Exploring the language of “All Ages and Abilities” for the CapaCITY/É Research Project

Hours Posted on Hours Updated on

By: Karen Laberee, Moreno Zanotto, Alison Funk, Sara F. L. Kirk, Sarah A. Moore, and Meghan Winters

Abstract

In 2023, CapaCITY/É initiated a six-year research project aimed at adapting Implementation Science for Healthy Cities research, specifically sustainable transportation interventions. The project team is comprised of researchers, city partners, and national organizations from Canada and Australia. Focusing on two types of interventions, “All Ages and Abilities” (AAA) bicycle networks and speed management programs, our work seeks to document practical and political barriers that hinder implementation.
Here we share some foundational work defining AAA bicycle networks, a popular yet inconsistently defined term in cycling and transportation planning. We share our published research of a policy scan of 35 Canadian municipal and regional plans where we found 25 plans that used AAA terminology. Cycle tracks and local street bikeways emerged as the most consistent examples of AAA infrastructure across plans. Our research also highlights the lack of clear criteria for a cycling network as well as varying interpretations of abilities within the AAA construct.
Our research underscores the importance of precise infrastructure specifications in policy documents for successful implementation. Together with our Canadian partner cities, CapaCITY/É developed an operational definition for AAA infrastructure that encompasses cycle tracks, local street bikeways, bike-only paths, and multi-use paths. This work contributes to an improved definition and understanding of AAA bicycle networks in Canada while emphasizing the importance of well-designed, equitable cycling infrastructure for broader health and mobility benefits. In 2024, we will build upon this work through discussions with practitioners on winter maintenance challenges and what constitutes a network.

CapaCITY/É

In 2023, our team embarked upon a six-year research project that aims to make major advances in Implementation Science applied to sustainable transportation interventions. CapaCITY/É comprises a multidisciplinary team of researchers, cities, and national organizations from Canada and Australia, united by the vision of accelerating a substantial increase in the adoption of sustainable transportation.  This acceleration is critical to climate adaptation and resiliency within the transportation sector (1). Our mission is to understand the key implementation factors for the scaling up and scaling out of sustainable transportation interventions across different municipal contexts, to support health, mobility, and equity goals.

Our work focuses on built environment investments (“interventions”) that support uptake in the use of sustainable transportation, as well as diversity in who uses it. Specifically, we are examining two types of evidence-based interventions that many Canadian and Australian jurisdictions have underway or under consideration: All “Ages and Abilities” (AAA) bicycle networks and speed management interventions. Even with strong evidence on the safety (2–5) or equity impacts of these interventions (6–9), widespread implementation encounters both practical barriers (e.g., budget, planning, local adaptations, etc.) and political challenges (e.g., short political cycles, small vocal opposition) hurdles (10,11).

The CapaCITY/É team aims to produce research and tools that will catalyze the implementation of sustainable transportation interventions that support health, mobility, and equity in cities. A first step is to understand how, why, and for whom these interventions are successful (or not).

What is “All Ages and Abilities”, anyway?

All “Ages and Abilities” (AAA) bicycle networks are one of the two types of sustainable transportation interventions that our CapaCITY/É research team is examining. While the AAA language has grown increasingly popular in the vernacular of cycling and transportation planning practice in recent decades, the catchy terminology hasn’t been consistently defined across contexts. We’ve heard from transportation practitioners asking questions about what types of bicycling infrastructure should be included, and what metrics they should use in their planning and design work to assess if they are supporting a wider uptake in who cycles.

Thus, to better understand the foundations of what is meant by AAA cycling networks, we conducted a policy scan of municipal and regional policy documents from various regions across Canada (12). We wanted to capture how the AAA language was being used in communities across Canada, including what facilities are most often considered AAA, and how and if cycling networks are being adequately defined for their desired outcomes. Given the AAA terminology, we also sought insights into how equity considerations were factored into these plans, and which priority populations were specifically mentioned.

We selected recent municipal and regional policy documents from across all provinces and territories, with a focus on large population centres and avoided neighbouring municipalities to ensure a wide geographic representation. Thirty-five plans were analyzed including cycling plans, active transportation plans, and transportation master plans. The plans were published from 2010 to 2022, and the lengths varied from 6 to 344 pages. Our scan is available through Open Access and we invite readers to review the original article for the list of plans and for additional details on our methodology.

