Document Type : Research Paper
Authors
Abstract
Abstract: The purpose of the present research was the importance-performance analysis of characteristics of bike paths effect on cycling decision with IPA model application. The research method was descriptive in the type of analytical. The statistical population of this study was all user of the bike sharing system of Isfahan city that 384 people were selected by available sampling as research sample. The bike path’s characteristics with an exact review of research literature were recognized and used for research questionnaire design. The validity of the questionnaire was investigated by 10 professors and experts and its reliability by Cronbach's alpha coefficient investigated that alpha coefficient in importance dimension 0.93 and in performance dimension 0.94 was calculated. The data analysis was done with descriptive and inferential statistics method. The research results showed all 34 bike path’s characteristics affecting the decision to cycling on concentrate here area “where the factors that give low satisfaction score from users, but they are important in their opinion” was maintained. Such characteristics require immediate corrective action and in this respect is a high priority. So, it is necessary urban authorities have a special focus on eliminating these deficiencies on existing bicycle paths and considering them to design future paths for expanding bikes riding in the daily lives of citizens and replacing them with motor vehicles. Bike Paths
Keywords
1. Rietveld P, Daniel VJTRPAP, Practice. Determinants of bicycle use: do municipal policies matter? 2004;38(7):531-50.
2. Soltani A, and Shariati, S. . "Investigating incentives and inhibitors of bicycle use in urban transport (Isfahan case study)". . Scientific-Research Journal of Iranian Architecture and Urban Development Association 2013:;(5),: 63-73. (In Persian)
3. Hassanzadeh G. "Assessing and assessing the physical capacities and social and cultural context of bicycle use in the city as a means of transportation." [ Master's Thesis, ]. Isfahan Isfahan University. ; 2008. (In Persian)
4. Sener IN, Eluru N, Bhat CRJT. An analysis of bicycle route choice preferences in Texas, US. 2009;36(5):511-39.
5. Naderan A, and Chopani, A. "Urban Transport Management, Urban and Rural Management. Municipal Organization of the Country2011. (In Persian)
6. Saghaei M, and Sadeghi, Z. "Presentation of a Mid-Term Cycling Model for Sustainable Development Case Study: The Central Range of Isfahan". . Journal of Urban Planning and Research 2013: ;4 ((12), ):96-116. (In Persian)
7. Heinen E, Van Wee B, Maat KJTr. Commuting by bicycle: an overview of the literature. 2010;30(1):59-96.
8. Moudon AV, Lee C, Cheadle AD, Collier CW, Johnson D, Schmid TL, et al. Cycling and the built environment, a US perspective. 2005;10(3):245-61.
9. Mohammad Hadi F, Fathi Vajargah, K., Pardakhtchi, M., and Abolghasemi, M. . "Students Satisfaction Analysis of In-Service Training Courses Based on IPA Model". . Management and Planning Dates in Educational Systems. 2011:;4((6), ):32-53. (In Persian)
10. Petritsch TA, Landis BW, Huang HF, Challa SJTrr. Sidepath safety model: bicycle sidepath design factors affecting crash rates. 2006;1982(1):194-201.
11. Krizek KJ, El-Geneidy A, Thompson KJT. A detailed analysis of how an urban trail system affects cyclists’ travel. 2007;34(5):611-24.
12. Kang L, Fricker JDJT. Bicyclist commuters’ choice of on-street versus off-street route segments. 2013;40(5):887-902.
13. Sacks D. Greenways as alternative transportation routes: a case study of selected greenways in the Baltimore, Washington area: M. Sc. Thesis, Towson State University, Towson, MD; 1994.
14. Noland RB, Kunreuther HJTP. Short-run and long-run policies for increasing bicycle transportation for daily commuter trips. 1995;2(1):67-79.
