Elsevier

Transport Policy

Volume 13, Issue 3, May 2006, Pages 265-279
Transport Policy

Why Canadians cycle more than Americans: A comparative analysis of bicycling trends and policies

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2005.11.001Get rights and content

Abstract

In spite of their colder climate, Canadians cycle about three times more than Americans. The main reasons for this difference are Canada's higher urban densities and mixed-use development, shorter trip distances, lower incomes, higher costs of owning, driving and parking a car, safer cycling conditions, and more extensive cycling infrastructure and training programs. Most of these factors result from differences between Canada and the United States in their transport and land-use policies, and not from intrinsic differences in history, culture or resource availability. That is good news, since it suggests the possibility of significantly increasing cycling levels in the United States by adopting some of the Canadian policies that have so effectively promoted cycling and enhanced its safety.

Introduction

One might assume that the much colder climate in Canada would deter cycling and thus lead to a lower bike share of urban travel in Canada than in the United States. As documented in this article, the reverse is true. In fact, cycling levels are considerably higher in Canadian cities. Even controlling for population size, Canadian metropolitan areas have bike shares of work trips about three times higher than American metropolitan areas. Just as a cool climate does not prevent cycling, a warm climate does not necessarily assure it. For example, the Yukon Territory—roughly the same latitude as Alaska—has a bike share of work trips more than twice as high as California's (2.0 vs. 0.8%) and more than three times as high as Florida's (0.6%).

Clearly, there must be other factors at work in Canada that offset the disadvantages of climate. It seems likely that differences in transport and land use policies play an important role in explaining the higher share of bike trips in Canada. To some extent, they may be the same policy differences that explain higher levels of transit use and walking in Canada. Several studies have found that higher densities and mixed-use development in Canadian cities promote greater transit use there, while the lower densities and single-use zoning in most American cities encourage car use (Cervero, 1986, Cervero, 1998, Filion et al., 2004, Goldberg and Mercer, 1986, Miron, 2003, Newman and Kenworthy, 1999, Pucher, 1994, Pucher and Lefevre, 1996, Transportation Research Board, 2001). Higher densities and mixed land uses probably encourage bike use as well, since trips tend to be shorter in compact, mixed-use environments. The much lower levels of car ownership in Canada might also encourage cycling—just as they encourage transit use. Moreover, car parking in Canada tends to be less available and more expensive than in the United States. Finally, the greater availability of transit services in Canada may complement bike use by serving those trips too long to cycle, thus facilitating a less car-dependent lifestyle.

In addition, however, both countries have government policies and programs directly targeted at bicycling. Most Canadian cities appear to have more extensive cycling networks, bike parking, and cycling education and training than most American cities. Cycling safety and promotion campaigns also differ. Clearly, such differences in bicycling policies are obvious candidates for explaining cycling levels.

This article examines a range of possible causes of the higher incidence of cycling in Canada compared to the United States. While previous studies have analyzed differences in land use, car dependence, and transit use in Canada and the United States (e.g. Transportation Research Board, 2001), none has dealt specifically with cycling. Especially given the stated goal of U.S. Department of Transportation (2004a) to double the bike share of urban travel in American cities, it makes sense to examine how Canadian cities have achieved their higher levels of cycling. No other country is as close to the United States in culture, lifestyle, democratic traditions, standard of living, historical development, and resource availability. Those similarities increase the likelihood that successful policies in Canada would be adaptable for use in American cities as well.

Section snippets

Levels of cycling in Canada and the United States

The Canadian and American Censuses are the only fully comparable sources of nationwide data on cycling levels in the two countries, but they only report on bike trips to work. The Canadian Census has reported on bicycling for the work trip since 1996. It shows an increase in the bike share of work trips in Canada from 1.1% in 1996 to 1.2% in 2001. Over the same period, the total number of bike trips increased by 18.5%, almost twice as fast as work trips by all other modes (10.3%) (Statistics

Factors influencing cycling levels

There are many possible reasons why Canada has a higher bike share of urban trips than the United States. In the remainder of this article, we examine a range of factors, including cycling safety, land use patterns, car ownership rates, costs of car use, per capita income, climate, and cultural differences. We present evidence of Canadian–American differences in these factors, discuss their likely impacts on cycling, and then use multiple regression analysis to explore the relative importance

Bicycling policies, programs, and funding

It is virtually certain that the factors examined above affect levels of cycling in Canada and the United States. From a planning perspective, however, it is perhaps most interesting to focus on differences in policies specifically aimed at encouraging cycling and increasing its safety. Unfortunately, it is virtually impossible to obtain national, aggregate data on the extensiveness of bikeway networks, bike parking, and cycling education and safety programs in Canada and the United States.