Results of the scan

Twenty-five of the 35 plans we analyzed used the AAA terminology. However, only nine of these plans included specific definitions. For example, Victoria’s Bicycle Network Plan (2016, p 11) describes the city’s planned AAA network as follows: “The aim of the city’s planned AAA network is to provide an interconnecting system of bicycle facilities that is comfortable and attractive for a broad range of users, including women, children, and seniors.”

Meanwhile, Halifax’s Integrated Mobility Plan (2017; p.7) states that “Mobility options should provide people of all ages and abilities with the independence to pursue these activities, including those with physical, visual, auditory and mental disabilities.”

We found 16 plans that mentioned AAA but didn’t include explicit definitions or criteria. These tended to provide framing like Kelowna’s ‘Kelowna on the Move’ Action Plan (2016, p. 29) that described attracting a “broad range of users”.

Fourteen plans made specific reference to bicycle infrastructure they considered AAA. Two types were mentioned very consistently: cycle tracks/protected bike lanes (13/14 plans) and local street bikeways/neighbourhood greenways (13/14 plans). Some plans also included multi-use paths (9/14 plans) and bicycle-only paths (6/14 plans) in their examples of AAA infrastructure.

The concept of a “cycling network” also tended to be loosely defined or described in the plans we analyzed. Most plans did mention the term “network”, recognizing the importance of ‘a continuous or ‘connected’ system. However, most plans did not list criteria or specifics. A handful described a cycling network in relation to connections or access to destinations. For example, Halifax’s Integrated Mobility Plan (2017) sums up the importance of a network as: “…bicycling routes are most useful when they form a connected and cohesive network that provides direct and convenient access to important destinations like employment districts, shopping, schools, service centres, and other community amenities (p. 90).” Six of the plans also talked about networks using the concept of a minimum grid, specifying threshold distances for residents to live within range of the cycling network (ranging from 200m to 800m).

As an indicator of specific equity considerations or priorities in cycling planning, we examined which population groups were named in the plans. Not surprisingly, seniors and children were most frequently mentioned and cover the “All Ages” construct within AAA language. However, what is meant by abilities was much less clear across plans. Fourteen plans mentioned people experiencing disability, and five included the consideration of different types of cycles (e.g., adaptive cycles, cargo bicycles, etc.). Six of the plans indicated that ‘ability’ is related to cycling experience. Out of this scan, it seems important to clarify if “all abilities” refers to experience, physical ability, or includes considerations for people experiencing disability, as these groups may each require different considerations. This is of particular importance given the legislative requirements of the Accessible Canada Act, a federal law that aims to identify, remove and prevent barriers facing people with disabilities. Equity is an area of growing attention for transportation planning and engineering, and more than half of the plans we reviewed in the scan did have some explicit mention of equity. In addition to the populations mentioned above, across the plans, there was mention of groups who have historically faced barriers in accessing cycling infrastructure. Only six plans detailed how they were building equity into their planning processes, such as with a socio-spatial analysis.

What questions remain?

Winter maintenance poses a challenge for cities who intend to offer a reliable cycling network year-round. Montreal has recognized the need for cycling infrastructure that is “safe and available all year long” in their Cycling Plan (2017). In Calgary, they refer to this as 5A with the addition of “Always Available” to the AAA. We will be hosting discussions on how cities are maintaining year-round access in a session at the Winter Cycling Congress in Edmonton, in February 2024.

Implications for CapaCITY/É

This policy scan was the first to describe how Canadian municipalities and regions define the terms ‘All Ages and Abilities’ in the context of cycling infrastructure. It provides our CapaCITY/É research team with an understanding of the varied ways that AAA language is being used across the country. This work also underscores that for successful research on scaling the implementation of AAA bicycle networks we will need precise infrastructure specified in policy documents and an adequate mechanism for assessing progress.

Building on this research, the CapaCITY/É team, in collaboration with staff from our nine Canadian partner cities, has endeavored to determine a starting operational definition for the types of infrastructure that can be classified as AAA. The set of facilities encompasses cycle tracks, local street bikeways, bike-only paths, and multi-use paths. Defining what constitutes a cycling network will require more discussions with practitioners across Canada in 2024.

Enhancing access to well-designed cycling infrastructure in a more equitable manner can yield health and mobility benefits for a wider range of populations (13–16). Many cities seek guidance on how to operationalize transportation equity in practice (17). Examining the health, mobility, and equity impacts of AAA cycling networks are one of CapaCITY/É’s research objectives.

