Executive Summary

The purpose of this case study was to perform a systematic review to identify some factors that could positively influence the perception of cycling. These factors would help a local cycling Club (The Club) address problems with Club revenue, the number of new members, and challenges with influencing the community, as well as, local, regional, and national policymakers.

This case study identifies potential guidance for The Club through a systematic review that is a quality appraisal and synthesis of 30 peer-reviewed, scholarly articles. Five primary findings resulted from the systematic review: personal values and beliefs strongly influenced the perception of cycling; individuals who value an active lifestyle have a positive perception of cycling; real/perceived physical safety is influenced by bicycle infrastructure; the decision to bike is multifactorial, involving psychological, socioeconomic, and infrastructure factors; motivational programs for biking work best in the individual’s environment.

There were three evidence-based recommendations for The Club. The first was to revise their mission statement to include value-laden statements known to influence riders. The second recommendation was geared towards The Club increasing its virtual and physical presence in the community. The third recommendation was for The Club to actively engage in communicating/advocating with local and county officials. These proposed evidence-based recommendations are coupled with a high-level assessment of risks and suggested implementation plans. A general communication plan accompanies these recommendations.

Overall, it was determined that the case study should contribute to a positive perception of cycling in the local area and other cities/towns.

Introduction

Problem Statement

The authors received their first project with a local cycling organization we are calling The Club. The Club expressed issues with declining revenue, a need for new members, and a lack of influence on the community, as well as, local, regional, and national policymakers. The organization’s focus is influencing key stakeholders by increasing the positive perception of cycling. These stakeholders include policymakers, municipal planning organizations, local businesses, community members, current club members, and potential new members, and cycling advocates.

Research Question

The authors reviewed The Club’s membership surveys and had an initial conference call with The Club’s President of the Board of Directors. The authors also met with The Club’s President in person. During the meeting, a review of rapid-evidence assessments conducted by individual team members, along with a consolidated presentation and review of initial findings with the client, led to the selection of the following research question: What factors positively influence the perception of cycling to improve stakeholder advocacy?

This research question was refined using a PICOC (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Context) assessment with the results shown below (Barends, Rousseau, & Briner, 2017):

• Population: The individuals affected by the outcome are bike riders
• Intervention: Influence the perception/thoughts of stakeholders (policymakers, municipal planning organizations, local businesses, community members, current club members, potential new members, and cycling advocates)
• Comparison: Current stakeholder perception/thoughts
• Outcome: Improved stakeholder perception
• Context: Bicycling Club

Based on the PICOC assessment, a final research question was derived: What can bicycle stakeholders do to positively influence the perception of cycling? This descriptive research question was selected to help The Club gain a broad understanding of actions they might consider taking to positively influence the perception of cycling in the community, thus increasing ridership and safety.

Background

Organizational Overview

The Club is a cycling club that was established in 1981 and consists of road, touring, hybrid, recumbent, and tandem cyclists. The Club strives to provide opportunities for riders of all levels and partners with other clubs and organizations to further safe riding throughout the region (The Club, 2020). The organization is membership-based and generates revenue through membership dues, merchandise sales, and other fundraising events such as 50/50 raffles, dinners, and other activities (The Club Bylaws, 2019). Attributes of The Club include camaraderie, companionship, and the sheer joy of riding bikes (The Club Bylaws, 2019).

The Club operates as a network value (loyalty-based) efficiency model. Essentially, The Club creates repeated interactions with a group of loyal customers (members). The generic value capture logic for a business model that wants to create a network value is to supplement the profit logic of the value-based model with attributes that attract and retain the critical mass of customers while keeping imitators out (Chatterjee, 2013). These attributes at The Club include camaraderie, companionship, and the sheer joy of riding bikes (The Club Bylaws, 2019). The imitators exist in this scenario as competing bicycle clubs and other comrade-building group-based offerings. Figure 1 shows the network-value business model for The Club.

Figure 1: Network-value (loyalty-based) business model for The Club.

In this model, the organization creates value for its members and partners

through unique attributes. In return, the members and partners generate

revenue and influence for the organization by existing as its network (Chatterjee, 2013).

 Organizational Assessment

Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis was used to assess THE CLUB. Based on discussions with the President of The Club and a review of membership survey results, the SWOT analysis revealed the information provided in Figure 2.

Figure 2: SWOT analysis for The Club.

