2021), “People systematically overlook subtractive changes”, Nature, Vol. 592, pp. 258-61, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03380-y. Adams, J. (2005), “Hypermobility: A Challenge to Governance”, in Tait, J. and C. Lyall (eds), New Modes of Governance, Routledge, London. Allen, H. et al. (2018), Ella se mueve Segura [She moves safely]: A study on women’s personal safety in public transport in three Latin American cities, FIA Foundation Research Series, Paper No. 10, www.fiafoundation.org/resources/ella-se-mueve-segura-she-moves-safely. APTA (2017), Who Rides Public Transportation?, American Public Transportation Association, Washington, DC, www.apta.com/research-technical-resources/research-reports/who-rides-publictransportation. Andersen, L.B., J. Mota and L. Di Pietro (2016), “Update on the global pandemic of physical inactivity”, The Lancet, Vol. 388/10051, pp. 1255-256, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30960-6. APUR (2019), Évolution du stationnement et nouveaux usages de l’espace public [Evolution of parking and new uses of public space], Atelier parisien d’urbanisme, Paris, www.apur.org/fr/nos-travaux/evolutionstationnement-usages-espace-public. Arellana, J. et al.

(2020), “Urban walkability considering pedestrians’ perceptions of the built environment: A 10-year review and a case study in a medium-sized city in Latin America”, Transport Reviews, Vol. 40, pp. 183-203, https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2019.1703842. Avila-Palencia, I. et al. (2018), “The effects of transport mode use on self-perceived health, mental health, and social contact measures: A cross-sectional and longitudinal study”, Environment International, Vol. 120, pp. 199-206, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.08.002. Barajas, J.M. and L.M. Braun (2021), “Are cycling and walking good for all? Tracking differences in associations among active travel, socioeconomics, gentrification, and self-reported health”, Journal of Transport and Health, Vol. 23/101246, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2021.101246. Barron, J. (18 August 2019), “The people of Central Park West want their parking spaces (sorry, cyclists): The city wants to carve out more space for cyclists. Opponents say the city is becoming increasingly hostile to drivers”, New York Times, www.nytimes.com/2019/08/18/nyregion/cars-cyclists-bike-lanes-.html (accessed 17 October 2023). Basil, P. and G. Nyachieo (2023), “Exploring barriers and perceptions to walking and cycling in Nairobi metropolitan area”, Frontiers in Sustainable Cities, Vol. 4/775340, https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2022.775340.

52

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN CITIES © OECD/ITF 2024

REFERENCES

Baumgartner, F.R., D.A. Epp and K. Shoub (2018), Suspect citizens: what 20 million traffic stops tell us about policing and race, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108553599. BBC (2022), “Electric scooters described as an ‘absolute menace’ ”, BBC News, www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-england-bristol-60710577 (accessed 12 October 2023). Beanland, V. and L.J. Hansen. (2017), “Do cyclists make better drivers? Associations between cycling experience and change detection in road scenes,” Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 106, pp. 420-27, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2017.07.013. Beckx, C. et al. (2013), “Limits to active transport substitution of short car trips”, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 22, pp. 10-13, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2013.03.001. Bellet, T. et al. (2009), “A theoretical and methodological framework for studying and modelling drivers’ mental representations”, Safety Science, Vol. 47/9, pp. 1205-221, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2009.03.014. Benton, J.S. et al. (2023), “‘Walking is our asset’: How to retain walking as a valued mode of transport in African cities”, Cities, Vol. 137/104297, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2023.104297. Bhatia, R. and M.

