Research and pilot implementations in the last decades have asserted the important role that cycling and rail transport needs to play for future-proof mobility systems – independently as well as in combination . Albeit a lot has been achieved already in urban and semi-urban settings, the knowledge of implementation in regional schemes lags behind envisioned expectations.
Thus the aim of this Track C is to showcase science-based knowledge of and operator-based hands-on experience in „Regional perspectives on integrating trains and bicycles“ from successful case studies. We encourage participants of this Track C to submit contributions that theoretically and/or empirically address questions such as:
- What schemes and provisions have proven to be successful and what schemes less so?
- What rationales can be seen behind different solutions?
- What components are needed to improve the integration of cycling and rail services?
- In successful schemes, what needs to be improved first: rail services or cycling infrastructures, or both?
- Which actors are involved in successful schemes of integrating trains and cycling?
- Rail vehicles and bicycles, what structures work best for service integration?
- Do we need to choose between utility and recreational cycling or are they just different sides of the same coin?
- What services and schemes are needed for integrated products and solutions
- What are the economic boundary conditions of successful integration?
- Nello-Deakin, S. and M.t. Brömmelstroet, Scaling up cycling or replacing driving? Triggers and trajectories of bike–train uptake in the Randstad area. Transportation, 2021.
It’s one of the saddest ironies of urban planning that the only thing we have learned from a hundred years of traffic engineering is this: if you make more space for cars, more cars come.*
Mikael Colville-Andersen, a Canadian-Danish urban designer and urban mobility expert