Journal of Transport and Land Use

Bicycle use in the university community: Empirical analysis using MobiCampus-UdL data (Lyon, France)

Nathalie Havet

Urban Planning, Economics and Transport Laboratory (LAET-ENTPE), Université de Lyon, CNRS

Louafi Bouzouina

Urban Planning, Economics and Transport Laboratory (LAET-ENTPE), Université de Lyon, CNRS

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2024.2450

Keywords: home-campus mobility, bicycle use, public transport accessibility, bike-sharing accessibility, combined modes, students, university staff

---

Abstract

Promoting sustainable mobility systems by encouraging the use of the bicycle as a transport mode is now a public policy objective. This political will is also pursued in France where the modal share of cycling is relatively low. However, young people and those with a high level of human capital, such as members of the university community, are observed to be more advanced in their adoption of cycling. An understanding of how cycling is used by university students and staff would therefore help to inform public decision-making and support more efficient targeted policies to develop this mode of transport. Using original data from the MobiCampus-UdL project, the aim of this article is to analyze the determinants of bicycle use by the university community at the University of Lyon, France. Two multivariate logistic regression models are estimated on the subsamples of students and staff: one explaining the probability of using the bicycle as an exclusive mode of transport to get to the campus and the other explaining the probability of using the bicycle in combination with other modes. Our results suggest that while socio-demographic characteristics have little influence within our two relatively homogeneous subsamples, access to mobility resources and the spatial characteristics of the campus and place of residence are crucial. We also find that access to bicycles is an important determinant of the utilization of cycling. Given that the adoption of cycling is still very low, our findings justify policies to increase the availability of bicycles and subsidize their purchase. More specifically, our results suggest that access to a shared bike station on campus encourages the exclusive use of bicycles by students and staff but has no effect when used in combination with other modes. On the other hand, good accessibility to public transport, whether from home or from campus, does not reduce the use of bicycles by either sub-population, either exclusively or in combination. Furthermore, while living far from the city center is an obstacle to the exclusive use of the bicycles, especially for staff, it does not in any way prevent their use in combination with other modes, such as the train. These results open up new avenues for anticipating the development of intermodality between public transport and cycling.

---

References

Andersen, L. B., Schnohr, P., Schroll, M., & Hein, O. (2000). All-cause mortality associated with physical activity during leisure time, work, sports, and cycling to work. Archives of Internal Medicine 160(11), 1621–1628. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.160.11.1621. PMID: 10847255

Balsas, C. (2003). Sustainable transportation planning on college campuses. Transport Policy, 10(1), 35–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0967-070X(02)00028-8

Barberan, A., de Abreu e Silva, J., & Monzon, A. (2017). Factors influencing bicycle use: A binary choice model with panel data. Transportation Research Procedia, 27, 253–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2017.12.097

Bouzouina L., Bayart C., & Bonnel P. (2020), L’impact de l’accessibilité et de la forme urbaine sur le choix modal des jeunes adultes: le cas de l’agglomération lyonnaise (1995-2006). Canadian Journal of Regional Science, 43(2), 6–19. https://doi.org/10.7202/1083289ar

Celis-Morales, C. A., Lyall, D. M., Welsh, P., Anderson, J., Steell, L., Guo, Y. … & Sattar, N. (2017). Association between active commuting and incident cardiovascular disease, cancer, and mortality: Prospective cohort study. British Medical Journal, 357, j1456. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j1456

Dalton, A. M., Jones, A. P., Panter, J. R., & Ogilvie, D. (2013). Neighborhood, route and workplace-related environmental characteristics predict adults’ mode of travel to work. PLoS One, 8(6), e67575.

Dill, J., & Voros, K. (2007). Factors affecting bicycling demand: Initial survey findings from the Portland, Oregon, Region. Transportation Research Record, 2031(1), 9–17. https://doi.org/10.3141/2031-02

Firth, D. (1993). Bias reduction of maximum likelihood estimates. Biometrika, 80(1), 27–38. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/80.1.27

Handy, S., van Wee, B., & Kroesen, M. (2014). Promoting cycling for transport: Research needs and challenges. Transport Reviews, 34(1), 4–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2013.860204

Harms, L., Bertolini, L., & Te Brömmelstroet, M. (2014). Spatial and social variations in cycling patterns in a mature cycling country exploring differences and trends. Journal of Transport & Health, 1(4), 232–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2014.09.012

Heinen, E., van Wee, B., & Maat, K. (2010). Commuting by bicycle: An overview of the literature. Transport Reviews, 30(1), 59–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441640903187001

Hendriksen, I., Simons, M., Galindo-Garre, F., & Hildebrandt, V. (2010). The association between commuter cycling and sickness absence. Preventive Medicine, 5(12), 132–135. https://doi.org.10.1016/j.ypmed.2010.05.007

Héran, F. (2015). Le retour de la bicyclette – Une histoire des déplacements urbains en Europe, de 1817 à 2050. Paris: Editis.

Hu, L., & Schneider, R. (2015). Shifts between automobile, bus, and bicycle commuting in an urban setting. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 141(2), 04014025. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000214

Huré, M., & Passalacqua, A. (2017). La Rochelle, France, and the invention of bike sharing public policy in the 1970s. The Journal of Transport History, 38(1), 106–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022526616676275

Jensen, P., Rouquier, J-B., Ovtracht, N., & Robardet, C. (2010). Characterizing the speed and paths of shared bicycle use in Lyon. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 15(8), 522–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2010.07.002

Kager, R., Bertolini, L., & Te Brömmelstroet, M. (2016). Characterization of and reflections on the synergy of bicycles and public transport. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 85, 208–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2016.01.015

King, G., & Zeng, L. (2001). Logistic regression in rare events. Political Analysis, 9(2), 137–163. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.pan.a004868

Klomp, R. (2022). Car dependency & alternative travel behavior at the ASU campus (Master’s thesis), Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ.