The strength of The Club is the organization itself. The Board of Directors and members are passionate about riding and enjoy spending time together. However, some weaknesses include a poor perception of bicycling in the community and by policy makers. Additionally, there is limited membership growth and participation in meetings and events.

There are opportunities to increase member involvement and membership overall. Improved membership would include partnerships with local businesses and policy makers. An additional key opportunity is in the potential to improve the community perception of cycling.

A potential threat to The Club would be in the dissent among Board Members who would not agree with a new direction.

Theory

Theoretical Framework

The Sense of Community Theory (McMillan & Chavis, 1986) was selected to serve as the theoretical framework for this Systematic Review. In summary, Sense of Community focuses on four key components: membership, influence, integration and fulfillment of needs (reinforcement), and shared emotional connection; as illustrated in Figure 3. Membership is inclusive of five distinct domains: boundaries, sense of belonging, common symbol system, personal investment, and emotional safety. Each of these domains is important in creating a sense of membership or belonging.

Figure 3: Sense of Community Theoretical Framework (McMillan & Chavis, 1986)

This theoretical framework was selected to understand the issues faced by The Club because of the common themes seen in the client’s description of the problem and the main constructs represented. Also, the Sense of Community framework has been previously used in research performed in the tourism industry (Hahm, Breiter, Severt, Wang, & Fjelstul, 2016), recreation industry (Legg, Wells, & Barile, 2015), and business industry, with a focus on brand loyalty (Djoko, 2016; Swimberghe, Darrat, Beal, & Astakhova, 2018). 

Theoretical Lens

Within the theoretical lens, membership is a concern. In discussions with The Club, one of the main problems expressed was a drop-in club membership. The president of The Club expressed that one of the more recent successes was the implementation of a new club jersey to create a more up-to-date common symbol for all members. Some members view The Club as a stepping stone from which they could advance to join other clubs. This condition illustrates a need for a stronger sense of belonging. In a recent survey, less than 10% of the 42 respondents listed “association with a club” as one of the top three reasons for membership, and less than 10% were willing to get involved in building club membership or serving on the Board of Directors.

Influence is a bi-directional concept, where for a member to be attracted to a group, they must have some influence over what the group does. However, group cohesiveness is contingent on a group’s ability to influence its members. In the same survey, 28% (12 respondents) indicated that they were not willing to attend club meetings or neglected to answer the question related to attendance at club meetings. Bi-directional influence cannot be achieved if members do not participate in the meetings where club objectives are discussed.

Another bi-directional component entails the influence between community stakeholders and the bike club. In this case, bike club members are attempting to influence community stakeholders for better riding environments while trying to change the community’s perception of cycling.

Reinforcement of the individual-group association must be rewarding for the members of the group to maintain a positive sense of togetherness. “Some of the rewards that are effective reinforcers of communities are status of membership, success of the community, and competence or capabilities of other members” (McMillan & Chavis, 1986, p.13). Creating a stronger and more active membership for The Club would also serve as a reward that reinforces strategic partnerships with civic leaders, bike clubs, and businesses, fostering a stronger sense of community. In the survey, over 40% of respondents indicated that they ride at least three times per week as part of The Club, and that this element of The Club was fulfilling.

The strength of the community is directly influenced by the shared emotional connections, which is represented by interactions of club members in shared events. Organized bike events serve as a positive influence in this community. During the survey, 86% of the respondents indicated that social interaction with other cyclists was one of their top three reasons for club membership.

Conceptual Framework

Integration of the information provided above about The Club with elements of the Sense of Community Theory resulted in the conceptual framework illustrated in Figure 4. The characteristics of the lines signify the strength or weakness of the theoretical construct at The Club, with intervention opportunities in the domains of membership and influence. The more solid the line, the stronger the theoretical construct was assessed to be at The Club.

Figure 4: Conceptual Framework for The Club integrated with Sense of Community Theory.

The authors assessed the Common Symbol System trait of Membership as strong. For The Club, this would be the physical branding and marketing material including the common riding gear that is used on group rides. Additional strong Membership traits are Emotional Safety and Boundaries. However, weak Membership traits for The Club include Sense of Belonging and Personal Investment.

The second key component of Sense of Community, as applied to The Club, is Shared Emotional Connection. This is a commitment and belief that members have and will share history, common places, time together, and similar experiences. For The Club, this is rated as very strong given the organization’s history and shared experiences amongst current members.

