body{background-attachment: fixed ! important; }
Showing posts with label bicycle advocacy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bicycle advocacy. Show all posts

Thursday, February 4, 2016

We Aren't Worthy: Taipei Plays Host to Velo-city Global

Untitled

Between Feb 27th and March 1st Taipei will play host to the worldwide Velo-city conference; a conference designed by the European Cyclists' Federation to promote the integration of the bicycle into the modern city infrastructure. 

According to the ECF, the purpose is to:


  • Raise the status of cycling and to promote recognition of the benefits of cycling for both individuals and society as a whole.
  • Encourage consideration of cyclists’ needs in Europe in all aspects of transport planning and management, environment, safety and health, and promote cycle-friendly conditions throughout Europe.
  • Support member groups on matters of national and international importance relating to the aims of the ECF.
  • Undertake research on matters relating to cycling, transportation, environment and safety.
  • Enhance the information and advice available to member groups and thus assist in their activities nationally and internationally.
  • Promote the exchange of information and expertise between member organisations.
  • Provide information and expertise in order to raise the awareness of specific groups: international bodies and institutions, politicians, planners, manufacturers/trade groups, bicycle holiday agents/tourism authorities, environmental and transport groups with regard to cycling and its benefits and needs

Of course, the ECF is no longer contained to just Europe as it has become a global proponent of lobby for progressive bicycle policy. 

Then why choose Taiwan? 

On the one hand, I see this as an incredibly welcome and opportune time to hold Velo-city in Taiwan. There is a continued interest in bicycles on all levels from riders, private enterprise and policymakers. In the face of an unprecedented turnover in government over the past two years in the executive, legislative and municipalities largely in favor of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), along with the inception and emergence of a more progressive New Power Party, (NPP) it may not be business as usual in terms of bicycle infrastructure development, which has overwhelmingly favored superfluous recreation over transportation and utility. These projects increase the visibility of cycling but do precious little to reduce the reliance on motorized transportation and merely increase their carbon footprint by spreading slick lanes asphalt in an attempt to shift people from the swimming pools and basketball courts to the bike lanes. Both parties made inroads promoting Taiwan centered policies, especially the NPP, which supports policies promoting sustainability and energy independence.

There has been some positive increase in ridership of the various metropolitan public bicycle programs, but from this rider's perspective, most of the riders appear to be students who would be using mass transportation anyway as opposed to a personal motor vehicle. 

I am less optimistic when I read how this event is being imagined locally: 

The Taipei Times reports: 
Taipei Deputy Mayor Chou Li-fang (周麗芳) said.
The event is to feature eight select bicycle trails, each having a different theme, including hot springs, waterfront parks, culture, historic buildings and art, Chou said. 
She said that Taipei is to join the list of previous host cities, such as London, Copenhagen, Milan, Italy and Vienna, Austria, which would boost the city’s international profile. 
Chou said that Taipei made strenuous efforts to work with the central government and the private sector to secure its 2013 bid to host the event. 
By winning the bid, it justified Taiwan’s status as a “bicycle kingdom,” Taipei’s efforts to promote cycling and its bicycle trails, as well as Taipei’s status as an international city.
We often see Taiwan so hungry for international validation, citizens and leaders are tone deaf to the criticism or suggestions provided by international experts. 

The purpose of this event and the mission of the ECF is not to justify a city's or a nation's status as a success in integrating the bicycle into the city infrastructure or to boost a city's profile for tourism. The purpose is to exchange information, learn and improve upon the status quo. 

Taiwan still faces two major problems that threaten the future development of building a "bicycle kingdom". 

The first is the lack of cycling infrastructure in the cities and areas where people actually live and work. The ability to substitute the car or scooter for the bicycle in a viable manner between home and the office is severely limited by the lack of a comprehensive and connected system of safe bicycle corridors throughout the city, the lack of safe and viable bicycle storage facilities, the lack of support for commuting cyclists in businesses and the lack of space given to the bicycle. 

