The Shared Coastal Pathway has quickly found a place in the hearts (and routines) of people on the North-west coast. One user on social media expressed it beautifully:
“I use the pathway regularly. What has amazed me is how many people are also using it. It’s far exceeded my expectations. The most heartwarming sights I see are little kids so tentative on their bikes but also the number of people on mobility devices (gophers) who are out and about. To be able to leave your home and have a safe transit and to see people along the way! It’s a game changer.”
So, this got us thinking, how can we measure just how much of a ‘game changer’ the pathway is and what impact it has had (and will have) on our community? Fortunately, economists, transport planners and researchers have turned their minds to this question before and have found ways of measuring these benefits and comparing them against the costs.
The Institute of Public Works Engineering Australasia (IPWEA) is the peak professional association for public works and infrastructure professionals across Australia and New Zealand. Their Practice Note 1 – Footpaths & Cycleways is a widely used reference for estimating the benefits and planning considerations of active transport infrastructure.
It suggests that investing in projects like this yields many benefits.
It helps people stay or become healthy by encouraging physical activity. Based on IPWEA’s assessment of pedestrian and cycle investment, they report that every $1 invested in walking and cycling infrastructure returns between $5–$13 in health benefits through increased physical activity. To put this positive health impact into perspective, the UK’s former Chief Medical Officer, Sir Liam Donaldson, stated, “The potential benefits of physical activity to health are huge. If a medication existed that had a similar effect, it would be regarded as a ‘wonder drug’ or ‘miracle cure’.” It improves brain health and mood, reduces the risk of several cancers, heart disease, and diabetes, and slows the ageing process[1].
Investing in walking and cycling infrastructure also keeps people safe, minimising the physical and emotional trauma of accidents. IPWEA notes that separated cycleways can reduce crash risk by up to 90% compared to roads without dedicated infrastructure. This is a major issue, quite apart from the personal distress each accident brings; a study estimated that the cost to the community of each major accident involving a bicycle in Tasmania was approximately $12,500[2].
It keeps people engaged in society and able to participate in their community by being able to get from point A to point B and enjoy the incidental interactions and greetings that are characteristic of our friendly region. IPWEA notes this is particularly true for elderly and mobility-impaired users, for whom improved footpaths increase mobility, enhancing social inclusion and reducing isolation.
Studies from Canada[3] and the ‘cost my commute’ app sheds light on the combined costs and benefits of different modes of transport, including the costs of building infrastructure and the less obvious impacts such as emissions, climate change, accidents, congestion, and even noise pollution. It accounts for things like the increased life expectancy and better health we gain from cycling or walking, as well as the savings this brings to the healthcare system. This type of accounting is common in Europe but less common elsewhere. Its findings are startling. When you consider the costs and benefits that accrue to the individual and the community, the research finds that in Canada:
‘The amount we all pay through taxes for costs like road infrastructure and indirect costs like pollution, accidents and noise is significant.’ But this becomes more poignant when compared to the broader costs associated with moving from A to B. The Canadian study found that for every $1 a traveller paid to go by car, society has to chip in $9.20 to cover the rest of the costs. However, if the traveller chooses to walk, for every $1 the traveller pays to walk (mainly the nominal cost of the time required), society needs to chip in only 1 cent.
It also supports local economies. Quite apart from reducing the burden of ill health on the community noted above, IPWEA found investing in footpaths and cycleways can improve local economic activity, noting that investing in making areas pedestrian and cycling-friendly can increase retail spending by up to 25%.
They also considered the costs saved when people shift short car trips to walking or cycling and estimated that this can save households $1,000–$2,000 per year in transport costs.
Of course, this raises the question of how much of that benefit would happen anyway. Do we actually need to build cycle paths and foot paths to enjoy these benefits, can we instead just rely on encouraging people? A study from Hobart of users of the cycle network found that over half of the users had been induced to travel by bicycle by the building of a cycle path. In other words, they hadn’t cycled before and took up cycling only because this infrastructure was built for them[4].
IPWAE also found that houses close to high-quality walking and cycling infrastructure were 5-10% higher in value than similar houses elsewhere.
Together, these positive impacts tell us our investment in the Shared Coastal Pathway was very well placed, and we can be reassured it has helped our community to meet its needs and thrive.
[1] https://medium.com/thrive-global/the-miracle-cure-what-exercise-does-to-our-brain-2166057b620f
[2] Palmer, A. J., Si, L., Gordon, J. M., Saul, T., Otahal, P., & Hitchens, P. L. (2015). Investigating the costs of major and minor cycling crashes in Tasmania, Australia. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 39(5), 485-490. https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-6405.12384
[3] https://thediscourse.ca/scarborough/full-cost-commute
[4] https://sensibletransport.org.au/project/hobart-cycleway-demand-assessment-2/