Additionally, The Club scores strongly in the third key component – Integration and Fulfillment of Needs. The Club’s members’ needs can be met by resources received through membership in the group. There may be an opportunity, however, to strengthen needs fulfillment by providing resources for skill development and/or racing support.

Influence (bi-directional) is the final key component. This is a sense of making a difference to the group, and a sense that the group matters to its members. The authors assessed this component as weak. However, it should be understood that this includes potential members and partners as well. The group matters to its members and the members matter to the group, but the size of the group and impact of the group compared to its potential implies that there may be some work to do in this component.

Alternative Views

Stakeholder Theory was considered as an alternative theoretical framework that could be applied to The Club for this systematic review. “Stakeholder Theory conceptualizes the firm as a series of groups with different respective relationships to it. Stakeholders consist of internal organizational members, including employees, managers, and board members; external members, such as owners, customers, suppliers, and competitors; and hybrid members engaged in interorganizational cooperative activity with the firm” (Schneider, 2002, p. 211). The main reason that the authors elected to go with the Sense of Community Theory versus Stakeholder Theory is that the Sense of Community Theory is geared towards membership, whereas Stakeholder Theory is aimed at organizational management.

Methodology

Evidence-Based Approach

Evidence-based management encourages the use of the best available evidence and helps

organizations to identify evidenced information to keep management informed (Aninag, 2014). The “evidence-based approach to management reduces the potential for irrational thinking, bias, or exhaustion” (Price, 2018, para. 5; Rynes, Giluk, & Brown, 2007). Evidence-based management is science and data driven (Price, 2018).

The team first created a search string based on words and associated synonyms from the research question. Inclusion / exclusion criteria were then stipulated, and literature was selected. Critical appraisal was also performed to assess the quality of the articles, with key data then being extracted for review. Coding with Atlas.ti was performed to synthesize the data.

Search Process / Literature Selection

Search strings generated 1420 articles for consideration. Broad preliminary search strings were initially used in the title and abstract searches on the UMGC “OneSearch” internet library database advanced search tool. This first search returned 516 results.

A more specific search using constructs from the original research question on the UMGC “OneSearch” internet library database advanced search tool yielded 402 results using search string (bike or bicycle or bicycling) AND (*influence) AND (perceptions or attitudes) AND factor.

One article by Habib, Mann, Mahmoud, and Weiss (2014) seemed to represent a seminal article in the field. A refined cited-reference search using Google Scholar was then conducted on this article, yielding 24 articles.

Based on the PICOC assessment and refined research question, refined search strings targeting policy makers and cyclists were used in the title, abstract, and all text search fields on the UMGC “OneSearch” internet library database advanced search tool. This search returned 436 results using the following search strings:

• Title search – (policy* OR “policymaker” OR “policy maker” OR “policy-maker” OR policy making)
• Abstract search – (bik* OR bicycle* OR cyclist)
• All text search – (percep* OR influen*)

A “Google Scholar” search was also conducted and yielded three additional articles using the following search strings:

• (bike* OR cyclist OR bicyc*) AND (policy OR regulat*) AND (influence AND advocacy*)
• (bike* OR cyclist OR bicyc*) AND (policy OR policy maker OR policy-maker OR regulation*)

A UMGC librarian assisted search targeted at advocacy on the UMGC “OneSearch” internet library database advanced search tool resulted in 39 additional articles: bicycle* n5 advoca*.

After removing duplicates, there were 632 articles. Screening of titles and abstracts resulted in 577 articles being excluded, and assessing full texts of the remaining articles resulted in 25 additional articles being excluded. As a result, 30 research articles were included in this systematic review. The article selection process is illustrated in Figure 5 (see Appendix A), which includes a flowchart for article selection using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) (Moher, Liberati, Tetzlaff, & Altman, 2010).

Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria

The team intended to include 30 original research articles in the systematic review. Articles had to be published in a scholarly journal within the last 10 years (2010 – 2020), and had to be published in English. Articles that were identified to not include applicable titles and/or abstracts were disqualified. As cycling is an international phenomenon, no constraints were applied related to the location of the research.

