Guelph Healthy Active Cities Initiative -Lessons from Copenhagen

By: Linda Rothman, Ph.D. and Jennifer Juste

Abstract

Across Canada, researchers, advocates, and public servants are grappling with how to address high rates of collision-related injuries and deaths on our roads, a public health crisis due to a culture of sedentary lifestyles, and the challenges of designing infrastructure to make cycling and walking safer and more connected. Four municipal teams from across Canada, including Brandon, Saskatoon, Oshawa and Guelph attended a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Healthy Cities funded workshop hosted by 880 Cities in Copenhagen, Denmark in the fall 2023. The teams consisted of representatives from the mayor’s offices, municipal transportation, public health, and academia. The workshop was designed to learn what makes Copenhagen one of the happiest and healthiest cities in the world through street design and transportation planning measures. This article reports on some of the lessons learnt by two members of the Guelph team, which include those related to design for human interaction, equity in cycling, the importance of relevant data, and characteristics of a safe cycling network. These learnings are being disseminated through a walking tour in Guelph (fall, 2023) , as well as a solutions panel and workshop planned for the spring 2024, which include representatives from the community, government, public health, advocacy, and professional organizations.

Introduction

Those of us who work in road safety and transportation are deeply aware of the day-to-day struggles, challenges, and dangers that our current transportation environment in Canada presents. Across Canada, researchers, advocates, and public servants are grappling with how to address high rates of collision-related injuries and deaths on our roads, a public health crisis due to a culture of sedentary lifestyles, and designing infrastructure to make cycling and walking safer and more connected.

Now imagine you can step out of your daily routine for a moment and into someone else’s shoes in another city, another country, on another continent. The context is very different, and you are able to see city streets in a new light.

Four municipal teams from across Canada, including Brandon, Saskatoon, Oshawa, and Guelph, were able to do just that through a federal grant-funded research workshop hosted by the renowned 8-80 Cities organization in Copenhagen, Denmark this past September. Through the Healthy Cities Research Initiative of the Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR), these cities sent teams of five to experience, observe and learn what makes Copenhagen one of the happiest and healthiest cities in the world through street design and transportation planning measures. This planning grant also provided the opportunity to transfer learnings gained at the workshop upon return to the home communities.

The Guelph team, represented by Mayor Cam Guthrie, Medical Officer of Health Dr. Nicola Mercer, research lead Dr. Linda Rothman and staff from the City and the public health units, traveled to find out how Copenhagen designs healthy and equitable urban spaces that facilitate active transportation. The City of Guelph was specifically looking for innovative ways to use data-informed decision making in improving service delivery and infrastructure to equity-deserving neighbourhoods. Over the next year, Guelph will deliver on several commitments within the grant to apply lessons learned from abroad to address local challenges in road safety and active transportation.

Data Trends

Municipalities of all sizes across Canada are grappling with the challenges of moving people safely, and Guelph is no exception. The World Health Organization has stated that road traffic injuries are the leading cause of death for children and young adults aged 5-29 years, and road crashes result in approximately 1.3 million deaths each year. In 2018, transport injury costs were over $3.6 billion in Canada, with over 366,000 emergency department visits and approximately 24,000 hospitalizations.(1) Therefore, road traffic injury represents a significant preventable burden on Canadian society.

Pedestrians and cyclists are referred to as vulnerable road users – VRU, due to their lack of protection against the traumatic forces of vehicles in a collision. While there has been some success in reducing fatal and serious injury collisions over the past decade in Ontario (from 44,430 in 2010 to 32,628 in 2019), there has been an increase in the proportion of VRU deaths from 27% to 33% among all traffic fatalities.(2) Therefore, while cycling and walking offer many benefits for the individual and the community, the safety of active transportation users is a major public health concern.