Bios

Karen Laberee

Karen is the National Research Coordinator of the CapaCITY/É project. With many years of research and project management experience, she has focused on various projects related to active transportation, involving outreach, promotion, or participant recruitment. Previously, she served as the Executive Director for BikeMaps.org, a crowdsourced tool gathering reports of cycling near misses and collisions. More recently, she led the development and promotion of a similar tool for the pedestrian environment, WalkRollMap.org.  She is thrilled to witness the emergence of more safe and comfortable cycling infrastructure in cities across Canada.

Moreno Zanotto

Moreno is a graduate of SFU’s Faculty of Health Sciences, where he completed his thesis research on the Vancouver public bike share system. Today, Moreno coordinates the training of personnel and manages the logistics of data collection for various public health intervention research studies that contribute to the design of healthier cities.

Moreno lives in beautiful Metro Vancouver and cycles for most trips using his e-bike. He actively engages with the cycling advocacy community, working to turn research evidence into practice by advocating for higher-quality cycling infrastructure and safer streets.

Alison Funk

Ali has worked in the field of health promotion for seven years on topics primarily related to active living, healthy eating, and mental well-being. She holds an undergraduate degree from the University of Victoria in Recreation and Health Education, and her background in active living informs her work. Ali has applied her experience internationally, working in New Zealand and Indonesia. She is passionate about prevention and has dedicated a significant portion of her career to school health promotion in BC, working with both primary and post-secondary education.

In April 2023, Ali graduated with her Master’s in Public Health from Simon Fraser University. During her master’s program, she gained experience in community development, equity-centered design, program planning, and evaluation. She completed her practicum in 2022 with Fraser Health, where she conducted a Mental Health in Schools evaluation. In the spring of 2023, Ali was grateful to have the experience of completing a directed study with Dr. Meghan Winters in the CHATR Lab, where she contributed to this paper. Ali currently works as a Community Health Specialist at Vancouver Coastal Health, where she is passionate about applying an equity-centered lens to her health promotion work.

Sara F.L. Kirk

Dr. Sara Kirk is a Professor of Health Promotion and serves as the Scientific Director of the Healthy Populations Institute at Dalhousie University. Her research explores the design of supportive environments for chronic disease prevention. This has included a focus on the role built and social environments that can promote or disrupt health and the benefits of sustainable transportation. Over her 17-year tenure at Dalhousie University, Dr. Kirk has authored over 200 published academic papers and secured grant funding exceeding $16 million as a Principal Investigator.  Dr. Kirk was the inaugural recipient of the Dalhousie University Award for Excellence in Graduate Supervision in 2014-2015 and recipient of the Faculty of Health Senior Research Excellence award in 2018. She was named one of Optimyz magazine’s top 100 health influencers for 2019 and in 2022, she was awarded a Distinguished Research Professorship at Dalhousie University. In 2023, she was a finalist in the Discovery Awards for Science and Innovation, Public Impact category, one of three researchers selected.

Sarah A. Moore

Dr. Sarah Moore is an Assistant Professor in the School of Health and Human Performance within the Faculty of Health, at Dalhousie University, in Nova Scotia, Canada. She also holds a cross-appointment with the Department of Pediatrics in the Faculty of Medicine, Additionally, she is a Project Lead with the MacEachen Institute for Public Policy and Governance, a Scholar with the Healthy Populations Institute, and an Affiliate Scientist at IWK Health in Pediatric Rehabilitation. Dr. Moore's research focuses on childhood disability, physical activity, movement, and active transportation with ongoing projects at both local and national levels. For example, she is a co-primary investigator with CapaCITY/É - a project set to catalyze the implementation of sustainable transportation interventions to support health, mobility, and equity outcomes in cities. Dr. Moore is also a co-investigator with the Canadian Disability Participation Project - a partnership project to support equitable access to quality participation programming for Canadians with disabilities. Overall, Dr. Moore's work aims to reduce disparities for persons with disabilities to physical activity, movement, and active transportation -- rights that are to be upheld according to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Her work encompasses “a nothing about us without us” framework, recognizing the importance of amplifying the voices of persons with disabilities in decision-making and design within research, practice, and policy.