Quality Assessment of the Literature

            Transparency, Accuracy, Purposivity, Utility, Propriety, Accessibility, and Specificity (TAPUPAS) was selected as the quality appraisal tool for this systematic review. According to Long, Grayson, and Boaz (2006), TAPUPAS appraisal provides a standardized framework to constructively assess the quality of evidence in a body of knowledge. Each of the 30 articles was appraised using TAPUPAS by one team member, and then independently reviewed by a peer team member. A five-point scale was used to rate each article as either 1 – Very Poor, 2 – Poor, 3 – Average, 4 – Good, or 5 – Excellent. The lesser of the two ratings from the team members was selected for each appraisal element. These appraisal element ratings were then totaled and presented as scores for each article. Scores were categorized as Low (0 – 11), Medium (12 – 23), or High (24 – 35). The quality appraisal is illustrated in the Quality Appraisal Chart in Appendix B. The appraisal resulted in the 30 articles being rated as High, within the range of 24 and 35.

Data Extraction

Each article offered useful information. The team extracted sector / population,

design and sample size, main findings, effect size, and limitations. Main findings were selected from the findings and discussion section of each article for synthesis, as the main findings could be used to derive themes. The Data Extraction Chart can be viewed in Appendix C.

Coding, Categorization, and Themes

A thematic synthesis was used in this case study based on the research question and the theoretical framework. After completion of the quality assessment, the coding of core themes allowed for thematic analysis and synthesis of the data. According to Bowen (2009), organizing data into central themes is a form of pattern recognition, providing an opportunity for integration. The software Atlas.ti, a qualitative software tool that helps sort, manage, and understand textual data, was used to aid in the first and second cycle coding of the literature. Second cycle coding was completed to remove redundancy, reorganize parent codes, and find common themes across the literature.

Themes across the 30 studies include: infrastructure and physical space for cycling; membership/ridership; cycling advocacy groups include community, policy makers, cycling club members, cyclists; an individual’s value/belief system and attitude influences their perceptions of cycling; motivations for cycling – transportation vs. leisure; characteristics of bikers (gender, age); economic influences; environmental influences. In addition, an overarching theme of multifactorial stakeholder involvement in cycling was very apparent. The themes were then reviewed and evolved into five overarching findings and three recommendations. The resulting coding parameters and levels developed for this thematic analysis can be found in Appendix D.

Findings

The Systematic Review resulted in five key findings. This was based on the emerging themes from the coding synthesis. The first finding is that personal values and beliefs were found to strongly influence an individual’s perception of cycling (Garcia et al., 2019; Etminani-Ghasrodashtia et al., 2018; Fernandez-Heredia et al., 2016; Thigpen, 2019; Park et al., 2019; Useche et al., 2019; Fernandez-Heredia et al., 2014).

For the second finding, the literature states that individuals who place high value on physical health, fitness, active lifestyle, stimulation, the environment, and openness to change are more likely to perceive cycling in a positive way and thus be more likely to engage in cycling (Garcia et al., 2019; Etminani-Ghasrodashtia et al., 2018; Fernandez-Heredia et al., 2016; Thigpen, 2019; Park et al., 2019; Useche et al., 2019; Fernandez-Heredia et al., 2014).

For the third finding, the literature showed that physical safety (real and perceived) is influenced by the quantity and type of biking infrastructure in place, and in turn, influences an individual’s decision to cycle (Sallis et al., 2013; Hoffman et al., 2014; Habib et al., 2014; Ghekiere et al., 2014; Etminani-Ghasrodashtia et al., 2018; Branion-Calles et al., 2019; Park et al., 2019; Handy et al., 2010). As a result, infrastructure impacts the perception of cycling and active engagement.

The fourth key finding is that the decision to bike is a multifactorial decision involving psychological, socioeconomic, and land use / infrastructure factors; and therefore, any campaign to change cycling behavior should involve steps that address these factors (Badland et al., 2013; Tapp, 2016; Habib et al., 2014).

Finally, it was deduced that programs or initiatives to motivate people to ride bicycles work best when customized to an individual’s environment (Rastogi, 2011; Braun et al., 2016; Fernandez-Heredia et al., 2016; Thigpen, 2019). The research shows that customization is highly important when trying to motivate riders. The literature reviewed included information on several employer-driven or city-driven programs aimed at increasing ridership. Each reported a mild uptick in ridership in relation to these general programs, suggesting a potential for higher ridership in more customized programs.