15. Guttenplan M, Patten RJTN. Off-road but on track: using bicycle and pedestrian trails for transportation. 1995(178).
16. Shafizadeh K, Niemeier DJTRR. Bicycle journey-to-work: travel behavior characteristics and spatial attributes. 1997;1578(1):84-90. (In Persian)
17. Landis BW, Vattikuti VR, Brannick MTJTRR. Real-time human perceptions: toward a bicycle level of service. 1997;1578(1):119-26.
18. Aultman-Hall L, Hall FL, Baetz BBJTrr. Analysis of bicycle commuter routes using geographic information systems: implications for bicycle planning. 1997;1578(1):102-10.
19. Nankervis MJTRPAP, Practice. The effect of weather and climate on bicycle commuting. 1999;33(6):417-31.
20. Hyodo T, Suzuki N, Takahashi KJTRR. Modeling of bicycle route and destination choice behavior for bicycle road network plan. 2000;1705(1):70-6.
21. Fajans J, Curry M. Why bicyclists hate stop signs. 2001.
22. Cervero R, Duncan MJAjoph. Walking, bicycling, and urban landscapes: evidence from the San Francisco Bay Area. 2003;93(9):1478-83.
23. Stinson M, Bhat C. An Analysis of Commuter Bicyclist Route Choice Using Stated Preference Survey (Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board). 2003.
24. Dill J, Carr TJTRR. Bicycle commuting and facilities in major US cities: if you build them, commuters will use them. 2003;1828(1):116-23.
25. Boslaugh SE, Luke DA, Brownson RC, Naleid KS, Kreuter MWJJoUH. Perceptions of neighborhood environment for physical activity: Is it “who you are” or “where you live?”. 2004;81(4):671-81.
26. Stinson MA, Bhat CR, editors. A comparison of the route preferences of experienced and inexperienced bicycle commuters. TRB 84th annual meeting compendium of papers; 2005.
27. Hunt JD, Abraham JEJT. Influences on bicycle use. 2007;34(4):453-70.
28. Shankwiler KD. Developing a Framework for Behavior Assessment of Bicycle Commuters: A Cyclist-Centric Appriach: Georgia Institute of Technology; 2006.
29. El-Geneidy AM, Krizek KJ, Iacono M, editors. Predicting bicycle travel speeds along different facilities using GPS data: A proof of concept model. Proceedings of the 86th annual meeting of the transportation research board, compendium of papers; 2007: TRB Washington, DC, USA.
30. Tilahun NY, Levinson DM, Krizek KJJTRPAP, Practice. Trails, lanes, or traffic: Valuing bicycle facilities with an adaptive stated preference survey. 2007;41(4):287-301.
31. Garrard J, Rose G, Lo SKJPm. Promoting transportation cycling for women: the role of bicycle infrastructure. 2008;46(1):55-9.
32. Parkin J, Wardman M, Page MJT. Estimation of the determinants of bicycle mode share for the journey to work using census data. 2008;35(1):93-109.
33. Harvey F, Krizek KJ, Collins R. Using GPS data to assess bicycle commuter route choice. 2008.
34. Sener IN, Eluru N, Bhat CRJTRR. Who are bicyclists? Why and how much are they bicycling? 2009;2134(1):63-72.
35. Dill JJJophp. Bicycling for transportation and health: the role of infrastructure. 2009;30(1):S95-S110.
36. Winters M, Teschke KJAjohp. Route preferences among adults in the near market for bicycling: findings of the cycling in cities study. 2010;25(1):40-7.
37. Larsen J, El-Geneidy AJTrpDt, environment. A travel behavior analysis of urban cycling facilities in Montréal, Canada. 2011;16(2):172-7.
38. Menghini G, Carrasco N, Schüssler N, Axhausen KWJTrpAp, practice. Route choice of cyclists in Zurich. 2010;44(9):754-65.
39. Taghvaee M, and Fathi, E. . "Criteria for locating and designing cycling routes (emphasizing the city of Isfahan)". . Applied Sociology 2011:;22 ( (43),):135-52. (In Persian)
40. Heinen E, Maat K, Van Wee BJTrpDt, environment. The role of attitudes toward characteristics of bicycle commuting on the choice to cycle to work over various distances. 2011;16(2):102-9.