A growing number of Canadian cities have adopted Vision Zero road safety plans to address severe injuries and fatalities on the road. The City of Guelph recently joined the list of Vision Zero cities through the adoption of its 2022 Transportation Master Plan (TMP). The TMP, which prioritizes safety, equity, and sustainability, seeks to increase the number of trips by walking and cycling from 11% in 2016 to 25% by 2051. In Guelph, from 2017 to 2021, there has been a reduction in total injury collisions from 973 to 468. However, VRU collisions remain a concern. During this time, there were 289 VRU collisions resulting in minimal/minor injuries, and 47 resulting in major/fatal injuries. As the number of pedestrians and cyclists on Guelph streets grow, it is important to stay focused on proactive policy, and design and operational measures through a strong equity-focused Vision Zero strategy to maintain this downward trend in collisions.

Equity considerations

The intersection of equity, active transportation, and road safety is particularly important to consider in transportation planning. Existing research suggests that there is less road safety infrastructure - for example, traffic calming measures, protected bike facilities, dedicated sidewalks - in Canada in areas with higher levels of social marginalization. These inequities in the built environment contribute to higher collision rates.(3-5) There are societal challenges faced by more marginalized communities, which influence opportunities and barriers to safe sustainable transportation. (6)

The City of Guelph has done its own analyses of whether there are correlations between collisions involving VRUs and the degree of marginalization of a neighbourhood. On average, the most marginalized areas of the city saw double the number of collisions involving pedestrians or cyclists compared to least marginalized areas of the city. (7) These most marginalized areas also had the fewest traffic studies completed (based on a request-system that was formerly in place). Finally, the analysis demonstrated that the most marginalized communities had the highest proportion of arterial and collector roads that are characterized by higher speeds and traffic volumes.

While cycling and walking offer many health and environmental benefits, the safety of active transportation continues to be a major public health concern for all people in Guelph, and in Canada generally, but even more so in more marginalized communities. It is essential to examine the impacts of sustainable transportation interventions on marginalized communities to determine whether their voices are being heard and their needs are being met. Important considerations include the quality of infrastructure, the connectedness of the network, and the level of service provided in the community.

Copenhagen: A different perspective

Copenhagen is known for its playful public plazas, world-class architecture, pastries, and bicycles. But it wasn’t always this way: in the 1980s, the central city nearly went bankrupt as a result of de-industrialization of its port, outdated housing, high unemployment rates, and a variety of other contributing factors.(8) During these years, many young people left Copenhagen to seek larger, newer housing in the suburbs. This left older workers, the unemployed and lower income households with a higher reliance on public welfare in the city core.(8) The city’s revitalization in the 90s was supported by a new vision and path for its reinvention, the national government’s initiation of some major infrastructure projects and the refinancing of the city’s debt. (8) The population has continued to grow since then, and Copenhagen has tackled its development challenges by adopting many sustainable urban strategies with the plan to become a regenerative city and a world leader in sustainability and health.(9) Part of the city’s strategic plan was to make the city less car dependent and more accessible to pedestrians and cyclists. Since the 1980’s, Copenhagen has transformed from a post-war car-dominated landscape to one that is regularly in the top three best cities for cycling in the world. Recent figures indicate that more than a third of all trips to work and school are made by bike in Copenhagen and there are 5 times more bikes than cars in the city.(10) The City is targeting a goal of 75% of trips in Copenhagen by foot, bike, or public transit by 2025. Some of the reasons for aiming high is that every time an employee replaces the car with the bike, an average of five sick days are saved annually (11). Given their mode share statistics, we begin to see why Copenhagen is among the happiest and healthiest cities in the world, and a fitting destination for the Healthy Cities Research Initiative.(12)

Observations that inspired us

Design for human interaction

While in Copenhagen, one might notice a few unique cultural behaviours that stand out. For one, nearly every passerby will make eye contact with you on the streets, providing a subtle sense of safety and security. You may also notice a surprising number of occupied baby strollers left unattended outside of cafes and shops while the parent visits the business inside. Busy boardwalks along the harbour are unencumbered with railings or safety mechanisms to prevent a fall into the frigid waters. These are all observations that the typical risk-averse North American visitor may find surprising.
Much of the public space, including parks, squares, and streets, is designed to encourage social interaction. When you create a city that encourages interaction, the result appears to be a higher degree of social trust. Can the way we design and build active transportation infrastructure in Canada lead to a higher degree of social trust?

