Exploration of the motivations and existing behaviour of bike rail integrators to inform future promotional interventions

Bike-rail integration (BRI) extends the catchment area of a station for those without access to a car or bus, whilst also enabling the substitution of more car journeys and allowing people to build exercise into their day. More cycle access to the rail network has particular benefits in a congested urban environment like Bristol, which has few opportunities to increase car access to or parking near stations. An increase in BRI could bring environmental, economic and health benefits but there are practical, social and psychological barriers. This paper reports on the results of a face-face survey of 135 bike rail integrators (BRIs) at two Bristol stations alongside semi-structured interviews and observation to explore their motivations, cycling history and existing behaviour. Two thirds of the BRIs were found to be male, 40% were in their thirties, nearly all were employed and living in households with incomes of between £17,000 and £50,000 and 62% owned a car. Their main motivations were saving time and getting exercise and they cycled on average 3.7 kilometres to or from the station. It appears that the majority are substituting a walking journey to the station. BRIs had experimented with different methods of bike rail integration, moved in and out of cycling at different times in their lives and the data builds a picture of the many different factors that influence the decision to cycle and integrate with rail. These findings are discussed in the context of behaviour change theory and the design of social marketing interventions to promote bike-rail integration. The research will contribute to informing effective investment to make the connection between cycling and rail more seamless which will be a part of the station travel plan agenda set out in the Government’s White Paper “Towards a Sustainable Railway”.

[1]  J M Morgan,et al.  ATTITUDES TO CYCLING , 1985 .

[2]  W. Velicer,et al.  The Transtheoretical Model of Health Behavior Change , 1997, American journal of health promotion : AJHP.

[3]  Karen Lesley Stanbridge.  Residential relocation and travel behaviour change , 2007 .

[4]  J. Dickinson,et al.  Local Transport and Social Representations: Challenging the Assumptions for Sustainable Tourism , 2006 .

[5]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of innovations , 1964, Encyclopedia of Sport Management.

[6]  H. Tajfel.  Human Groups and Social Categories: Studies in Social Psychology , 1981 .

[7]  Hugh McClintock,et al.  The Nottingham Cycle-friendly Employers Project: Lessons for encouraging cycle commuting , 2000 .

[8]  Birgitta Gatersleben,et al.  Contemplating Cycling to Work: Attitudes and Perceptions in Different Stages of Change , 2007 .

[9]  Ben Fincham,et al.  Bicycle messengers: image, identity and community , 2007 .

[10]  H. Joffe.  Risk: from perception to social representation. , 2003, The British journal of social psychology.

[11]  D. Davies,et al.  ATTITUDES TO CYCLING: A QUALITATIVE STUDY AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK , 1997 .

[12]  Carol Cooper,et al.  Successfully Changing Individual Travel Behavior , 2007 .

[13]  Piet Rietveld,et al.  The accessibility of railway stations: the role of the bicycle in The Netherlands , 2000 .

[14]  M. Conner,et al.  The Theory of Planned Behaviour , 2004 .

[15]  J. Anable,et al.  AN EVIDENCE BASE REVIEW OF PUBLIC ATTITUDES TO CLIMATE CHANGE AND TRANSPORT BEHAVIOUR , 2006 .

[16]  B. Verplanken,et al.  Habit, information acquisition, and the process of making travel mode choices , 1997 .