If we build it, who will benefit? A multi-criteria approach for the prioritization of new bicycle lanes in Quebec City, Canada


  • Emily Grisé McGill University
  • Ahmed El-Geneidy McGill University




Many cities across the world are actively promoting cycling through investments in cycling infrastructure, yet ensuring that the benefits from these investments are distributed equally in a region and not benefiting only one group is an important social goal. The aim of this study is to develop a methodology that can help in identifying where new bicycle facilities can be built in a region while prioritizing investments for those who need them most. The study uses Quebec City, Canada, as an example since the city has recently made a strong commitment to provide safe and attractive bicycle infrastructure to its residents. It also uses a GIS-based grid cell model to identify priority areas for cycling investment in different parts of the city. This is followed by a proposal for a new set of facilities based on a multi-criteria approach. These proposed facilities are then evaluated through a level of usage analysis to determine which routes will provide the maximum benefit to existing and potential cyclists. Finally, an equity analysis is conducted to evaluate whether the new facilities will meet some of the travel needs of individuals residing in socially deprived neighborhoods. This step in the evaluation process proposes a new social equity component in bicycle planning processes. This research can be of value to planners, engineers and policymakers working toward investments in bicycle facilities because it shows the full process of planning and evaluating different cycling facilities while incorporating social equity principles.

Author Biography

Emily Grisé, McGill University

Equity, Transit operations, bicycle planning


Aultman-Hall, L., Hall, F., & Baetz, B. (1997). Analysis of bicycle commuter routes using geographic information systems: Implications for bicycle planning. Transportation Research Record, 1578, 102–110.

Broach, J., Gliebe, J., & Dill, J. (2011). Bicycle route choice model developed using revealed preference GPS data. Paper presented at the Transportation Research Board 90th Annual Meeting, January 23–27, 2011.

Buehler, R., & Pucher, J. (2012). Cycling to work in 90 large American cities: New evidence on the role of bike paths and lanes. Transportation, 39(2), 409–432.

Burke, C., & Scott, D. (2016). The space race: A framework to evaluate the potential travel-time impacts of reallocating road space to bicycle facilities. Journal of Transport Geography, 56, 110–119.

Damant-Sirois, G., Grimsrud, M., & El-Geneidy, A. (2014). What’s your type: A multidimensional cyclist typology. Transportation, 41(6), 1153–1169.

El-Geneidy, A., Buliung, R., Diab, E., van Lierop, D., Langlois, M., & Legrain, A. (2016). Non-stop equity: Assessing daily intersections between transit accessibility and social disparity across the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA). Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 43(3), 540–560.

El-Geneidy, A., Cerdá, A., Fischler, R., & Luka, N. (2011). Evaluating the impacts of transportation plans using accessibility measures. Canadian Journal of Urban Research, 20(1), 81.

El-Geneidy, A., Krizek, K., & Iacono, M. (2007). Predicting bicycle travel speeds along different facilities using GPS data: A proof of concept model. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Compendium of Papers, January 21–25, Washington, DC.

Flanagan, E., Lachapelle, U., & El-Geneidy, A. (2016). Riding tandem: Does cycling infrastructure investment mirror gentrification and privilege in Portland, OR, and Chicago, IL? Research in Transportation Economics, 60, 14–24.

Flocks, J., Escobedo, F., Wade, J., Varela, S., & Wald, C. (2011). Environmental justice implications of urban tree cover in Miami-Dade County, Florida. Environmental Justice, 4(2), 125–134.

Foth, N., Manaugh, K., & El-Geneidy, A. (2013). Towards equitable transit: Examining transit accessibility and social need in Toronto, Canada, 1996–2006. Journal of Transport Geography, 29, 1–10.

Howard, C., & Burns, E. (2001). Cycling to work in Phoenix: Route choice, travel behavior, and commuter characteristics. Transportation Research Record, 1773, 39–46.

Larsen, J., & El-Geneidy, A. (2011). A travel behavior analysis of urban cycling facilities in Montréal, Canada. Transportation research part D: Transport and Environment, 16(2), 172–177.

Larsen, J., Patterson, Z., & El-Geneidy, A. (2013). Build it. But where? The use of geographic information systems in identifying locations for new cycling infrastructure. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 7(4), 299–317.

Lubitow, A., & Miller, T. (2013). Contesting sustainability: Bikes, race, and politics in Portlandia. Environmental Justice, 6(4), 121–126.

Manaugh, K., & El-Geneidy, A. (2012). Who benefits from new transportation infrastructure? Using accessibility measures to evaluate social equity in public transport provision. In K. Geurs, K. Krizek, & A. Reggiani (Eds.), Accessibility and transport planning: Challenges for Europe and North America (pp. 211–227). London, UK: Edward Elgar.

Metzger, J. (1996). The theory and practice of equity planning: An annotated bibliography. Journal of Planning Literature, 11(1), 112–126.

Milakis, D., & Athanasopoulos, K. (2014). What about people in cycle network planning? Applying participative multicriteria GIS analysis in the case of the Athens metropolitan cycle network. Journal of Transport Geography, 35, 120–129.

Pucher, J., & Buehler, R. (2008). Making cycling irresistible: Lessons from the Netherlands, Denmark and Germany. Transport Reviews, 28(4), 495–528.

Pucher, J., & Buehler, R. (2016). Safer cycling through improved infrastructure. American Journal of Public Health, 106(12), 2089–2091.

Pucher, J., Dill, J., & Handy, S. (2010). Infrastructure, programs, and policies to increase bicycling: An international review. Preventive Medicine, 50, S106–S125.

Réseau de Transport de la Capitale. (2011). Enquête Origine-Destination 2011 sur la mobilité des personnes dans la région de Québec.

Rybarczyk, G., & Wu, C. (2010). Bicycle facility planning using GIS and multi-criteria decision analysis. Applied Geography, 30(2), 282–293.

Sánchez-Cantalejo, C., Ocana-Riola, R., & Fernández-Ajuria, A. (2008). Deprivation index for small areas in Spain. Social Indicators Research, 89(2), 259–273.

Statistics Canada. (2011). 2011 National Household Survey Commuting Flow Data. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.

Statistics Canada. (2015). Commuting to work. Retrieved from http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/as-sa/99-012-x/2011003/tbl/tbl1a-eng.cfm

Townsend, P., Phillimore, P., & Beattie, A. (1998). Health and deprivation: Inequality and the north. Beckenham, UK: Croom Helm.

Ville De Quebec. (2016). Vision des déplacements à vélo. Retrieved from Quebec: https://www.ville.quebec.qc.ca/planification_orientations/transport/docs/vision_deplacements_velo.pdf




How to Cite

Grisé, E., & El-Geneidy, A. (2018). If we build it, who will benefit? A multi-criteria approach for the prioritization of new bicycle lanes in Quebec City, Canada. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2018.1115