41. Casello JM, Nour A, Rewa K, Hill J, editors. An analysis of stated preference and GPS data for bicycle travel forecasting. Proceedings of the Transportation Research Board 90th Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, USA; 2011.
42. Hood J, Sall E, Charlton BJTl. A GPS-based bicycle route choice model for San Francisco, California. 2011;3(1):63-75.
43. Emond CR, Handy SLJJoTG. Factors associated with bicycling to high school: insights from Davis, CA. 2012;20(1):71-9.
44. Broach J, Dill J, Gliebe JJTRPAP, Practice. Where do cyclists ride? A route choice model developed with revealed preference GPS data. 2012;46(10):1730-40.
45. Rondinella G, Fernandez-Heredia A, Monzón A. Analysis of perceptions of utilitarian cycling by level of user experience. 2012.
46. Emadi M, Ghahremantabrizi, K., and Sharifian, I. . "Exploratory Study on the Factors Influencing the Development of Bicycling in Kerman". . Semi-quarterly of the management and sport development 2013:; (3), :47-60. (In Persian)
47. Snizek B, Nielsen TAS, Skov-Petersen HJJoTG. Mapping bicyclists’ experiences in Copenhagen. 2013;30:227-33.
48. Segadilha ABP, da Penha Sanches SJP-S, Sciences B. Identification of factors that influence cyclistś route choice. 2014;160:372-80.
49. Ghorbani R, and Asadi, A. . "Investigating of Affective Factors on Reduction of Bicycle Use in Urban Travel (Case Study: Zanjan City)". . Journal of Geography and Planning 2015:;19 ((51), ):267-88. (In Persian)
50. Ghafari Guilande A, Hosseini, S.M., and Pasazadeh, A. . "Investigating Affective Factors on Citizen's Unwillingness to Use Bicycle on Urban Travel (Case Study: Ardabil City)". Urban Studies Quarterly 2015: ((15),):81-90. (In Persian)
51. Li M, Pitts, B., and Quarterman, J. "Research Methods in Sport Management". . Tehran: : Tehran University Press. ; 2008: .
52. Eskildsen JK, Kristensen KJIJoP, Management P. Enhancing importance-performance analysis. 2006;55(1):40-60.
53. Mäki-Opas TE, Borodulin K, Valkeinen H, Stenholm S, Kunst AE, Abel T, et al. The contribution of travel-related urban zones, cycling and pedestrian networks and green space to commuting physical activity among adults–a cross-sectional population-based study using geographical information systems. 2016;16(1):760.
54. Hirsch JA, Meyer KA, Peterson M, Zhang L, Rodriguez DA, Gordon-Larsen PJIjobn, et al. Municipal investment in off-road trails and changes in bicycle commuting in Minneapolis, Minnesota over 10 years: a longitudinal repeated cross-sectional study. 2017;14(1):21.
55. Dales J, Jones P, Black R, Hoe N, Mayo A, Parkin J, et al. International cycling infrastructure best practice study. 2014.
56. Ghorishi M. "Evaluation of the efficiency and effectiveness of cycling routes in the 8th district of Tehran". Quarterly Journal of Urban Management Studies. 2015: ;7((22), ):31-44. (In Persian)
57. Asgari torzani A, and Habibian, M. . "Identifying Effective Policies on Bicycle Share System in Tehran city". Transportation Engineering 2016: ;7((3), ):463-80. (In Persian)
58. Dill J, Monsere CM, McNeil NJAA, Prevention. Evaluation of bike boxes at signalized intersections. 2012;44(1):126-34.
59. Askari M, and Rahimi, M. "A survey on social acceptance of bike use at metropolitan level, case study: Tehran metropolis". Applied Sociology. 2017:;28((1-65), ):185-206. (In Persian)
)