APCC 2024 reflections: True Measures of Cycling infrastructure investment
It has been just over a week since the Asia-Pacific Cycling Conference 2024 was held in Magdanjin/Brisbane and there hasn’t been a dull moment since. We had the opportunity to curate and facilitate a panel session during the conference. In line with our own brand of pushing boundaries of what is possible between the cycling and sustainability sectors, we decided to introduce a conversation that is not initiated often: the true measures of cycling infrastructure investment.
Susanne facilitated a panel session with:
Environmental Economist & academic at Victoria University, John Symons
Founder of Traction, Sandy Murdoch
Co-founder of Echo Impact Group & Human Geographer, Ishara Sahama
Image of the panellists on April 11th at Sofitel Brisbane. Photo credits: APCC 2024
Our panel discussion explored the realities of car-dependent cities and the harm(s) it can cause. In particular, the harm of car dependency upon multiple intersecting infrastructural, social, physical health & mental health issues and, how green development can provide the solution to many of these macro-level issues. This was then linked to cycling as a vehicle of empowerment for vulnerable youth, and the opportunities it presents for supporting cognitive development, confidence, social cohesion and addressing mental health complexities. Finally, the panel concluded with insights of how to assess and start the process of measuring social value in cycling infrastructure investment.
We explored the converse of how cycling infrastructure is assessed and considered in urban development & planning. What it looks like to truly account for and measure the social, cultural and wellbeing measures which are fundamentally present from the very beginning of green development. Upon reflecting on this panel discussion and the effect it had upon attendees who approached us right after, as well as the follow-up post APCC, a few things have become apparent.
Firstly, our discussion seemed to be the catalyst for many to be open and transparent on aspects of their own work, initiatives, or programs which they invest into and whether it is truly measuring factors, elements and “costs” that are non-fiscal. Many of the conversations held after this session presented views by individuals of varying levels of influence, social capital and commitment in the cycling and urban development industries of the need to incorporate community engagement, lived expertise, lived experience and social value in decision-making and investment considerations.
Secondly, the idea of tracking impact, particularly social, cultural and wellbeing measures from inception of a project that is cycling based or cycling infrastructure focussed, is of keen interest. Traditionally, measures of success for infrastructure (cycling or otherwise) are predicated on ROIs, the scale of funding, intra-governmental partnerships, and economic contribution once open and accessible to the public. However, as discussed during the panel, economic valuation differs drastically from social valuation. Green developments can greatly benefit from incorporating social impact assessment & evaluations during preliminary planning stages to avoid preventable fiscal costs bought upon by a lack of awareness and consideration of the range of social complexities. The panel discussed many aspects of this shortfall in cycling infrastructure investment and referred to a specific resource by Consult Australia.
This reference, a comprehensive report, explores the need for proper social impact assessment in infrastructure business cases, see here for more. Consult Australia evaluates through an independent report of why social evaluation and assessment is critical in preliminary planning stages for infrastructure, whether it be for cycling, public transport or sustainable buildings.
Thirdly, many attendees both during and after the conference remarked that considering a community-based approach and engaging with those with lived expertise for development/infrastructure planning stages is slowly gaining traction. Whilst these practices are prevalent in social planning practices and placemaking, it has yet to become a standardised approach across urban development. Indeed, this then brings to question the frameworks and processes between varying levels of government and the private sector, by which development is assessed, evaluated, and approved. This is where engaging with community-based organisations, non-profits, charities, and social enterprises which provide preventative, educational and mental wellness focussed programs and are engaging their target audience(s) through active living initiatives (cycling, physical education, sports etc) is pivotal in consultation & planning phases for green development.
Organisations like Traction can provide community-level data, both historically and at present, to inform local stakeholders, government, and private developers on the potential impact a proposed green development can have upon local communities over, for example, 1-, 5- and 10-year horizons. As Sandy explained, the benefits of providing a bicycle to youth who are impacted by mental health, isolation or are situated in harmful environments, and the flow-on effect this has on families, support workers, local community, educators, businesses & business leaders are exponential. Cycling infrastructure as a physical component in urban areas provides the foundational support for at-risk youth to remove themselves from harmful situations and environments, and equally provides opportunities for them to be better connected in their local communities. In a way, cycling infrastructure plays a role in addressing social isolation and fragmentation – a reality in many regions which have a high car dependency, urban sprawl and growing ageing population(s).
This panel and the conference itself supported our (biased) view that ‘the bicycle’, active transport, and related infrastructure can provide a solution to the many complex socio-economic issues we face in urban regions. For us at Bikey Wipes, this was an opportunity to bridge the gap between the “two worlds” we see in our day-to-day: community and business. To facilitate nuanced dialogue on how community-based evidence, purpose-led business and open collaboration can better inform the decisions made for cycling infrastructure investment is both a privilege and opportunity; to enable meaningful, transformative collaborations for equitable change.
All in all, cycling provides much more than just physical health benefits, improved mobility and connectivity. It presents the impetus to reflect upon non-traditional measures (benefits) in infrastructural investments and means to think beyond the very frameworks that have been deemed as normal and acceptable. This invokes a cultural change, and one which we think is needed if we are to build infrastructure that develops lasting legacy, generational prosperity, and critically, is climate sensitive.
If you would like to know more about how Bikey Wipes is involved with community groups, our sustainability efforts or have other enquiries, we would love to hear from you. Contact us here.