Meghan Winters

Meghan Winters is a Professor in the Faculty of Health Sciences at Simon Fraser University. She leads the Cities, Health, and Active Transportation Lab (CHATR Lab), focusing on researching on how city design impacts mobility, safety, and health, and on equity considerations within cities’ policies and plans.  Meghan and her team collaborate with decision-makers and community groups at the intersection of health, urban planning, and transportation to generate actionable evidence and tools for shaping livable, sustainable, and equitable cities. In her role as the PHAC/CIHR Applied Public Health Chair, Meghan is expanding the REACH-Cities (REsearch and ACtion for Healthy Cities) program, which aims to promote research, tools, and partnerships fostering increased gender and social equity in our cities.

Meghan leads interdisciplinary and intersectoral teams nationwide within the healthy cities space, such as the INTERACT team, and CapaCITY/É. Her outstanding contributions have earned her recognition, including  the CIHR IPPH’s Trailblazer Award, designation as an SFU Distinguished Professor, and acknowledgement as a Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research Scholar.

References

  1. IPCC IP on CC. AR6 Synthesis Report. Climate Change 2023. [Internet]. 2023. Available from: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/
  2. Harris MA, Reynolds CCO, Winters M, Cripton PA, Shen H, Chipman ML, et al. Comparing the effects of infrastructure on bicycling injury at intersections and non-intersections using a case–crossover design. Inj Prev. 2013 Oct;19(5):303–10.
  3. Ling R, Rothman L, Cloutier MS, Macarthur C, Howard A. Cyclist-motor vehicle collisions before and after implementation of cycle tracks in Toronto, Canada. Accid Anal Prev. 2020 Feb;135:105360.
  4. Pucher J, Buehler R. Safer Cycling Through Improved Infrastructure. Am J Public Health. 2016 Dec;106(12):2089–91.
  5. Teschke K, Harris MA, Reynolds CCO, Winters M, Babul S, Chipman M, et al. Route Infrastructure and the Risk of Injuries to Bicyclists: A Case-Crossover Study. Am J Public Health. 2012 Dec;102(12):2336–43.
  6. Branion-Calles M, Nelson T, Fuller D, Gauvin L, Winters M. Associations between individual characteristics, availability of bicycle infrastructure, and city-wide safety perceptions of bicycling: A cross-sectional survey of bicyclists in 6 Canadian and U.S. cities. Transp Res Part Policy Pract. 2019 May;123:229–39.
  7. Clark C, Mokhtarian PL, Circella G, Watkins K. The role of attitudes in perceptions of bicycle facilities: A latent-class regression approach. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav. 2021 Feb;77:129–48.
  8. Dill J, Goddard T, Monsere C, McNeil N. Can Protected Bike Lanes Help Close the Gender Gap in Cycling? Lessons from Five Cities. Urban Stud Plan Fac Publ Present [Internet]. 2014 Nov 1; Available from: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/usp_fac/123
  9. Garrard J, Rose G, Lo SK. Promoting transportation cycling for women: The role of bicycle infrastructure. Prev Med. 2008 Jan;46(1):55–9.
  10. Whitehurst DGT, DeVries DN, Fuller D, Winters M. An economic analysis of the health-related benefits associated with bicycle infrastructure investment in three Canadian cities. Zúniga-González CA, editor. PLOS ONE. 2021 Feb 8;16(2):e0246419.
  11. Nello-Deakin S. Environmental determinants of cycling: Not seeing the forest for the trees? J Transp Geogr. 2020 May;85:102704.
  12. Laberee K, Zanotto M, Funk A, Kirk SFL, Moore SA, Winters M. ‘All Ages and Abilities’: exploring the language of municipal cycling policies. Urban Plan Transp Res. 2023 Dec 31;11(1):2264365.
  13. Buehler R, Pucher JR, editors. Cycling for sustainable cities. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press; 2021. 464 p. (Urban and industrial environments).
  14. Doran A, El-Geneidy A, Manaugh K. The pursuit of cycling equity: A review of Canadian transport plans. J Transp Geogr. 2021 Jan;90:102927.
  15. Fishman E, Schepers P, Kamphuis CBM. Dutch Cycling: Quantifying the Health and Related Economic Benefits. Am J Public Health. 2015 Aug;105(8):e13–5.
  16. Mitra R, Nash S. Can the built environment explain gender gap in cycling? An exploration of university students’ travel behavior in Toronto, Canada. Int J Sustain Transp. 2019 Feb 7;13(2):138–47.
  17. Williams T, Winters M. From Rhetoric to Reality. Promising Practices for Advancing Transportation Equity in Canadian Communities. Transportation Talk - ITE Canada. 2023; Summer 2023:51–4.