Walking and cycling barriers: obstacles to Cachoeira do Sul students' choice of active transport modes

Authors

  • Jean Augusto Lemes Laboratório de Mobilidade e Logística, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria - UFSM, Campus Cachoeira do Sul, Cachoeira do Sul, RS.
  • Raquel Cristina Ferreira Laboratório de Mobilidade e Logística, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria - UFSM, Campus Cachoeira do Sul, Cachoeira do Sul, RS.
  • Samuel Baesso Müller Laboratório de Mobilidade e Logística, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria - UFSM, Campus Cachoeira do Sul, Cachoeira do Sul, RS.
  • Tânia Batistela Torres Laboratório de Sistemas de Transportes, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria - UFSM, Campus Cachoeira do Sul, Cachoeira do Sul, RS.
  • Brenda Medeiros Pereira Laboratório de Mobilidade e Logística, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria - UFSM, Campus Cachoeira do Sul, Cachoeira do Sul, RS.
  • Alejandro Ruiz-Padillo Laboratório de Sistemas de Transportes, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria - UFSM, Campus Cachoeira do Sul, Cachoeira do Sul, RS.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X35515

Keywords:

Active modes, Logit, Students

Abstract

One of the greatest challenges on mobility nowadays is to promote the use sustainable modes of transportation for the population of urban areas. This paper aims to map the main barriers reported by high school students to the use of active modes (walking and cycling) in the city of Cachoeira do Sul, in Rio Grande do Sul. Data were collected through the application of a survey on a sample of city students and were analyzed using discrete choice model logit binomial. Aspects such as security and road safety, as well as distance between origins and destinations presented positive impacts on active transport use. Conclusions can contribute for planning safer and more attractive road environments for the active modes. Results are valid for the surveyed city and also for other small cities with similar urban mobility and urban development standards.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

AHLPORT KN, LINNAN L, VAUGHN A, EVERSON KR, WARD DS. Barriers to and facilitators of walking and bicycling to school: formative results from the non-motorized travel study. Health Education & Behavior. v. 35, n. 2, p. 221–244, 2006.

BALL K, BAUMAN A, LESLIE E, OWEN N. Perceived Environmental Aesthetics and Convenience and Company Are Associated with Walking for Exercise among Australian Adults. Preventive Medicine, Austrália, 2001.

BARROS APBG, MARTÍNEZ LMG, VIEGAS JM. A caminhabilidade sob a ótica das pessoas: O que promove e o que inibe um deslocamento a pé? Revista UR, 2015.

BEN-AKIVA ME, LERMAN SR. LERMAN, Steven R. Discrete choice analysis: theory and application to travel demand. MIT press, 1985.

BIERLAIRE M. BIOGEME: A free package for the estimation of discrete choice models. Proceedings of the 3rd Swiss Transportation Research Conference. Ascona, Switzerland, 2003.

BOARNET MG, ANDERSON CL, DAY K, MCMILLAN T. Evaluation of the California Safe Routes to School legislation: Urban form changes and children’s active transportation to school. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28, 134–140, 2005.

BRASIL. Política Nacional de Mobilidade Urbana. Brasília (Brasil). 2012.

CERVERO R, DUNCAN M. Walking, Bicycling, and Urban Landscapes: Evidence from the San Francisco Bay Area. American Journal of Public Health, v. 93, n. 9, p. 1478–1483, 2003.

CHAUDHURY H. The influence of neighborhood residential density, physical and social environments on older adults' physical activity: An exploratory study in two metropolitan areas. Journal of Aging Studies, v. 26, n. 1, p. 35-43, 2012.

CLARK AF, SCOTT DM. Barriers to walking: an investigation of adults in Hamilton (Ontario, Canada). International journal of environmental research and public health, v. 13, n. 2, p. 179, 2016.

DUNTON GF, SCHNEIDER M. Peer Reviewed: Perceived Barriers to Walking for Physical Activity. Preventing chronic disease, v. 3, n. 4, 2006.

ELVIK R, HOKE A, VAA T, SORENSEN M. The handbook of road safety measures. Oxford: Elsevier, 2004.

EWING R, CERVERO R. Travel and the built environment. Journal of the American Planning Association. v. 76, n. 3, p. 265-294, 2010.

FRYE A. Disabled and Older Persons and Sustainable Urban Mobility, Thematic study prepared for Global Report on Human Settlements, 2013.

GAMACHE S, ROUTHIER F, MORALES E, LEBLOND J. Municipal practices and needs regarding accessibility of pedestrian infrastructures for individuals with physical disabilities in Québec, Canada. Journal of accessibility and design for all, v. 7, n. 1, p. 21-55, 2017.

