Cargando…

How much behaviour change is required for the investment in cycling infrastructure to be sustainable? A break-even analysis

BACKGROUND: Active travel has gained traction among policy makers as a promising solution to physical inactivity. Returns on active travel investments, including cycling infrastructure, crucially rely on resulting improvements in population behaviours. Estimating the expected economic value that an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Candio, Paolo, Frew, Emma
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10115289/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37075055
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284634
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Active travel has gained traction among policy makers as a promising solution to physical inactivity. Returns on active travel investments, including cycling infrastructure, crucially rely on resulting improvements in population behaviours. Estimating the expected economic value that an additional regular cyclist will generate and being able to identify the behaviour change required at the population level to offset the intervention costs is important to inform future investment decisions. METHODS: The WHO’s Health Economic Assessment Tool was employed to conduct a break-even analysis. A case study methodology was used which focused on a real-world construction project of a separated cycleway in the UK. The economic assessment considered physical activity benefits, air pollution, crash risk and carbon emissions in monetary terms. An iterative computational approach was applied to identify the behaviour change (cycling) requirements, and corresponding benefits valued using international dollars, to break even on the investment costs. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess robustness of the base-case results. RESULTS: Over a ten-year time horizon, an additional regular cyclist (i.e., someone cycling most days of the week) was found to generate $798 (₤533) per annum (international dollars). An additional 267 regular cyclists per km were required to break even on the construction of the new separated cycleway. Estimates were particularly sensitive to variations to age, cycling volume and evaluation time horizon. CONCLUSIONS: Policymakers planning to invest in cycling infrastructure should consider using these reproducible, order-of-magnitude estimates to complement the more comprehensive transport appraisal and budget allocation processes. This would ensure that, when considering its health-related economic benefits, the investment is justifiable on economic sustainability grounds.