Cycling for all

Figure 3: A group of people riding bicycles stopped at a light. The group includes a pregnant woman, a student, several seniors, and some commuters. Photo Credit: Jennifer Juste

Copenhagen clearly embodies the concept of “Cycling for All” which is emphasized by the Cycling Embassy of Denmark. (13) The emphasis is on starting to build safe, sustainable transportation culture with youth. The tour provided by the Danish Cycling Embassy during the workshop, informed us that as early as kindergarten, children are given balance bikes and play games in the schoolyard to gain confidence on two wheels. As they progress through their schooling, the curriculum covers technical skills, etiquette, and rules of the road. The result is that cyclists in Copenhagen are very consistent in following the rules, and their predictable behaviour is easier for other road users to anticipate and react to. This consistency can arguably prevent many collisions from happening. This education program has been in place for decades, such that multi-generational families now encourage seniors to stay engaged and active by bike. Seniors are frequently seen riding their bicycles alongside people of all other ages – there is no pressure related to speed as long as bicyclists follow the rules! Cargo bikes are growing in popularity and are used to carry children, friends, and people with disabilities who are unable to independently cycle (as well as groceries and even small furniture!). In addition, organizations like Cycling Without Age provide services for the elderly and mobility-compromised to get around by trike-shaw.

Figure 4: Friends traveling together by cargo bike. Photo credit: Jennifer Juste

What also was notable to us was that cyclists did not appear to be overrepresented by men, as we find in Canada. Recent studies in Copenhagen report an almost perfect gender balance in cycling when considering the numbers of kilometre ridden.(14, 15) This is a contrast to the Canadian situation, where a study of 79,735 cycling counted in 68 communities across Canada found that there were twice as many men as women observed.(16)  There are many explanations offered for this, but the most prevalent is that concerns of personal security and safety are the primary reason for less woman cycling, and that quality of infrastructure is of high importance.(17)

In Copenhagen, we also felt that there was a prevailing view of cycling as a utilitarian means of transportation for everyone as opposed to the prevailing feeling of cycling for just recreation in Canada. In Copenhagen, cycling is for everyone to get around, and there is no need for speed in the downtown core. People dress in street clothes and use their rain gear; bikes are basic with few speeds and with convenient baskets for storage’ there are many cargo bikes, and locking up is easy, with a built-in rear caliper lock that requires no bike parking.

The importance of relevant data

As part of our visit, participants were given many informative presentations by city staff, non-profit organizations, health agencies, and other groups. Many of the presentations portrayed the importance of collecting the right data to support the continued implementation of building safe sustainable transportation. For instance, renowned Danish architect, Jan Gehl, is known for his books and methodologies about observational data to inform human-centric design. Gehl uses a mix of quantitative and qualitative methods to understand people’s lived experience in their neighbourhoods.(18)

Copenhagen has a robust data collection program for their transportation network that includes automated counters, in-person manual counters, and household travel survey statistics. For instance, we learned that amongst Copenhagener’s reasons for cycling, safety did not even factor into their top five reasons for cycling. Cycling was a natural choice because it was first and foremost easy (59%), followed by speedy (50%), good exercise (48%), convenient (28%), and affordable (25%).(19) These data are essential to build a case for safe sustainable transportation and to mobilize action.  The integration of active transportation data with public health data is key.

Unfortunately, there is a dearth of active transportation data in Canada, as the collection of these data has not been a priority. However, one of the targets of Canada’s new National Active Transportation Strategy is to support the development and use of data collection tools, such as automated counting systems, to inform infrastructure investments to advance growth of sustainable transportation.(20)  Similarly, although we do have collision data from police-reports and hospitals, these data are frequently underestimates of cycling incidents (particularly the police-reported data) and these data are poorly integrated resulting in difficulties in strategic planning.

