Cycling is affordable, healthy, and sustainable, but access to destinations on low-stress safe cycling routes in most cities is both limited and unevenly distributed. Many cities are expanding cycling networks to improve safety, increase cycling mode share, and increase diversity in access to cycling, however resources remain limited which requires prioritization of infrastructure. When proposed infrastructure locations are optimized to provide the highest average access to opportunities using a utilitarian definition of accessibility, marginalized groups and locations may be further left behind. This occurs since the greatest gains to network connectivity, using a utility definition, come from expansions inside or directly adjacent to the densest network areas. We compare utilitarian and equity-driven planning strategies for cycling network expansion and explore tradeoffs in spatial coverage, equity, and efficiency, using Toronto, Canada as a case study. We find that optimizing accessibility in several small regions instead of city-wide leads to an infrastructure plan that is more spatially dispersed. Further, we show that an optimization model targeting low-access areas produces an infrastructure plan with more regions meeting a minimum threshold of accessibility but with lower average accessibility gains, indicating the presence of an equity-efficiency tradeoff. We also find that infrastructure projects that maximize a region's accessibility to jobs are often located outside that region, challenging political perceptions of "local" infrastructure and benefits. These results inform planning, advocacy, design, and policy, and shed light on spatial and socio-demographic equity tradeoffs in deciding where to add cycling infrastructure.

中文翻译：

---

探索自行车基础设施规划中的地理公平与效率权衡


骑自行车是负担得起的、健康的和可持续的，但在大多数城市，通过低压力安全的自行车路线到达目的地的机会既有限又分布不均。许多城市正在扩大自行车网络以提高安全性、增加骑行方式的份额并增加骑行方式的多样性，但资源仍然有限，这需要优先考虑基础设施。当拟议的基础设施位置使用实用的可访问性定义进行优化以提供最高的平均机会时，边缘化群体和位置可能会进一步落后。这是因为使用实用程序定义，网络连接的最大收益来自最密集网络区域内部或直接相邻的扩展。我们以加拿大多伦多为案例研究，比较了自行车网络扩展的功利主义和公平驱动的规划策略，并探讨了空间覆盖率、公平性和效率方面的权衡。我们发现，在几个小区域而不是整个城市范围内优化可达性会导致基础设施规划在空间上更加分散。此外，我们表明，针对低可达区域的优化模型会产生一个基础设施计划，其中更多区域满足最低可达性阈值，但平均可达性增益较低，这表明存在公平-效率权衡。我们还发现，最大限度地提高一个地区就业机会的基础设施项目通常位于该地区之外，这挑战了人们对“当地”基础设施和利益的政治看法。这些结果为规划、宣传、设计和政策提供了信息，并阐明了在决定在哪里增加自行车基础设施时的空间和社会人口公平权衡。