Why cities with high bicycling rates are safer for all road users
Why cities with high bicycling rates are safer for all road users
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jth.2019.03.004
复制
发表时间：
2019-06-01
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Ferenchak, Nicholas N.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Marshall, Wesley E.;Ferenchak, Nicholas N.
简介：尽管骑自行车被认为比开车危险十倍，但有证据表明，高自行车模式共享的城市不仅对骑自行车的人更安全，而且对所有道路使用者都更安全。我们希望了解是什么让这些城市更安全。安全差异是否与骑自行车的人的“数量安全”有关，或者它们是否可以通过建筑环境的差异或居住在其中的人来更好地解释？研究方法：基于来自美国12个大城市的13年数据，我们通过多水平、纵向、负二项回归模型调查了近8700个街区组中的17,000多起死亡和77,000起重伤。我们假设三种途径实现更好的道路安全结果：i）旅行行为差异（例如，“数量安全”或转向“更安全”模式）; ii）建筑环境差异（如有助于促进更安全环境的基础设施）;以及iii）社会人口/社会经济差异（例如，一些城市可能居住着道路安全风险较低的人）。结果：结果表明，更多的骑自行车的人并不是这些城市对所有道路使用者来说更安全的原因。相反，更好的安全结果与更普遍的自行车设施有关-特别是受保护和分离的自行车设施-在街区组层面，更强烈地是在整个城市。更高的交叉口密度，通常对应于更紧凑和更低速度的建筑环境，与所有道路使用者更好的道路安全结果密切相关。代表中产阶级化的变量也占了我们在安全outcome.Conclusions可解释的变化：本文提供了一个基于证据的方法来建设更安全的城市。虽然这项工作的政策影响指向保护和分离的自行车基础设施作为解决方案的一部分，但我们需要记住，这些方法是互补的，不应该孤立地考虑。此外，我们的研究结果--特别是与中产阶级化相关的安全差距--表明了公平问题和未来研究的必要性。
Introduction: Despite bicycling being considered ten times more dangerous than driving, the evidence suggests that high-bicycling-mode-share cities are not only safer for bicyclists but for all road users. We look to understand what makes these cities safer. Are the safety differences related to 'safety-in-numbers' of bicyclists, or can they be better explained by built environment differences or the people that inhabit them?Methods: Based on thirteen years of data from twelve large U.S. cities, we investigated over 17,000 fatalities and 77,000 severe injuries across nearly 8700 block groups via multilevel, longitudinal, negative binomial regression models. We hypothesize three pathways towards better road safety outcomes: i) travel behavior differences (e.g. 'safety-in-numbers' or shifts to 'safer' modes); ii) built environment differences (e.g. infrastructure that helps promote safer environments); and iii) socio-demographic/socio-economic differences (e.g. some cities may be populated by those with lower road safety risk).Results: The results suggest that more bicyclists is not the reason these cities are safer for all road users. Better safety outcomes are instead associated with a greater prevalence of bike facilities - particularly protected and separated bike facilities - at the block group level and, more strongly so, across the overall city. Higher intersection density, which typically corresponds to more compact and lower-speed built environments, was strongly associated with better road safety outcomes for all road users. The variables representing gentrification also accounted for much of our explainable variation in safety outcomes.Conclusions: This paper provides an evidence-based approach to building safer cities. While the policy implications of this work point to protected and separated bike infrastructure as part of the solution, we need to keep in mind that these approaches are complementary and should not be considered in isolation. Moreover, our results - particularly the safety disparities associated with gentrification - suggest equity issues and the need for future research.