Characteristics of the Copenhagen cycling network

Copenhagen’s large number of trips by bike is attributable to several key characteristics of its cycling network. First, the network is almost entirely separated from traffic. Bike paths are often the same dimension as car lanes, carrying equal if not higher volumes of people per hour and making “safety in numbers” a reasonable causation for the perceived sense of safety. Vehicles are also very accustomed to yielding to cyclists- there is a strong sense that cyclists have priority. Second, cyclists are not left to fend for themselves at the intersection as they so often do in Canadian cities. Intersections have separate signals for the bicycle paths, and advanced stop bars for people on bikes to put them ahead of stopped vehicles and in view. Cyclists are expected to make left turns in two steps and are kept out of the flow of traffic by waiting spaces at the corners. Finally, the cycling network is continuous and coherent so that it is easy, direct, and efficient to get to any place in the city. These good design principles mean safety is less a consideration for people’s choice in transportation mode. (24)

As most of the workshop attendees did not have previous experience cycling in Copenhagen, what we found notable were the vast numbers of people respectfully cycling alongside us - as long as we followed the rules! Due to a robust education program for cycling that begins in kindergarten, there is a strong culture of compliance and etiquette amongst cyclists. This predictability in behaviour amongst cyclists reduces any stress that may arise for the unfamiliar cyclist in this city, and likely has implications for lowering the probability of serious collisions with vehicles.

Bringing it home to Canada

It is tempting to want to “copy and paste” the elements we saw in Copenhagen to Guelph and the other Canadian municipalities. But as professionals working with cities, we know that local context is extremely important and there are several fundamental differences. For one, although also in a northern climate, Copenhagen does not experience the snow accumulation that most Canadian cities do. Their road designs do not need to factor in space to store snow or ensure plows can get through. Copenhagen’s climate tends more toward frequent freeze-thaw cycles and high amounts of precipitation as rainfall.

Copenhagen is also noticeably less diverse than Guelph, with immigrants and their second-generation descendants only representing 15.4% of the population. In Guelph, 48.5% of the population is either foreign-born immigrants or second generation (2021 census). Canada is a nation built on diversity of cultures and religions, and as a result, we do not have the same homogenous views or experiences, which likely include attitudes towards transportation. In practice, this emphasizes how important it is to determine and address different needs for transportation based around a multitude of different cultural norms.

Another observation was that the built environment in Copenhagen did not always fit what our North American perspective sees as safe for VRU. For example, their design standard for bike parking “pits” look like trip/fall hazards to our eyes, however when asked about this, the local professionals said this was not something typical in their culture to litigate after an injury in a public space. It may be that our society’s  perceptions of risk may create challenges to implementing some of the ways Copenhagen has introduced active transportation into public spaces.

Some of our  takeaways

• Asking people what they need is important. We need to make cycling and walking accessible to all cultures, genders, income brackets, and communities.
• Collecting more observational data to accompany traditional data sources can reveal how people are currently using their community and where to focus efforts on implementing infrastructure improvements and/or safety measures.
• Data are important to set targets, monitor progress, and make a strong case for active transportation. Data should include measurement of active transportation and mode share, relevant urban development targets (i.e., the numbers of kilometres of cycling infrastructure) and health outcome data in terms of collisions and chronic disease.
• Cycling should not just be about recreational riding in spandex and on expensive carbon frames that we are afraid to lock up. We need to focus less on speed and more on practical commuting, dressing for our weather and riding comfortably. Like they say - there is no such thing as bad weather, only bad clothes.
• Bringing the benefits down to the individual level - less talk about emissions (although we all know how important that is!) and talk more about convenience, mental and physical health benefits, and reduced cost.
• Considering the role of public space design in building social trust: opportunities for shared space, social interaction, and eye contact to help build more engagement within our communities.
• Integrating active transportation into elementary school physical education programs to normalize it and provide some skills training. Once a child cycles for purposes beyond just play, they are more likely to be an adult cyclist, which can lead to a cultural change in their attitudes to active transportation.
• There is a culture of social responsibility evident, in terms of how people using different transportation modes interact with each other in Copenhagen. There is a sense that cyclists and pedestrians have priority over cars and considering the destructive impact that cars can have on vulnerable road users. From our observations, it appears there are strict rules of the road, which appear to work even considering the congestion in the city core. It is interesting to reflect on this in terms of our Canadian transportation culture that seems to value speed over safety.
• We need to focus on optimizing our built environment to encourage safe cycling and walking for all people, including children, women, and seniors. Part of this is related to connectivity - no one wants to start a ride on a separated cycle track and end it in the middle of a busy roadway with no infrastructure. Another important element is to focus our infrastructure on separation from traffic physically (separated cycle tracks) and also temporally (advanced signals)

Final words

Generally, what we need to adopt from Copenhagen to our Canadian settings, is the philosophy of equitable, easy, convenient, and healthy active transportation in our cities. We need to prioritize creating spaces that invite human interaction, build community trust, and mutual respect, to improve the quality of life for all.