Recommendations, Implementation and Risks, and Communication Plan

Recommendations    

Based on these key findings from the systematic review, the following three recommendations are postulated for The Club for implementation:

• The authors recommend that The Club refine the mission statement of The Club to include value laden statements (such as those associated with health, physical fitness, and environmental impact) known to influence riders (Garcia et al., 2019; Etminani-Ghasrodashtia et al., 2018; Fernandez-Heredia et al., 2016; Thigpen, 2019; Park et al., 2019; Useche et al., 2019; Fernandez-Heredia et al., 2014). This recommendation would address one of the perceived weaknesses of The Club identified in the Sense of Community Theory. Namely, it would induce a stronger personal investment into The Club by members and potential members, as well as, articulate its value system to the community. This will help demonstrate to all stakeholders that The Club’s values align with theirs.
• The Club should increase its physical and virtual presence in the community (Badland et al., 2013; Tapp, 2016; Habib et al., 2014; Rastogi, 2011; Braun et al., 2016; Fernandez-Heredia, 2016; Thigpen, 2019). This would directly enhance The Club’s sense of belonging in the community and exhibit some influence over how the community perceives cycling. Involvement could be in the form of participating in local fairs, school activities, social events, etc. as a group. Other activities could help to support these activities, whereby The Club’s logo would be displayed in prominent positions.
• The Club should actively engage in communicating/advocating with the local and county officials in the local area (Sallis et al., 2013; Hoffman et al., 2014; Habib et al., 2014; Ghekiere et al., 2014; Etminani-Ghasrodashtia et al., 2018; Branion-Calles et al., 2019; Park et al., 2019; Handy et al., 2010). This would include elected officials, the City Manager’s office, the Office of Infrastructure and Development, as well as other policy makers in the local area, to exert more influence over infrastructure decisions related to cycling. Being involved in building permits and other infrastructural decision processes would help ensure that safety and other cycling infrastructural development are embedded as part of the city’s permit approval process. This recommendation would address the perceived weaknesses of The Club when nested within the Sense of Community Theory. Namely, giving and receiving bi-directional influence over infrastructure decisions during community planning projects, and ensuring cycling infrastructure options are actively considered and adopted (when possible).

Implementation and Risks

To refine The Club mission, as suggested in the first recommendation, it is proposed that there be a discussion at the next Board of Directors meeting regarding this systematic review. Once a consensus is gained on the need to revise the mission statement and focus, a full membership meeting should be scheduled to obtain all input on the mission statement and focus from all members. During the general meeting, consider language that focuses on:

• Promoting and encouraging cycling as part of a fitness regimen designed to foster health and wellbeing
• The safety and enjoyment associated with cycling, and actively working towards the development of a safe environment for all cyclists
• The development of riding skills for adults and youth

Once agreed upon, the organization’s website can be updated to emphasize the new core values of The Club. With a revised purpose statement, The Club could undertake a new marketing strategy to emphasize these core values. There is a risk associated with this recommendation in that the outcome will take time to demonstrate an impact, and the impact will be less tangible. However, the findings indicate that this is a key component in attracting and retaining new members.

To implement the second recommendation of increasing physical and virtual presence in the community, there may need to be an expansion of the existing communications and marketing team, which is currently comprised of a single individual. Dividing the work amongst several individuals mitigates the risk of burnout, as individuals in The Club leadership roles are volunteers. Additionally, this recommendation needs to be viewed in two parts – physical and virtual. From a physical standpoint, The Club would need to make its presence known outside of its group members. This would include riding in branded gear, as well as posting posters in high traffic areas. This may also include exploration of partnerships that allow for co-branding. For example, a Mug Club at the local brewery, or sponsoring high traffic events to allow for The Club logo and website to be communicated to non-members.

Virtually, a social media team would need to be developed and assigned the task of managing the The Club social media presence. Managing the presence could be as simple as giving upload access to a small group of people who find material and upload regularly. Additionally, The Club should consider social media geo-fencing their desired area of influence and doing advertisements to promote club events or cycling in general. Geo-fencing is a marketing tactic that allows users to target recipients within a specified geographic region. Social media advertising would help The Club to get its messages out. The Club could also cascade its messages by sharing messages with its partners, who could then share the messages with their followers. The Club should consider this after it has built its member/partner base.

The risk associated with the second recommendation is that individual burnout can occur from maintaining the social media presence. This risk can be mitigated by expanding members involved in Board of Director level activities, particularly the Communications/Marketing committee.