Kroesen, M., & Handy, S. (2014). The relation between bicycle commuting and non-work cycling: Results from a mobility panel. Transportation, 41(3), 507–527. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-013-9491-4

Leitgöb, H. (2013). The problem of rare events in maximum likelihood logistic regression-assessing potential remedies. Paper presented at the European Survey Research Association 5th Conference, Lisbon, Portugal. Retrieved from http://www.europeansurveyresearch.org/conf/uploads/494/678/167/PresentationLeitg_b.pdf

Martens, K. (2004). The bicycle as a feedering mode: Experiences from three European countries. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 9(4), 281–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2004.02.005

McConville, M. E., Rodriguez, D. A., Clifton, K., Cho, G., & Fleichhacker, S. (2011). Disaggregate land uses and walking. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 40, 25–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2010.09.023

Millward, H., Spinney, J., & Scott, D. (2013). Active-transport walking behavior: Destinations, durations, distances. Journal of Transport Geography, 28, 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trangeo.2012.11.012

Munoz Lopez, B. (2016). Integrating bicycle option in mode choice models through latent variables (Doctoral thesis), Universidad Politecnica de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.

Neves, A, & Brand, C. (2019). Assessing the potential for carbon emissions savings from replacing short car trips with walking and cycling using a mixed GPS-travel diary approach. Transport Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 123, 130–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2018.08.022

Oja, P., Vuori, I., & Paronen, O. (1998). Daily walking and cycling to work: Their utility as health-enhancing physical activity. Patient Education and Counseling 33(1 Suppl), S87–S94. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0738-3991(98)00013-5

Papon, F. (2003). La ville à pied et à vélo. In D. Pumain, M.-F. Mattei (Eds), Données urbaines (pp. 75–85). Paris: INSEE, Anthropos, CNRS.

Parkin, J., Wardman, M., & Page, M. (2007). Estimation of the determinants of bicycle mode share for the journey to work using census data. Transportation, 35(1), 93–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-007-9137-5

Poelman, H., Dijkstra, L., & Ackermans, L. (2020). How many people can you reach by public transport, bicycle or on foot in European cities? Measuring urban accessibility for low-carbon modes. Luxembourg: Working Papers of Regional and Urban Policy, European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/work/012020_low_carbon_urban.pdf

Prince, S. A., Lancione, S., Lang, J. J., Amankwah, N., de Groh, M., Jaramillo Garcia, A., Merucci, K. & Geneau, R. (2021). Are people who use active modes of transportation more physically active? An overview of reviews across the life course. Transport Reviews, 42(5), 645–671. https:// doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2021.2004262

Praznocky, C. (2012). Les bénéficies et les risques de la pratique du vélo: Evaluation en Ile-de-France. Paris: l'Observatoire régional de santé Ile-de-France. https://www.ors-idf.org/fileadmin/DataStorageKit/ORS/Etudes/Etude_1580/RapportVeloBeneficesRisques_1_.pdf

Pucher, J., Dill, J., & Handy, S. (2010). Infrastructure, programs, and policies to increase bicycling: An international review. Preventive Medicine, 50(Supplement), S106–S125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.07.028

Rabl, A., & de Nazelle, A. (2012). Benefits of shift from car to active transport. Transport Policy, 19(1), 121–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2011.09.008

Raux, C., Zoubir, A., & Geyik, M. (2017). Who are bike sharing schemes members and do they travel differently? The case of Lyon’s “Velo’v” scheme. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 106, 350–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2017.10.010

Rondinella, G. (2015). Considering cycling for commuting: The role of mode familiarity (Doctoral thesis), Universidad Politecnica de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.

Romanowska, A., Okraszewska, R., & Jamroz, K. (2019). A study of transport behavior of academic communities. Sustainability, 11(13), 3519. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11133519

Rybarczyk, G., & Gallagher, L. (2014). Measuring the potential for bicycling and walking at a metropolitan commuter university. Journal of Transport Geography, 39, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2014.06.009

Ryley, T. (2006). Use of non-motorized modes and life stage in Edinburgh. Journal of Transport Geography, 14 (5), 367–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2005.10.001

Shannon, T., Giles-Corti, B., Pikora, T., Bulsara, M., Shilton, T., & Bull, F. (2006). Active commuting in a university setting: Assessing commuting habits and potential for modal change. Transport Policy, 13(3), 240–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transpol.2005.11.002

Staudt, A. (2020). Firthfit: Stata module to compute model fit for Firth’s logit models. Örebro, Sweden: School of Business at Örebro University. http://econpapers.repec.org/software/bocbocode/S458175.htm

Université de Lyon. (2022). Guide de la décarbonation de l’enseignement supérieur. https://www.universite-lyon.fr/medias/fichier/2022-11-23-guide-decarbonation-enseignement-superieur_1669275258233-pdf?ID_FICHE=104037

Van Den Berg, L., & Russo, A. (2017). The student city: Strategic planning for student communities in EU cities. Abingdon, Oxdfordshire, UK: Routledge.

Woo, H.-S., Berns, J. P., & Solanelles, P. (2022). How rare is rare? How common is common? Empirical issues associated with binary dependent variables with rare or common event rates. Organizational Research Methods, 26(4), 655–677. https://doi.org/10.1177/10944281221083197