The workshop provided the unique and invaluable opportunity to engage with multidisciplinary Canadian team members from several cities, including representatives from both transportation and public health. Interacting with representatives from Danish organizations related to cycling, health, architecture, and urban form provided some excellent food-for-thought in terms of determining how to translate learnings to our home cities. We came away contemplating what, as a Canadian society, we value in terms of health, wellbeing, social trust, and our environments.

After the workshop, Guelph led a neighborhood walking tour with support from Parachute Canada to start mobilizing some of the knowledge we gained from Copenhagen. The walking tour was attended by 53 participants with representation from the community, government, public health, advocacy, and professional organizations. This tour will set the stage for a multi-sectoral community design workshop and panel discussion in Spring 2024 to pull together lessons from Copenhagen with local challenges and barriers to delivering safe and active transportation. These activities will provide meaningful insights and direction to future projects in Guelph aimed at improving equitable and safe active transportation throughout Guelph. There are plans for future collaborative grant submissions to evaluate the resulting changes implemented by Guelph.

We feel that it is important to do justice to this experience in Copenhagen and subsequent activities by continuing to communicate what we have learned through newsletters and presentations to a wide variety of audiences. We would highly encourage people to form teams in other Canadian cities to engage in this enriching experience. The Canadian Institutes of Health Research, together with 8-80 Cities, plan to hold another competition in the near future to hold the workshop in Fall 2024.

CIHR has a webpage that contains information related to this project. Good luck to all who apply!

https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/53622.html

Happy riding!!

Linda and Jennifer

Bios

Dr. Linda Rothman, BScOT, Ph.D

Linda Rothman B.Sc.OT, Ph.D. (Research Lead) is an Assistant Professor at the School of Occupational and Public Health at Toronto Metropolitan University, an Adjunct Scientist in Child Health Evaluative Sciences at the Hospital for Sick Children, and an Assistant Professor (status only) at Dalla Lana, School of Public Health, University of Toronto. Her area of expertise is in vulnerable road user injuries in urban environments as a public health issue and has been working in this field for over 20 years. Linda is an investigator on a new Healthy Cities CapaCITY/É team grant involving researchers working together with 10 municipalities across Canada and Melbourne, Australia. This team is investigating the implementation and evaluation of interventions related to speed reduction and All Ages and Abilities Bicycle Networks. Other recent research projects include studying the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on road traffic volumes and collisions and evaluating new road safety infrastructure in 4 Canadian cities with a social equity lens. Linda works with a variety of knowledge users and has presented her work in many international, national, and local venues.

Jennifer Juste, M.U.P, B. Sc.

Jennifer Juste has been working on enhancing sustainable and equitable transportation for the City of Guelph since 2006. Since that time, Jennifer has created all of the foundational master plans and policies to guide the City’s growth and development over the next 50 years equitably, sustainably and affordably. She is a graduate of McGill University’s School of Urban Planning where she focused her studies on resilience to economic disruptions in cities and communities. She is the Manager of Transportation Planning and is focused on executing the recommendations of the 2022 Transportation Master Plan over the next phase of her career to ensure all visitors and residents of Guelph of any age and ability can get around safely, efficiently, and sustainably.