GEHL J. Cidades para pessoas. Perspectiva, 2 ed. São Paulo, 2010.

GLAZIER RH, CREATORE MI, WEYMAN JT, FAZLI G. Density, destinations or both? A comparison of measures of walkability in relation to transportation behaviors, obesity and diabetes in Toronto, Canada. PloS one, v. 9, n. 1, 2014.

INSTITUTO BRASILEIRO DE GEOGRAFIA E ESTATÍSTICA Rio Grande do Sul: Cachoeira do Sul. 2016. Disponível em: https://cidades.ibge.gov.br/brasil/rs/cachoeira-do-sul. Acesso em: 28 mar. 2018.

INSTITUTO BRASILEIRO DE GEOGRAFIA E ESTATÍSTICA. Coordenação de Trabalho e Rendimento. Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios: síntese de indicadores. Rio de Janeiro, 2016.

INSTITUTO DE PESQUISA ECONÔMICA APLICADA. Relatório brasileiro para a Habitat III. Conselho das Cidades. Brasília, 2016.

INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE PESQUISAS ESPACIAIS. TOPODATA: Banco de Dados Geomorfológicos do Brasil. Obtido de http://www.dsr.inpe.br/topodata/acesso.php. 2008.

MCDONALD NC, YANG Y, ABBOTT SM, BULLOCK AN. Impact of the Safe Routes to School program on walking and biking: Eugene, Oregon study. Transport policy, v. 29, p. 243-248, 2013.

MCFADDEN DL. Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior. University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, EUA, 1974. Disponível em: https://eml.berkeley.edu/reprints/mcfadden/zarembka.pdf. Acesso em: 20 mar. 2018.

MCMILLAN TE. Urban form and a child’s trip to school: the current literature and a framework for future research. Journal of Planning Literature, v. 19, n. 4, p. 440-456, 2005.

NAPIER MA, BROWN BB, WERNER CM, GALLIMORE J. Walking to school: Community design and child and parent barriers. Journal of Environmental Psychology, v. 31, n. 1, p. 45-51, 2011.

OESTREICH L, LEMES JA, MENNA RO, TORRES TB, RUIZ-PADILLO A. Avaliação da percepção de segurança viária no entorno de escolas mediante uma análise estatística fuzzy. Universidade Federal de Santa Maria Campus Cachoeira do Sul, Cachoeira do Sul - RS, Brasil, 2017.

ORTÚZAR JD, WILLUMSEN LG. Modelling Transport. 4 ed, John Wiley & Sons, 2011.

POOLEY CG, TURNBULL J, ADAMS M. The journey to school in Britain since the 1940’s: continuity and change. Area, v. 37, n. 1, p. 43-53, 2005.

SCOVINO AS. As viagens a pé na cidade do Rio de Janeiro: um estudo da mobilidade e exclusão social. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. COPPE/UFRJ. Rio de Janeiro, 2008.

STAMM C, STADUTO JAR, LIMA JF, WADI YM. A população urbana e a difusão das cidades de porte médio no Brasil. Interações (Campo Grande), v. 14, n. 2, 2013.

STROHMEIER F. Barriers and their influence on the mobility behavior of elder pedestrians in urban areas: challenges and best practice for walkability in the city of Vienna. Transportation Research Procedia, v. 14, p. 1134-1143, 2016.

VILLAVECES A, NIETO LA, ORTEGA D, RÍOS JF. Pedestrians' perceptions of walkability and safety in relation to the built environment in Cali, Colombia. 2009–10. Injury prevention, 2012.

WOOD L, FRANK LD, GILES-CORTI B. Sense of community and its relationship with walking and neighborhood design. Social Science & Medicine, v. 70, n. 9, p. 1381-1390, 2010.

WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION. Global status report on road safety 2015, 2015.

YEUNG J, WEARING S, HILLS AP. Child transport practices and perceived barriers in active commuting to school. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, v. 42, n. 6, p. 895-900, 2008.

Downloads

Published

2019-03-12

How to Cite

Lemes, J. A., Ferreira, R. C., Müller, S. B., Torres, T. B., Pereira, B. M., & Ruiz-Padillo, A. (2019). Walking and cycling barriers: obstacles to Cachoeira do Sul students’ choice of active transport modes. Ciência E Natura, 40, 156–167. https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X35515

Issue

CIÊNCIA E NATURA, V. 40, 2018, SPECIAL EDITION: II MOSTRA DE PROJETOS DA UFSM – CAMPUS CACHOEIRA DO SUL

Section

Special Edition

License

To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.

 

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles. 

Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.

In particular, 

Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.

Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.

Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Most read articles by the same author(s)