Wier (2011), “‘Safety in Numbers’ re-examined: Can we make valid or practical inferences from available evidence?” Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 43/1, pp. 235-40, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2010.08.015. Bohannon, R.W. and A. Williams Andrews (2011), “Normal walking speed: A descriptive meta-analysis”, Physiotherapy, Vol. 97/3, pp. 182-89, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physio.2010.12.004. Bostock, L. (2008), “Pathways of disadvantage? Walking as a mode of transport among low-income mothers”, Health and Social Care in the Community, Vol. 9, pp. 11-18, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.13652524.2001.00275.x. Bradshaw, L. (2020), “Motorists file legal complaint against temporary cycle paths”, The Bulletin, www.thebulletin.be/motorists-file-legal-complaint-against-temporary-cycle-paths (accessed 17 October 2023). Brand, C. et al. (2021), “The climate change mitigation impacts of active travel: Evidence from a longitudinal panel study in seven European cities”, Global Environmental Change, Vol. 67/102224, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102224. Braun, L.M. et al. (2023) “Who benefits from shifting metal-to-pedal? Equity in the health tradeoffs of cycling”, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 115/103540, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2022.103540. Braun, L.M., D.A. Rodriguez and P.

Gordon-Larsen (2019), “Social (in)equity in access to cycling infrastructure: Cross-sectional associations between bike lanes and area-level sociodemographic characteristics in 22 large US cities”, Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 80/102544, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2019.102544. Bruno, M., H.-J. Dekker and L. Lindenberg Lemos (2021), “Mobility protests in the Netherlands of the 1970s: Activism, innovation, and transitions”, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, Vol. 40, pp. 521-35, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2021.10.001. Carboni, A. et al. (2021), “Gender perceptions of active mobility: Insights from three European cities”, European Transport/Trasporti Europei, Vol. 85/9, https://doi.org/10.48295/ET.2021.85.9.

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN CITIES © OECD/ITF 2024

53

REFERENCES

Carboni, A. et al. (2022), “Active mobility perception from an intersectional perspective: insights from two European cities”, Transportation Research Procedia, Vol. 60, pp. 560-67, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2021.12.072. Cardon, G. and J. Salmon (2020), “Why have youth physical activity trends flatlined in the last decade? Opinion piece on ‘Global trends in insufficient physical activity among adolescents: a pooled analysis of 298 population-based surveys with 1.6 million participants’ by Guthold et al.”, Journal of Sport and Health Science, Vol. 9, pp. 335-38, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2020.04.009. Cassidy, C. (2022), “Solution or hazard? Australia’s e-scooter debate gains speed, but the rules are a mess”, The Guardian, 22 July 2022, www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/jul/23/solution-orhazard-australias-e-scooter-debate-gains-speed-but-the-rules-are-a-mess (accessed 2 October 2023). Castro, A. et al. (2019), “Physical activity of electric bicycle users compared to conventional bicycle users and non-cyclists: Insights based on health and transport data from an online survey in seven European cities”, Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Vol. 1/100017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2019.100017. Ceccato, V. and A.

Loukaitou-Sideris (2022), “Fear of sexual harassment and its impact on safety perceptions in transit environments: A global perspective”, Violence Against Women, Vol. 28/1, pp. 26-48, https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801221992874. Ceccato, V. and Y. Paz (2017), “Crime in São Paulo’s metro system: Sexual crimes against women”, Crime Prevention and Community Safety, Vol. 19, pp. 211-26, https://doi.org/10.1057/s41300-017-00272. Chen, S.-T. et al. (2021), “Active school travel is associated with fewer suicide attempts among adolescents from low-and middle-income countries”, International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, Vol. 21/1/100202, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2020.11.001. Chowdhury, S. and B. van Wee (2020), “Examining women’s perception of safety during waiting times at public transport terminals”, Transport Policy, Vol. 94, pp. 102-108, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.05.009. Combs, T.S. and C.F. Pardo (2021), “Shifting streets COVID-19 mobility data: Findings from a global dataset and a research agenda for transport planning and policy”, Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Vol. 9/100322, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2021.100322. Cook, S. et al. (2022), “More than walking and cycling: What is ‘active travel’?”, Transport Policy, Vol. 126, pp. 151-61, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2022.07.015. Crozet, Y. (2019).