References

1.  Parachute. The cost of injury in Canada 2021. Toronto, ON: Parachute; 2021.
2. Ministry of Transportation. Ontario Road Safety Annual Reports (OSAR) 2020 [Available from: http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/publications/ontario-road-safety-annual-report.shtml. Accessed Nov 9, 2023.
3. Rothman L, Macarthur C, Wilton A, Howard AW, Macpherson AK. Recent trends in child and youth emergency department visits because of pedestrian motor vehicle collisions by socioeconomic status in Ontario, Canada. Inj Prev. 2019;25(6):570-3.
4. Rothman L, Cloutier M-S, Manaugh K, Howard AW, Macpherson AK, Macarthur C. Spatial distribution of roadway environment features related to child pedestrian safety by census tract income in Toronto, Canada. Inj Prev. 2020;26(3):229-33.
5. Schwartz N, Howard A, Cloutier M-S, Mitra R, Saunders N, Macpherson A, et al. Social inequalities in child pedestrian collisions: The role of the built environment. Transp Res D Transp Environ. 2022;111:103448.
6. Linovski O, Dorries H, Simpson S-A. Public Transit and Equity-Deserving Groups: Understanding Lived Experiences 2021 [Available from: https://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/server/api/core/bitstreams/31d1437c-a4bf-4ead-a350-2c38752cd20c/content. Accessed Nov 13, 2023.
7. Laban S, A B. Enhancing equity and road safety in Guelph. Guelph, ON: University of Guelph, City of Guelph; 2021.
8. Andersen HT, Winther L. Crisis in the resurgent city? The rise of Copenhagen. Int J Urban Reg Res. 2010;34(3):693-700.
9. Fayed L, Elshater A, Rashed R, editors. Copenhagen: A Model for Regenerative Cities. Architecture & Urbanism: A Smart Look; 2019 Oct; Cairo, Egypt.
10. Statistics Denmark, Danish Cycling Federation. Danish National Travel Survey, Bicycle accounts & Bicycle Reports 2014-2021 (City of Copenhagen) [Available from: https://cyclingsolutions.info/embassy/danish-cycling-statistics/. Accessed Nov 9, 2023.
11. Presentation by Monica Magnussen, Head of international affairs, climate and urban development, City of Copenhagen. Presented September 25, 2023.
12. Kjaergard Andersen T. Welcome to Copenhagen. 880 Cities Presentation; Sept 2023.
13. Cycling Embassy of Denmark. Cycling Recommendations 2018 [Available from: https://cyclingsolutions.info/cycling-recommendations/. Accessed Nov 9, 2023.
14. Couturier Lopez L. Cycling inequalities in Copenhagen: Strategies and policies. 2021.
15. Haustein S, Koglin T, Nielsen TAS, Svensson Å. A comparison of cycling cultures in Stockholm and Copenhagen. Int. J. Sustain. Transp. 2020;14(4):280-93.
16. Winters M, Beairsto J, Mitra R, Walker K, Zanotto M, Laberee K, et al. Pedal poll/sondo vélo 2021: a community science project on who cycles in Canada. J. Transp. Health. 2023;30:101606.
17. Doran A, El-Geneidy A, Manaugh K. The pursuit of cycling equity: A review of Canadian transport plans. J Transp Geogr. 2021;90:102927.
18. Risom J (Chief Innovation Officer). Public Life 101. Gehl Architects; Presentation; Sept 27, 2023.
19. Magnussen (Technical and and Environmental Administration). Co-Creating Copenhagen City of Copenhagen, Presentation; Sept. 2023.
20. Infrastructure Canada. National Active Transportation Strategy 2021-2026 2021 [Available from: chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.infrastructure.gc.ca/alt-format/pdf/nats-snta/nats-strat-snta-en.pdf. Accessed Nov 9, 2023.
21. Celis-Morales CA, Lyall DM, Welsh P, Anderson J, Steell L, Guo Y, et al. Association between active commuting and incident cardiovascular disease, cancer, and mortality: prospective cohort study. BMJ. 2017;357:j1456.
22. Rasmussen MG, Grøntved A, Blond K, Overvad K, Tjønneland A, Jensen MK, et al. Associations between recreational and commuter cycling, changes in cycling, and type 2 diabetes risk: a cohort study of Danish men and women. PLoS medicine. 2016;13(7):e1002076.
23. Cities changing diabetes. Our approach 2023 [Available from: https://www.citieschangingdiabetes.com/about-ccd/our-approach.html. Accessed Nov 13, 2023.
24. Bech LA. Bicycle Strategy and Implementation in Copenhagen. Cophenhagen: Cycling Embassy of Denmark. Presentation.; Sept 24, 2023.