| Literature DB >> 28617345 |
Yeran Sun1, Yunyan Du2, Yu Wang3, Liyuan Zhuang4.
Abstract
Policymakers pay much attention to effectively increasing frequency of people's cycling in the context of developing sustainable and green cities. Investigating associations of environmental characteristics and cycling behaviour could offer implications for changing urban infrastructure aiming at encouraging active travel. However, earlier examinations of associations between environmental characteristics and active travel behaviour are limited by low spatial granularity and coverage of traditional data. Crowdsourced geographic information offers an opportunity to determine the fine-grained travel patterns of people. Particularly, Strava Metro data offer a good opportunity for studies of recreational cycling behaviour as they can offer hourly, daily or annual cycling volumes with different purposes (commuting or recreational) in each street across a city. Therefore, in this study, we utilised Strava Metro data for investigating associations between environmental characteristics and recreational cycling behaviour at a large spatial scale (street level). In this study, we took account of population density, employment density, road length, road connectivity, proximity to public transit services, land use mix, proximity to green space, volume of motor vehicles and traffic accidents in an empirical investigation over Glasgow. Empirical results reveal that Strava cyclists are more likely to cycle for recreation on streets with short length, large connectivity or low volume of motor vehicles or on streets surrounded by residential land.Entities:
Keywords: Strava; big data; crowdsourced geographic information; cycling; street level
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28617345 PMCID: PMC5486330 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph14060644
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Edges and nodes of Strava Metro data (Basemap: OpenStreetMap, licensed under the Open Database License).
Fields in the Streets file (source: [48]).
| Field | Description |
|---|---|
| Edge_id | Unique and permanent Street ID number for delivery. |
| Year | Numerical year format (yyyy). |
| Day | Numerical day format (1–365). |
| Hour | Numerical hour format (0–24). |
| Minute | Numerical minute format (0–59). |
| Count_Ride | Count of all-purpose cycling trips (regardless of unique cyclists) on the section of street for the day, hour and minute. |
| Commute_Count_Ride | Count of commuting cycling trips (regardless of unique cyclists) on the section of street for the day, hour and minute. |
| Recreation_Count _Ride | Count of recreational cycling trips (regardless of unique cyclists) on the section of street for the day, hour and minute. |
Demographics of Strava cyclists in 2015.
| Statistics | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Athlete ID count (User count) | 13,684 | |||||||
| Activity count (Trip count) | 287,833 | |||||||
| Commute count (Commute trip count) | 174,758 | |||||||
| Recreational count (Recreational trip count) | 113,075 | |||||||
| Average distance of trips | 24 km | |||||||
| Average time of trips | 81 min | |||||||
| 718 | 2176 | 2957 | 2028 | 448 | 73 | 2812 | 11,212 | |
| 141 | 417 | 346 | 217 | 44 | 2 | 531 | 1698 | |
Independent variables considered in this study.
| Variable Type | Indepedent Variables | Type |
|---|---|---|
| Temporal factor | Time of the day | categorical |
| Socio-economic factors | Population density (/ha) | numeric |
| Employment density (/ha) | numeric | |
| Urban form factors | Distance to city centre (km) | numeric |
| Distance to the nearest bus stop (km) | numeric | |
| Road factors | Road class | categorical |
| Road length (km) | numeric | |
| Connectivity of major road | numeric | |
| Connectivity of minor road | numeric | |
| Land use and green space factors | Land use mix | numeric |
| Dominant land use type | categorical | |
| Contiguity to green space | categorical | |
| Traffic-related factors | Volume of motor vehicles (k) | numeric |
| Traffic accident density (/m square) | numeric |
Figure 2A simple example for calculating the population density of a street.
The estimated linear mixed-effects model for RCR.
| Coefficient | SE | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | –0.085204 | 0.04942 | 0.0848 |
| TOTD “ | 0.143248 | 0.01274 | <0.0001 |
| TOTD “ | 0.015746 | 0.01718 | 0.3595 * |
| TOTD “ | 0.05746 | 0.01537 | 0.0002 |
| TOTD “ | 0.090575 | 0.01537 | <0.0001 |
| TOTD “ | 0.146904 | 0.01437 | <0.0001 |
| Population density | −0.000105 | 0.00007 | 0.1459 * |
| Employment density | 0.00089 | 0.00049 | 0.0734 * |
| Distance to city centre | 0.007584 | 0.00411 | 0.068 * |
| Distance to the nearest bus stop | −0.065410 | 0.09992 | 0.5142 * |
| Road class “ | −0.05799 | 0.03249 | 0.0772 * |
| Road length | −0.058438 | 0.025 | 0.0214 |
| Connectivity of major road | 0.027201 | 0.00923 | 0.004 |
| Connectivity of minor road | 0.041115 | 0.00964 | <0.0001 |
| Land use mix | −0.019881 | 0.02038 | 0.3316 * |
| DLUT “ | 0.043976 | 0.04296 | 0.3084 * |
| DLUT “ | 0.016395 | 0.02872 | 0.5693 * |
| DLUT “ | 0.060977 | 0.02482 | 0.0157 |
| CTGS “ | 0.021779 | 0.02044 | 0.2891 * |
| Volume of motor vehicles | −0.000909 | 0.00035 | 0.0116 |
| Traffic accident density | −14.31249 | 42.86109 | 0.7391 * |
| AIC | −493.1176 | ||
| BIC | −357.0646 | ||
| Restricted log-likelihood | 269.5588 |
Note: * means it is not statistically significant at a 0.05 level.