“Économie des rythmes urbains” [Economy of Urban Rythms], EspacesTemps.net, https://shs.hal.science/halshs-02135976/file/Crozet_2019_Economie_rythmes_urbains.pdf (accessed 15 January 2024). Crozet, Y. (2020), “Cars and Space Consumption: Rethinking the Regulation of Urban Mobility”, International Transport Forum Discussion Papers, No. 2020/13, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/8abaa384-en. Culver, G. (2018), “Death and the car: On (auto)mobility, violence, and injustice”, ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies, Vol. 17/1, pp. 144-70, https://acmejournal.org/index.php/acme/article/view/1580.

54

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN CITIES © OECD/ITF 2024

REFERENCES

Curl, A., J. Clark and A. Kearns (2018), “Household car adoption and financial distress in deprived urban communities: A case of forced car ownership?”, Transport Policy, Vol. 65, pp. 61-71, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2017.01.002. de Bortoli, A. and Z. Christoforou (2020), “Consequential LCA for territorial and multimodal transportation policies: Method and application to the free-floating e-scooter disruption in Paris”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 273/122898, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122898. de Hartog, J.J. et al. (2010), “Do the health benefits of cycling outweigh the risks?”, Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 118/8, pp. 1109-116, https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.0901747. de Nazelle, A. et al. (2010), “Short trips: An opportunity for reducing mobile-source emissions?”, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 15/8, pp. 451-57, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2010.04.012. de Nazelle, A. et al. (2011), “Improving health through policies that promote active travel: A review of evidence to support integrated health impact assessment”, Environment International, Vol. 37/4, pp. 766-77, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2011.02.003. de Sá, T.H. et al. (2017), “Health impact modelling of different travel patterns on physical activity, air pollution and road injuries for São Paulo, Brazil”, Environment International, Vol. 108, pp.

22-31, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2017.07.009. Diario Libre (2022), “Vecinos de La Esperilla dicen ciclovía de la avenida Bolívar es un fracaso: Solicitan a la Alcaldía del Distrito Nacional y al Intrant rectificar y disponer su eliminación” [Neighbors of La Esperilla say cycle path on Bolivar Avenue is a failure: They ask the Mayor of the National District and Intrant to rectify and order its elimination], www.diariolibre.com/actualidad/nacional/2022/11/24/junta-de-vecinos-diceciclovia-avenida-bolivar-es-un-fracaso/2151375 (accessed 17 October 2023). Ding, D. et al. (2016), “The economic burden of physical inactivity: A global analysis of major noncommunicable diseases”, The Lancet, Vol. 388/10051, pp. 1311-324, https://doi.org/10.1016/S01406736(16)30383-X. Dons, E. et al. (2018), “Transport mode choice and body mass index: Cross-sectional and longitudinal evidence from a European-wide study”, Environment International, Vol. 119, pp. 109-116, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.06.023. Dunckel-Graglia, A. (2013a), “‘Pink transportation’ in Mexico City: Reclaiming urban space through collective action against gender-based violence”, Gender and Development, Vol. 21, pp. 265-76, https://doi.org/10.1080/13552074.2013.802131. Dunckel-Graglia, A.

(2013b), “Women-only transportation: How ‘pink’ public transportation changes public perception of women’s mobility”, Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 16/2, pp. 85-105, https://doi.org/10.5038/2375-0901.16.2.5. Ekelund, U. et al. (2016), “Does physical activity attenuate, or even eliminate, the detrimental association of sitting time with mortality? A 55armonized meta-analysis of data from more than 1 million men and women”, The Lancet, Vol. 388, pp. 1302-310, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30370-1. EC (2023), “Collision matrix (urban roads only)”, European Commission, Brussels, https://transport.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2023-02/Collision%20matrix%20URBAN%202021.pdf, (accessed 10 October 2023).

