Cycling to work is uncommon in most areas of the USA but relatively common in a particular set of metros and neighbourhoods. Explanations for this spatial heterogeneity often focus on differences in local geography, with some areas being allegedly more suitable for cycling. I estimate the role of topography and climate in determining the share of a metro’s workers who cycle to work and the probability a particular worker chooses to cycle. I combine a USA-wide data set of commute flows with detailed elevation and climate data. I find that climate and topography play essentially no role in explaining cycling mode share across metros. Across workers, the hilliness of a commuter’s route is found to be statistically irrelevant to cycling mode choice.
AbrahamJEMcMillanSBrownleeAT, et al. (2002) Investigation of cycling sensitivities. In: 81st Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC.
2.
AngristJD (2001) Estimation of limited dependent variable models with dummy endogenous regressors: Simple strategies for empirical practice. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics19(1): 2–28.
3.
BeenackersMAFosterSKamphuisCB, et al. (2012) Taking up cycling after residential relocation: Built environment factors. American Journal of Preventive Medicine42(6): 610–615.
4.
BuehlerRPucherJ (2012) Cycling to work in 90 large American cities: New evidence on the role of bike paths and lanes. Transportation39(2): 409–432.
5.
CerveroR (1996) Mixed land-uses and commuting: Evidence from the American housing survey. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice30(5): 361–377.
6.
CerveroRSarmientoOLJacobyE, et al. (2009) Influences of built environments on walking and cycling: Lessons from Bogotá. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation3(4): 203–226.
7.
De HartogJJBoogaardHNijlandH, et al. (2010) Do the health benefits of cycling outweigh the risks?Environmental Health Perspectives118(8): 1109–1116.
8.
DickinsonJEKinghamSCopseyS, et al. (2003) Employer travel plans, cycling and gender: Will travel plan measures improve the outlook for cycling to work in the UK?Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment8(1): 53–67.
9.
DillJCarrT (2003) Bicycle commuting and facilities in major US cities: If you build them, commuters will use them. Transportation Research Record1828(1): 116–123.
10.
HeinenEMaatKvan WeeB (2013) The effect of work-related factors on the bicycle commute mode choice in the Netherlands. Transportation40(1): 23–43.
11.
HeinenEVan WeeBMaatK (2010) Commuting by bicycle: An overview of the literature. Transport Reviews30(1): 59–96.
12.
HuntJDAbrahamJE (2007) Influences on bicycle use. Transportation34(4): 453–470.
13.
KeijerMJNRietveldP (2000) How do people get to the railway station? The Dutch experience. Transportation Planning and Technology23(3): 215–235.
14.
MattinglyKMorrisseyJ (2014) Housing and transport expenditure: Socio-spatial indicators of affordability in Auckland. Cities38: 69–83.
15.
Miranda-MorenoLFNosalT (2011) Weather or not to cycle: Temporal trends and impact of weather on cycling in an urban environment. Transportation Research Record2247(1): 42–52.
16.
ParkinJWardmanMPageM (2008) Estimation of the determinants of bicycle mode share for the journey to work using census data. Transportation35(1): 93–109.
17.
PucherJKomanoffCSchimekP (1999) Bicycling renaissance in North America?: Recent trends and alternative policies to promote bicycling. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice33: 625–654.
18.
ReynoldsCCOHarrisMATeschkeK, et al. (2009) The impact of transportation infrastructure on bicycling injuries and crashes: A review of the literature. Environmental Health8(1): 1–19.
19.
RietveldPDanielV (2004) Determinants of bicycle use: Do municipal policies matter?Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice38(7): 531–550.
20.
RodriguezDAJooJ (2004) The relationship between non-motorized mode choice and the local physical environment. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment9(2): 151–173.
21.
SaelensBESallisJFFrankLD (2003) Environmental correlates of walking and cycling: Findings from the transportation, urban design, and planning literatures. Annals of Behavioral Medicine25(2): 80–91.
22.
SingletonPACliftonKJ (2014) Exploring synergy in bicycle and transit use: Empirical evidence at two scales. Transportation Research Record2417(1): 92–102.
23.
SmileyKTRushingWScottM (2016) Behind a bicycling boom: Governance, cultural change and place character in Memphis, Tennessee. Urban Studies53(1): 193–209.
24.
StinsonMBhatC (2004) Frequency of bicycle commuting: Internet-based survey analysis. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board1878(1): 122–130.
25.
StrotzRH (1955) Myopia and inconsistency in dynamic utility maximization. The Review of Economic Studies23(3): 165–180.
26.
VandenbulckeGDujardinCThomasI, et al. (2011) Cycle commuting in Belgium: Spatial determinants and ‘re-cycling’ strategies. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice45(2): 118–137.
27.
WalshCJakemanPMolesR, et al. (2008) A comparison of carbon dioxide emissions associated with motorised transport modes and cycling in Ireland. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment13(6): 392–399.
28.
WintersMFriesenMCKoehoornM, et al. (2007) Utilitarian bicycling: A multilevel analysis of climate and personal influences. American Journal of Preventive Medicine32(1): 52–58.
29.
XingYHandySLMokhtarianPL (2010) Factors associated with proportions and miles of bicycling for transportation and recreation in six small US cities. Transportation Research Part D: Policy and Practice15(2): 73–81.
30.
ZhaoP (2014) The impact of the built environment on bicycle commuting: Evidence from Beijing. Urban Studies51(5): 1019–1037.
