Table 1.
Baseline (2016) population, mode share and bicycle infrastructure characteristics of the study cities.
Table 2.
Parameters and input data, including source, for the primary two-case (2016, 2020) assessments of bicycling infrastructure investment over a 10-year time horizona.
Fig 1.
Annual estimates of the number of premature deaths prevented under each bicycling mode share scenario, by pathway (physical activity, air pollution and crash risk) and city, for the 10-year time horizon of the study.
Table 3.
Number of premature deaths prevented by impact pathway (physical activity, air pollution, crash risk), carbon saved, and benefit:cost ratios for each change in bicycling scenario, by city, over the 10-year time horizona.
Fig 2.
Findings from the univariate sensitivity analyses for the moderate change (2% increase) scenario in Victoria (Panel A), Kelowna (Panel B) and Halifax (Panel C), where variation in inputs led to a change in the respective benefit:cost ratio. Details of the changes made to the input parameters are provided in SM2.a a A ‘change’ in a ratio estimate is defined as an absolute difference for the benefit term equal to or greater than 0.05. The results of all sensitivity analyses (to one decimal place) are reported in SM3. In each panel, the dashed line indicates the point where the benefit:cost ratio is 1:1.