Queensland University of Technology, Institute of Health & Biomedical Innovation and the School of Public Health and Social Work, Brisbane, Qld 4059, Australia.
School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences and Centre for Physical Activity and Nutrition Research, Deakin University, Geelong Waurn Ponds Campus, Geelong, Vic. 3220, Australia.
Health Promot J Austr. 2013 Dec;24(3):227-33. doi: 10.1071/HE13062.
Although increases in cycling in Brisbane are encouraging, bicycle mode share to work (the proportion of people travelling to work by bicycle) in the state of Queensland remains low. The aim of this qualitative study was to draw upon the lived experiences of Queensland cyclists to understand the main motivators for utility cycling (cycling as a means to get to and from places) and compare motivators between utility cyclists (those who cycle for utility as well as for recreation) and non-utility cyclists (those who cycle only for recreation).
For an online survey, members of a bicycle group (831 utility cyclists and 931 non-utility cyclists, aged 18-90 years) were asked to describe, unprompted, what would motivate them to engage in utility cycling (more often). Responses were coded into themes within four levels of an ecological model.
Within an ecological model, built environment influences on motivation were grouped according to whether they related to appeal (safety), convenience (accessibility) or attractiveness (more amenities) and included adequate infrastructure for short trips, bikeway connectivity, end-of-trip facilities at public locations and easy and safe bicycle access to destinations outside of cities. A key social-cultural influence related to improved interactions among different road users.
The built and social-cultural environments need to be more supportive of utility cycling before even current utility and non-utility cyclists will be motivated to engage (more often) in utility cycling. SO WHAT?: Additional government strategies and more and better infrastructure that support utility cycling beyond commuter cycling may encourage a utility cycling culture.
尽管布里斯班的自行车出行量有所增加，但昆士兰州的自行车出行比例（骑自行车上班的人数比例）仍然很低。本研究旨在从昆士兰自行车骑行者的生活经验中汲取经验，了解骑行的主要动机（作为出行工具），并比较实用型骑行者（既为实用目的又为娱乐目的而骑行的人）和非实用型骑行者（仅为娱乐目的而骑行的人）的动机。
在一项在线调查中，自行车团体的成员（831 名实用型骑行者和 931 名非实用型骑行者，年龄在 18-90 岁之间）被要求在没有提示的情况下描述促使他们进行实用型骑行（更频繁地骑行）的动机。响应被编码为生态模型四个层次内的主题。
在生态模型中，根据与吸引力（安全性）、便利性（可达性）或吸引力（更多设施）相关的影响因素，将对动机的构建环境影响进行分组，包括短途旅行的基础设施充足、自行车道连通性、公共地点的终点设施以及在城市外的目的地轻松安全地使用自行车。一个关键的社会文化影响因素涉及改善不同道路使用者之间的互动。
在现有实用型和非实用型骑行者被激励（更频繁地）进行实用型骑行之前，需要构建和社会文化环境更支持实用型骑行。那么该怎么办呢？政府可能需要制定更多的策略，以及更多和更好的基础设施，以支持除通勤骑行之外的实用型骑行，从而鼓励实用型骑行文化的发展。