To implement the third recommendation and become actively engaged in communicating with the local and county government, The Club should regularly invite the following individuals to Board of Directors meetings after The Club updates its mission and focus:

• Elected officials including Mayor, Aldermen, and County Representatives
• City Manager
• Chief Infrastructure and Development Officer
• Director of Planning, Zoning, and Urban Design
• Director of Capital Projects Management

The Club should also consider having representation on some of the planning boards and committees that impact infrastructure planning and funding in the area. The risk associated with the third recommendation is that advocacy could get political. Additionally, there may be discouragement from inactivity or slow activity.

Communication Plan

The Board of Directors should provide direction and guidance through a revised missions statement. The Communications/Marketing Committee should expand, update communications tools on a regular basis, and monitor impact via data analytics. Members should be encouraged to spread influence via involvement in activities and with partner organizations/businesses. Target audiences to influence should include current and non-members, government officials, partner organizations and businesses, and youth. Key messages should center on health impacts, cycling as a safe mode of transportation, skill development, environmental stewardship, and infrastructure.

Implications for Practice

This paper can inform research on bicycle stakeholder influence in a multinational context. This is due to the study including 30 articles from different parts of the world such as Brazil, Australia, China, India, and the United States. This paper can also help researchers to identify references pertaining to the influence of bicycle stakeholder perception. Practitioners may use this study to gain a more global perspective regarding approaches to influence bicycle stakeholders. The recommendations that were selected for The Club can be used for the advancement of bicycle friendly communities, bicycle club mission statements, bicycle club marketing strategy, and bicycle policy. They can also be leveraged to increase focus on bicycle infrastructure awareness and the diversification of urban economic strategies. All of these have direct implication on how individuals perceive cycling and may directly or indirectly influence an individual’s willingness to cycle.

Limitations

This systematic review is limited to the scope of the research question and The Club project objectives. The information contained in this systematic review can be used for research on influencing bicycle stakeholder perception; however, it should be noted that the systematic review is not all encompassing. Although transparency and rigor were focus areas for the paper to ensure understanding of the information, reproducibility of the results, and thoroughness, it should be considered that the assessment was performed over the course of three-weeks. Thirty articles were reviewed, appraised, and synthesized to glean the primary findings.

Also, seasonal impacts such as rain, snow, and extreme heat were not investigated in this study, and additional research would need to be performed to identify the seasonal impacts on stakeholder perception(s) of cycling. Bicycle Club cost analysis was also not researched, as membership cost was not communicated by the President of the Board of Directors as a problem.

Further research would need to be performed regarding the perception of transportation such scooters and skateboards, as these were not within the scope of this systematic review. Also, while some negative perceptions were identified during the coding process, exploration of these perceptions was not included in the systematic review.

Conclusion

This systematic review will help to positively influence the perception of cycling. The TAPUPAS quality appraisal that was performed included sufficient rigor with peer review for evaluating the 30 articles selected for the systematic review. Quality appraisal resulted in High rated quality articles. Finding extraction and synthesis allowed for the evaluation of key data that could influence the perception of cycling. Synthesis of the articles resulted in the derivation of themes that could be translated into recommendations and implications for practice.

In conclusion, a properly planned implementation of the evidence-based recommendations in this case study should result in a paradigm shift toward positively changing the perception of cycling in The Club’s local area and other cities/towns.

References

Aninag, A. (2014). The advantage of evidence-based management. Retrieved from

https://www.usfca.edu/management.news/the-advantage-of-evidence-based-management

Agarwal, A., Ziemke, D. and Nagel, K. (2019). Bicycle superhighway: An environmentally sustainable policy for urban transport. Transportation Research Part A, 1-22. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2019.06.015

Badland, H., Knuiman, M., Hooper, P., & Giles-Corti, B. (2013). Socio-ecological predictors of the uptake of cycling for recreation and transport in adults: Results from the RESIDE study. Preventive Medicine, 57(4), 396–399. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2013.06.015

Barends, E., Rousseau, D. M., & Briner, R. B. (Eds.). (2017). CEBMa guideline for rapid evidence assessments in management and organizations, version 1.0. Amsterdam: Center for Evidence-Based Management. Retrieved from https://www.cebma.org/wp-content/uploads/CEBMa-REA-Guideline.pdf

Bourke, M., Hilland, T. A., & Craike, M. (2018). An exploratory analysis of the interactions between social norms and the built environment on cycling for recreation and transport. BMC Public Health, 1, 1. doi:10.1186/s12889-018-6075-4

Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40. doi:10.3316/QRJ0902027

Branion-Calles, M., Nelson, T., Fuller, D., Gauvin, L., & Winters, M. (2019). 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. Transportation Research Part A, 123, 229-239. doi:10/1016/j.tra.2018.10.024

Braun, L. M., Rodriguez, D. A., Cole-Hunter, T., Ambros, A., Donaire-Gonzalez, D., Jerrett, M., Mendez, M. A., Nieuwenhuijsen, M. J., de Nazelle, A. (2016). Short-term planning and policy interventions to promote cycling in urban centers: Findings from a commute mode choice analysis in Barcelona, Spain. Transportation Research Part A, 89, 164–183. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2016.05.007

Caggiani, L., Camporeale, R., & Ottomanelli, M. (2017). Planning and design of equitable free-floating bike-sharing systems implementing a road pricing strategy. Journal of Advanced Transportation. doi:10.1155/2017/3182387

Chatterjee, S. (2013). Simple rules for designing business models. California Management Review, 55(2), 97-126. doi:10.1525/cmr.2013.55.2.97

Cooper, J., & Leahy, T. (2017). Cycletopia in the sticks: Bicycle advocacy beyond the city limits. Mobilities, 12(5), 611–627. doi:10.1080/17450101.2016.1254898

Djoko, A. B. (2016). The effect of sense of community to brand loyalty. Business and Entrepreneurial Review, 7, 1–7.

Etminani-Ghasrodashti, R., Paydar, M., & Ardeshiri, A. (2018). Recreational cycling in a coastal city: Investigating lifestyle, attitudes and built environment in cycling behavior. Sustainable Cities and Society, 39, 241–251. doi:10.1016/j.scs.2018.02.037

Fernandez-Heredia, A., Jara-Diaz, S., & Monzon, A. (2016). Modeling bicycle use intention: The role of perceptions. Transportation, 43, 1-23. doi:10.1007/s11116-014-9559-9

Fernandez-Heredia, A., Monzon, A., & Jara-Diaz, S. (2014). Understanding cyclists’ perceptions, keys for a successful bike promotion. Transportation Research Part A, 63, 1-11. doi:10/1016/j.tra.2014.02.013

Fleiter, J. J., & Senserrick, T. (2015). Social policy implications relating to road trauma in a rapidly motorizing world: The example of china. Asian Social Work & Policy Review, 9(1), 70–78. doi:10.1111/aswp.12040

García, J., Mars, L., Arroyo, R., Casquero, D., di Ciommo, F., & Ruiz, T. (2019). Personal values, attitudes and travel intentions towards cycling and walking, and actual behavior. Sustainability, 13, 3574. doi:10.3390/su11133574

Geraghty, A. B., Seifert, W., Preston, T., Holm, C. V., Duarte, T. H., & Farrar, S. M. (2009). Partnership moves community toward complete streets. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 37(6), S420–S427. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2009.09.009

Ghekiere, A., van Cauwenberg, J., de Geus, B., Clarys, P., Cardon, G., Salmon, J., de Bourdeaudhuij, I., &   Deforche, B. (2014). Critical environmental factors for transportation cycling in children: a qualitative study using bike-along interviews. PLoS ONE, 9, e106696. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0106696

Habib, K., Mann, J., Mahmoud, M., & Weiss, A. (2014). Synopsis of bicycle demand in the city of Toronto: Investigating the effects of perception, consciousness and conformability on the purpose of biking and       bike ownership. Transportation Research Part A, 70, 67-80. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2014.09.012

Hahm, J. J., Breiter, D., Severt, K., Wang, Y., & Fjelstul, J. (2016). The relationship between sense of community and satisfaction on future intentions to attend an association’s annual meeting. Tourism Management, 52, 151–160.

Handy, S., Xing, Y., & Buehler, T. (2010). Factors associated with bicycle ownership and use: A study of six small cities. Transportation, 37, 967-985. doi:10.1007/s11116-010-9269-x

Hoffmann, M. L., & Lugo, A. E. (2014). Who is ‘world class’? Transportation Justice and Bicycle Policy.

