Impacts of the Safe Routes to School Program on Walking and Bicycling

Noreen McDonald

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill1

Outline

• Children’s Travel

• Impacts of the Safe Routes to School Program

• Work @ ITS

2

Children’s Travel

3

25%of the population

4Source: American Factfinder

33%of households

5Source: American Factfinder

20%of vehicle trips

6Source: National Household Travel Survey

Why do we need to understand children’s travel?

7

Predicting Adult Travel

Infrastructure Investments

Physical Activity Opportunities

Safe Routes to School Program Impacts

8

Shift to Automobility

9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Auto

Walk/Bike

School Bus

Transit

US Mode to School, 5-18 year olds

Source: McDonald, et al. 2011. AJPM 41(2): 146-151.

SRTS Goals

• “enable and encourage children to walk and bicycle to school”

• “make bicycling and walking to school a safer and more appealing transportation alternatives”

10

SRTS by the Numbers

11

Funding

$1.2 Billion

Schools

Source: McDonald, et al. 2013. AJPM 45(4): 401-406.

1 in 5

Research Question

• Do SRTS programs affect the proportion of children walking and bicycling to school?

12

Research Design

13

Randomized Controlled Trial

Quasi-experimental

• 4 states• 801 schools• 2007-2012

Approach

Proportion Walking and Bicycling to School

SRTS Interventions

School Characteristics

Neighborhood Characteristics

Time Period

14

tiititit DZXSRTSfy ,,,

Data

15

Walking and Biking to School• Administrative

Data• Student Report• Parent Report

16Source: National Center for Safe Routes to School

Data

17

Walking and Biking to School

SRTS Interventions

• 4Es• Engineering• Education,

Encouragement• Enforcement

Data: Measuring SRTS

18

% Walk Bike

SRTS

Step Function%

Walk Bike

SRTS

Linear Function

Time Time

% Walk Bike

SRTS

Combined

Time

Presence (1/0)

Number of Years +

Presence

Number of Years

Data

19

Walking and Biking to School

SRTS Interventions

School and Neighborhood

• US Dept of Education• Census• WalkScore

Methods: Functional Form

20

Fractional Logit

+

-

• Predictions inside (0,1)• 0 & 1• Marginal effects

• Unbalanced panel

)exp(1

)exp(

X

XY

Source: Papke and Wooldridge, 2008; Papke and Wooldridge, 1996

Results

21

Walking and Biking to School

0%

10%

20%

30%

BeforeSRTS

0.1-1.0years

1.1-2.0years

2.1-3.0years

3.1-4.0years

4.1-5.0years

>5.0years

After SRTS 22Source: McDonald, et al. 2015. JAPA 80(2).

Results: SRTS Program Impacts

23

0.8

0.9

1.2

1.2

3.2

-1

-2 0 2 4

Presence

# of YearsEducation &

Encouragement

Enforcement

Engineering

Presence

# of Years

Presence

# of Years

Proportion Walk/Bike

Source: McDonald, et al. 2015. JAPA 80(2).

Results: SRTS Program Impacts

24

0.8

0.9

1.2

1.2

3.2

-1

-2 0 2 4

Presence

# of YearsEducation &

Encouragement

Enforcement

Engineering

Presence

# of Years

Presence

# of Years

Proportion Walk/Bike

Education and Encouragement• 0.9 point increase

per year• Over 5 years, a

relative increase of 25%

Source: McDonald, et al. 2015. JAPA 80(2).

Results: SRTS Program Impacts

25

0.8

0.9

1.2

1.2

3.2

-1

-2 0 2 4

Presence

# of YearsEducation &

Encouragement

Enforcement

Engineering

Presence

# of Years

Presence

# of Years

Proportion Walk/Bike

Source: McDonald, et al. 2015. JAPA 80(2).

Results: SRTS Program Impacts

26

Enforcement

• No statistically significant effect

0.8

0.9

1.2

1.2

3.2

-1

-2 0 2 4

Presence

# of YearsEducation &

Encouragement

Enforcement

Engineering

Presence

# of Years

Presence

# of Years

Proportion Walk/Bike

Source: McDonald, et al. 2015. JAPA 80(2).

Results: SRTS Program Impacts

27

0.8

0.9

1.2

1.2

3.2

-1

-2 0 2 4

Presence

# of YearsEducation &

Encouragement

Enforcement

Engineering

Presence

# of Years

Presence

# of Years

Proportion Walk/Bike

Source: McDonald, et al. 2015. JAPA 80(2).

Results: SRTS Program Impacts

28

0.8

0.9

1.2

1.2

3.2

-1

-2 0 2 4

Presence

# of YearsEducation &

Encouragement

Enforcement

Engineering

Presence

# of Years

Presence

# of Years

Proportion Walk/Bike

Engineering

• 3.2 point one-time increase

• Relative increase of 20%

Source: McDonald, et al. 2015. JAPA 80(2).

Policy Implications

• SRTS program associated with more walking and bicycling

• Mainstream SRTS programs

29

Work @ ITS

30Image Source: http://www.basf-new-business.com/

Source: The Atlantic

31

Declining licensure & mobilityImpacts and explanations

Millennial Travel

Image Source: New York Times

Image Source: The Atlantic

The Millennial Economy: Links between Transport and Work for a New Generation

Image Source: https://www.sccsc.edu/client/NewsDetail.aspx?id=9381

Changing Nature of Workforce Transition & Role of Transport as Barrier/Facilitator

32

Tradeoffs between Environmental Benefits and Social Exclusion: Are There Risks to the Downturn in Driving?

33

Which groups have seen largest declines?Are needs being met?

http://media.salon.com/2013/08/boomerang_babies_money_jobs.jpg

Children’s Travel

34Image Source: http://www.perey.com/images/social_networking.jpg

Walking and Biking

Health

Physical Activity+ +

Pollution Intake

? -

Air Quality &Physical Activity

Questions

noreen@unc.edu

N.McDonald@leeds.ac.uk

35