The second major problem is with the pernicious air pollution that regularly chokes our cities and drives the PM2.5 air pollution index into the danger zone. I have personally lost several cycling days this year due to unhealthy levels of pollution. I didn't have an asthma problem before cycling in Taiwan. The PM2.5 index used in Taiwan has been adjusted to Taiwan's own index, which shifts the entire spectrum of air quality rightward so that levels that would be deemed unhealthy in most countries, will still be deemed healthy or moderate by Taiwan's standards. Tackling the problem of air quality will be paramount to securing a future that is safe for cycling in Taiwan. 

My hope is that the foreign experts will find time to freely roam Taiwan by bicycle and provide our politicians and city planners with harsh critical and constructive feedback on how we can implement solutions. We don't need any more gland handing

Taiwan is not ready to feel it has ascended to the pinnacle of bicycle transportation and political leaders need to admit that we have a long way to go to make the changes needed to stand along side Copenhagen and Vancouver as equals in infrastructure development. But will anybody listen? 


Tuesday, November 9, 2010

New Research May Lead To Better Cycling Routes in Taiwan




A recent paper published by two researchers from Taiwan's National Cheng Kung University seeks to improve infrastructure planning around popular cycling routes in Taiwan. The researchers analyzed survey data that divided riders by frequency (ability) and evaluated their calculous in choosing routes.


One major problem with the cycling routes the government has plotted around Taiwan has been the manner in which the routes are designed and allocated. Taiwan's cycling routes are often designed without consulting the community the routes are supposed to serve, and often lack many of the features that cyclists look for when choosing routes. Routes are designed in a top-down manner in which the central and local government mandates a route and it is built (often with political considerations in mind).


Another problem is the complete disorganization of cycling advocacy in Taiwan. There are few, if any, organized cycling advocacy groups the government can turn to for advice. It is not surprising in light of Taiwan's recent political history that Taiwan's cyclists avoid joining cycling advocacy groups that could act as a political force or may cross existing lines of political affiliation.


Click on the title for the full paper or simply read the conclusion at the bottom:


Estimating recreational cyclists’

preference on bicycle route facility

-Evidence from Taiwan


Ching-Fu Chen ,National Cheng Kung University

Pei-Chun Chen ,National Cheng Kung University


"CONCLUSION

This paper analyses recreational cyclists’ preference for attributes of bicycle route

facility in Taiwan. The SP method was conducted in which recreational cyclists were

asked to state their choice from three unlabelled bicycle routes’ alternatives on the

basis of their attributes. Choice modeling was applied to the collected data and

recreational cyclists’ preferences for each attribute are estimated. This study used

MNL model which include facility attributes and ASC interaction with recreational

specialization dimensions; the model captures the systematic heterogeneity in

recreational cyclists’ preference. Subsequently, LCM is used to account for

heterogeneity in the preference of bicycle route and facility attributes.


Empirical MNL results indicate that recreational cyclists prefer bicycle routes with

attraction along the route, basic facilities including toilet and simple maintain

equipment, tourist information center, and bike path. In addition, recreational cyclists

who have frequent participation in cycling are more likely to prefer bike route. For the

frequent recreational cyclist, bike route can provide diverse experience. Recreational

cyclists who take long time in cycling are likely to prefer restaurant service, and low

cognitive level in recreational specialization cyclists are more likely to choice leisure

route.


Using LCM with segment membership functions for predicting segment

membership of recreational cyclists, it allows for explicit identification of recreational

specialization concept. Moreover, LCM also improves the model fit to the data, and

allows for testing the impact of recreational specialization variable on segment

membership. As a result, high recreational specialization cyclists are more likely than

low recreational specialization cyclists to choice challenge and endurance grading

route.


From a managerial perspective, bicycle route should be classified according to

different group of recreational cyclist, for instance, riding experience, distance, slope,

etc. In addition, base on safety conscious, roadway type is very important attribute to

consider bicycle route. Bicycle path is separate from general roadway that cyclists can

use exclusively route. It can improve safety considerations for barriers to bicycle use.

From a long term perspective, increasing the number of recreational cyclists would

contribute to efforts to increase the number of commuting cyclists."



Also: