|
Abstract
|
Background
Cycling advocates have recently argued that low-income and minority communities across the U.S. have disproportionately low access to bike lanes. To date, however, quantitative evidence of disparities in access to bike lanes is limited to a small number of cities.
Methods
We address this research gap by examining cross-sectional associations between bike lanes and sociodemographic characteristics at the block group level for 23 large U.S. cities (n=22,164 block groups). Dependent variables include the presence (yes/no), density, connectivity, and proximity of bike lanes, measured using secondary GIS data collected by each of the 23 cities between 2012 and 2016. Primary independent variables include indicators of race, ethnicity, educational attainment, income, poverty, and a composite socioeconomic status (SES) index, measured using data from the 2011-2015 American Community Survey. We use linear and logistic multilevel mixed-effects regression models to estimate associations between these sociodemographic characteristics and each bike lane dependent variable, before and after adjusting for traditional indicators of cycling demand (population and employment density, distance to downtown, percent of population between ages 18 and 34, percent of workers commuting by bicycle).
Results
In unadjusted associations, disadvantaged block groups (i.e. lower SES, higher proportions of minority residents) had significantly lower access to bike lanes. After adjusting for traditional indicators of cycling demand, access to bike lanes remained lower for block groups with particular types of disadvantage (lower educational attainment, higher proportions of Hispanic residents, lower composite SES) but not with other types of disadvantage (lower proportions of black residents, lower income, higher poverty).
Conclusions
These results provide empirical support for advocates' claims of distributional inequalities in bike lane access, suggesting the importance of more closely considering social equity in the bicycle planning and advocacy process. |