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN CITIES © OECD/ITF 2024

55

REFERENCES

Félix, R., P. Cambra and F. Moura (2020), “Build it and give ‘em bikes, and they will come: The effects of cycling infrastructure and bike-sharing system in Lisbon”, Case Studies on Transport Policy, Vol. 8/2, pp. 672-82, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2020.03.002. Ferrari, G. et al. (2020a), “Is the perceived neighborhood built environment associated with domainspecific physical activity in Latin American adults? An eight-country observational study”, International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, Vol. 17/125, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-02001030-6. Ferrari, G. et al. (2020b), “Socio-demographic patterns of public, private and active travel in Latin America: Cross-sectional findings from the ELANS study”, Journal of Transport and Health, Vol. 16/100788, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2019.100788. Figueroa Martínez, C. et al. (2019), “Walking through deprived neighbourhoods: Meanings and constructions behind the attributes of the built environment”, Travel Behaviour and Society, Vol. 16, pp. 171-81, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2019.05.006. FRA (2019), Fundamental Rights Report 2019, European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, Vienna, http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2019/fundamental-rights-report-2019.

France24 (28 August 2023), “Paris ban of ‘nuisance’ electric scooters comes into effect”, www.france24.com/en/live-news/20230828-paris-bids-adieu-to-love-or-hate-electric-scooters (accessed 5 October 2023). Fyhri, A. et al. (2023), “Does active transport lead to improved mood and performance? A panel study of travel changes during the Covid-19 lockdown in Norway”, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 94, pp. 114-32, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2022.12.009. Galpin, A., G. Underwood and D. Crundall (2009), “Change blindness in driving scenes”, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 12/2, pp. 179-85, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2008.11.002. Galtung, J. (1969), “Violence, Peace, and Peace Research”, Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 6(3), pp. 167-91, http://www.jstor.org/stable/422690. Galtung, J. (1975), “Peace: Research - Education - Action”, Essays in Peace Research, Ejlers Forlag, Copenhagen. Gartman, D. (2004), “Three ages of the automobile: The cultural logics of the car”, Theory, Culture and Society, Vol. 21, pp. 169-95, https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276404046066. Gatersleben, B, N. Murtagh and E. White (2013), “Hoody, goody or buddy? How travel mode affects social perceptions in urban neighbourhoods”, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 21, pp.

219-30, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2013.09.005. Geels, F.W. (2005), “The dynamics of transitions in socio-technical systems: A multi-level analysis of the transition pathway from horse-drawn carriages to automobiles (1860–1930)”, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, Vol. 17:4, pp. 445-76, https://www.doi.org/10.1080/09537320500357319. Geels, F. W. (2014), “Regime resistance against low-carbon transitions: Introducing politics and power into the multi-level perspective”, Theory, Culture and Society, Vol. 31/5, pp. 21-40, https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276414531627.

56

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN CITIES © OECD/ITF 2024

REFERENCES

Gekoski, A. et al. (2015), “‘What Works’ in Reducing Sexual Harassment and Sexual Offences on Public Transport Nationally and Internationally: A rapid evidence assessment”, British Transport Police and Department for Transport, London, https://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/id/eprint/15219. Gemeente Amsterdam (2023), “Meer ruimte, minder parkeerplekken” [More space, fewer parking spots], https://openresearch.amsterdam/image/2023/3/13/visualisatie_meer_ruimte_minder_ parkeervakken.pdf. Gemeente Amsterdam (2020), “Amsterdam maakt ruimte: Agenda Amsterdam Autoluw” [Amsterdam makes space: The Amsterdam Low Car Plan], https://openresearch.amsterdam/image/2019/11/28/amsterdam_autoluw_agenda.pdf. Ghimire, S. and E. Bardaka (2023), “Active travel among carless and car-owning low-income populations in the United States”, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 117/103627, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2023.103627. Gilbert, R. (1998), “Reducing automobile use in urban areas by reducing automobile ownership: The EANO principle”, in Andan, O., B. Faivre-D’Arcier and M. Lee-Gosselin (eds), Onzièmes Entretiens Jacques Cartier – Actes Du Colloque L’avenir Des Déplacements En Ville, 7-9 Décembre 1998 (Tome 2), Laboratoire d’Economie Des Transports, Lyon. Giménez-Nadal, J.I., L. Echeverría and A.