Multiple regression analysis of factors influencing cycling levels

Few studies have attempted to use multiple regression to examine the relative importance of factors influencing cycling levels. Baltes (1997) relied exclusively on Census data from 1990 to analyze the bike share of work trips in 284 MSAs in the United States. He did not examine any policy variables at all, but found that high urban population density, temperate climate, and a high proportion of college students were all associated with higher bike share of the work trip. Nelson and Allen (1997)

Conclusions and policy implications

There is no simple answer to the question posed in the title of this article. Many factors help explain why Canadians cycle more than Americans. The denser, mixed-use development in Canadian cities leads to average trip distances those are only half as long in Canada and thus more bikeable than the longer trips Americans make. In addition, the costs of owning and driving a car are considerably higher in Canada than in the United States, while average incomes in Canada are lower. Both factors

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank their colleagues David Hensher, Michael Greenberg, Martin Wachs, Joseph Seneca, Peter Stopher, John Rose, Radha Jagannathan, Todd Littman, and John Preston for their advice and suggestions for improving earlier versions of this article.

References (58)

  • J. Pucher et al.

    Bicycling renaissance in North America? Recent trends and alternative policies to promote bicycling

    Transportation Research A

    (1999)
  • American Aeutomobile Association, 2005. Your Driving Costs. AAA. Washington, DC: Accessible at:...
  • M. Baltes

    Factors influencing nondiscretionary work trips by bicycle determined from 1990 US census metropolitan area statistical area data

    Transportation Research Record

    (1997)
  • Canadian Automobile Association, 2005. Driving Costs. CAA. Ottawa, Canada Accessible at:...
  • Canadian Petroleum Products Institute (CPPI), 2001. Fuel facts: gasoline price monitor. Prepared by Purvin & Gertz,...
  • R. Cervero

    Urban transit in Canada: integration and innovation at its best

    Transportation Quarterly

    (1986)
  • R. Cervero

    The Transit Metropolis: A Global Inquiry

    (1998)
  • A. Clarke

    Green modes and US transport policy: TEA-21

  • J. Dill et al.

    Bicycle commuting and facilities in major US cities: if you build them, commuters will use them—another look

    Transportation Research Record

    (2003)
  • Energy Information Administration (EIA), 2000. Petroleum Marketing Annual 2000. Washington, DC. Accessible online at:...
  • Environment Canada, 2005. National Climate Data and Information Archive: Climate Data Online. Downsview, Ontario,...
  • Fifty Years of Transport Policy: Successes, Failures, and New Challenges

    (2003)
  • Implementing Sustainable Urban Travel Policies: National Policies to Promote Cycling

    (2004)
  • European Union, 2003. Energy and transport in figures. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission, Directorate General for...
  • P. Filion et al.

    Canada-U.S. metropolitan density patterns: zonal convergence and divergence

    Urban Geography

    (2004)
  • M. Goldberg et al.

    The Myth of the North American City: Continentalism Challenged

    (1986)
  • J. Grant

    Mixed use in theory and practice: canadian experience with implementing a planning principle

    Journal of the American Planning Association

    (2002)
  • Energy Prices and Taxes

    (2005)
  • P. Jacobsen

    Safety in numbers: more walkers and bicyclists, safer walking and bicycling

    Injury Prevention

    (2003)
  • Kenworthy, J. 2002. Energy use in urban transport systems: a global review. Paper presented at the Third Biennial...
  • League of American Bicyclists, 2005. Bicycling Friendly Communities. Washington, DC: author. Accessible at:...
  • J. Miron

    Urban Sprawl in Canada and America: Just How Dissimilar?

    (2003)
  • National Center for Walking and Bicycling, 2005. National Walking and Bicycling Study: Case Studies. Washington, DC:...
  • National Center for Walking and Bicycling, 2005. Bicycling Facilities Reference Guide. Washington, DC: U.S. Department...
  • National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), 2005. US Climate Normals: Area Weighted State, Regional, and National Temperature...
  • A. Nelson et al.

    If you build them, commuters will use them

    Transportation Research Record

    (1997)
  • P. Newman et al.

    Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence

    (1999)
  • Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2005a. National Accounts of OECD Countries. Paris, France: OECD....
  • Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2005b. International Road Traffic Accident Database. Paris,...
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text