Kang, L., & Fricker, J. D. (2016). Sharing urban sidewalks with bicyclists? An exploratory analysis of pedestrian perceptions and attitudes. Transport Policy, 49, 216–225. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.04.013

Kim, J., Choi, K., Kim, S., & Fujii, S. (2017). How to promote sustainable public bike system from a psychological perspective? International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 11(4), 272–281. doi: 10.1080/15568318.2016.1252450

Legg, E., Wells, M. S., & Barile, J. P. (2015). Factors related to sense of community in youth sport parents. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 33, 73–86. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1730142315?accountid= 13626

Long, A. F., Grayson, L., & Boaz, A. (2006). Assessing the quality of knowledge in social care: Exploring the potential of a set of generic standards. British Journal of Social Work. 36, 207–226. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bch307

Medeiros, R. M., & Duarte, F. (2013). Policy to promote bicycle use or bicycle to promote politicians? Bicycles in the imagery of urban mobility in Brazil. Urban, Planning and Transport Research, (1), 28. doi:10.1080/21650020.2013.866875

McMillan, D. W., Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14.

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2010). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. International Journal Of Surgery (London, England), 8(5), 336–341. doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.02.007

Osborne, N., & Grant-Smith, D. (2017). Constructing the cycling citizen: A critical analysis of policy imagery in Brisbane, Australia. Journal of Transport Geography, 64, 44–53. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2017.08.015

Park, Y., & Akar, G. (2019). Understanding the effects of individual attitudes and residential neighborhood types on university commuters’ bicycling decisions. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 12(1). doi:10.5198/jtlu.2019.1259

Pelechrinis, K., Zacharias, C., Kokkodis, M., & Lappas, T. (2017). Economic impact and policy implications from urban shared transportation: The case of Pittsburgh’s shared bike system. PLoS ONE, 12(8), 1–21. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0184092

Price, E. (2018). The benefits of evidence-based management in a nutshell. Retrieved from https://www.ckju.net/en/blog/benefits-evidence-based-management-nutshell/1246

Queensland Transport (QT), 2007. South East Queensland principal cycle network plan: A guide for the planning and provision of principal cycling infrastructure in South East Queensland. Queensland Government, Brisbane.

Rastogi, R. (2011). Promotion of non-motorized modes as a sustainable transportation option: policy and planning issues. Current Science (00113891), 100(9), 1340–1348. Retrieved from https://search-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=asn&AN=63019640&site=eds-live&scope=site

Rynes, S. L., Giluk, T. L., & Brown, K. G. (2007). The very separate worlds of academic and practitioner periodicals in human resource management: Implications for evidence-based management. Academy of Management Journal, 50(5), 987-1008.

Sallis, J., Conway, T., Dillon, L., Frank, L., Adams, M., Cain, K., & Saelens, B. (2013). Environmental and demographic correlates of bicycling. Preventive Medicine, 57, 456-460. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2013.06.014

Schneider, M. (2002). A stakeholder model of organizational leadership. Organization Science, 13(2), 209-220

Solbraa, A. K., Anderssen, S. A., Holme, I. M., Kolle, E., Hansen, B. H., & Ashe, M. C. (2018). The built environment correlates of objectively measured physical activity in Norwegian adults: A cross-sectional study. Journal of Sport and Health Science, 1, 19. doi:10.1016/j.jshs.2017.11.002

Swimberghe, K., Darrat, M. A., Beal, B. D., & Astakhova, M. (2018). Examining a psychological sense of brand community in elderly consumers. Journal of Business Research, 82, 171–178.

Tapp, A., Davis, A., Nancarrow, C., & Jones, S. (2016). Great Britain adults’ opinions on cycling: Implications for policy. Transportation Research Part A, 89, 14–28. doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2016.05.001

Thigpen, C. (2019). Do bicycling experiences and exposure influence bicycling skills and attitudes? Evidence from a bicycling friendly environment. Transportation Research Part A, 123, 68-79. doi:10/1019/j.tra.2018.05.017

Useche, S., Montoro, L., Sanmartin, J., & Alonso, F. (2019). Healthy but risky: A descriptive study on cyclists’ encouraging and discouraging factors for using bicycles, habits and safety outcomes. Transportation Research Part F, 62, 587-598. doi: 10/1016/j.trf.2019.02.014

Willis, D. P., Manaugh, K., & El-Geneidy, A. (2015). Cycling under influence: Summarizing the influence of perceptions, attitudes, habits, and social environments on cycling for transportation. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 9(8), 565–579. doi: 10.1080/15568318.2013.827285

*See pdf for Figures and Appendices