Walking and Cycling in Northern Ireland 2023/2024
Key points
Active Travel
- In 2023/24, 89% of respondents said they considered ‘walking’ to be active travel, while 78% said the same for ‘cycling’.
Walking in Northern Ireland
Two thirds of respondents were satisfied with walking facilities in their area.
63% of respondents said that they would be likely to walk short journeys (up to 3km / 2 miles).
Cycling in Northern Ireland
Less than 3 in 10 respondents own or have access to a bicycle.
Of those who owned or had access to a bicycle, just under one third (31%) had cycled in the previous 4 weeks.
55% of respondents are satisfied with cycling facilities in their area, up from 52% in 2022/23 and 46% in 2021/22.
16% of respondents said they would be likely to cycle short journeys (up to 5km / 3 miles).
Introduction
At the centre of all the Department for Infrastructure’s policies for the decarbonisation of transport is the Hierarchy for Reducing the Carbon Impact of Transport. This hierarchy highlights three overarching policy areas - Reduce Trips, Shifting Mode and Switching Fuels. At the top of the hierarchy, Reduce trips focuses on policies that will assist in reducing the need, length, and frequency of private car journeys undertaken; For Shift Mode this heading supports and encourages the modal shift away from private cars to more sustainable modes such as active travel and public transport; and Switching Fuels focuses on switching to zero or low carbon fuels. The hierarchy acknowledges that an efficient future transport network will require more than a transition to zero-emission and low-emission vehicles (ZEV / LEVs). While ZEVs and LEVs are part of the solution, managing transport demand and embedding behaviour change is also of vital importance. DfI invests in developing better pedestrian and cycling infrastructure and provides significant levels of funding to support and improve public transport services for passengers through a service agreement with Translink and provides grants to fund a range of passenger transport services aimed at reducing rural and social isolation across Northern Ireland. To support the uptake of ULEVs, the Office for Low Emission Vehicles (OLEV) provides a range of UK-wide e-car related grants including grants towards the purchase of plug-in cars and vans and grants for home, workplace and residential charge points. To allow people and goods to move easily from door to door the Department will invest in low-carbon, accessible, efficient and sustainable transport services and infrastructure that will enable more people to walk, wheel, cycle and use public transport. Encouraging more sustainable and efficient ways of travelling as preferred choices could also contribute to reducing the impact of traffic congestion particularly in the peaks, improved air quality and encourage healthier, more environmentally sustainable lifestyles which would bring many other benefits.
Uses of the data
This publication presents information from the 2023/24 Continuous Household Survey (CHS) on modes of transport considered to be ‘active travel’, satisfaction with pedestrian and cycling facilities in their area and likelihood to walk, wheel or cycle short journeys. In addition, data is presented on the proportion of people who own or have access to a cycle, frequency of cycling in the last 4 weeks, reasons for and attitude towards cycling.
The information will be used to assist the Department in focusing its policies on addressing the key issues that prevent people from taking up active and sustainable travel and to encourage more people to use active and sustainable methods of travel, where possible. Please note that further analysis and Section 75 breakdowns may be available on request from ASRB.
Methodology changes due to COVID-19
Due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, data collection for the 2020/21 survey moved from face-to-face interviewing to telephone mode with a reduction in the number of questions, therefore caution should be used when interpreting trend data due to methodology and content changes during the 2020/21 survey period.
In 2020/21, the output from the survey, in terms of the range and depth of topics covered, was reduced from that of previous years, with the subsequent capacity for detailed analysis constrained. In 2021/22, the sample size for the CHS returned to normal and while the survey content was slightly impacted by the move to telephone interviewing, a larger number of questions were asked.
More information is available on the NISRA website.
Part 1: Active travel
Since 2019/20 the Continuous Household Survey (CHS) has asked respondents a question in relation to modes of transport considered to be ‘active travel’.
1.1 Modes of transport considered to be ‘active travel’
A question asking respondents “what modes of transport you would consider to be ‘active travel’?” was included in the 2023/24 Continuous Household Survey.
The majority of respondents (89%) said they considered ‘walking’ to be active travel, while 78% said the same for ‘cycling’.
Respondents also said they consider bus (16%), car/van (19%), and train (14%) to be active travel.
Figure 1: What modes of transport do you consider to be ‘active travel’? (%)
Part 2: Walking
This section presents data from the 2023/24 CHS in relation to satisfaction with walking facilities in their area and the likelihood to walk short journeys (up to 3km/2 miles).
2.1 Satisfaction with Walking Infrastructure
Respondents were asked about their satisfaction with walking facilities in their area since 2017/18 and the trend results are displayed in Figure 2 below. However caution should be used when interpreting trend data due to methodology and content changes during the 2020/21 survey period.
Figure 2: Are you satisfied with the current provision for walking and walkers in your area? (%)*
*due to methodology changes figures from 2020/21 are not directly comparable with previous years.
Respondents were asked to indicate whether or not they are satisfied with the current situation for walking and walkers in their local area taking consideration of condition of footpaths, pedestrian crossings, and street lighting etc.
In 2023/24, two thirds of respondents said that they were satisfied with walking conditions in their area, down from 74% in 2020/21 and around the same as 2017/18 and 2022/23 (65%).
Figure 3: Are you satisfied with the current provision for walking and walkers in your area? (by respondent group) (%)
A higher proportion of those aged 16-24 (77%) were satisfied with walking in their area, compared with 64% of those aged 50 to 64, and 62% of those aged 65 and over.
Male respondents (70%) were more likely to be satisfied with walking in their area than female respondents (63%).
Respondents living in urban areas (72%) were more likely than those living in rural areas (57%) to be satisfied with walking provisions in their area.
Respondents who do not have a disability (68%) were more likely to be satisfied with the walking provisions in their area compared to those who stated they did have a disability (61%).
Figure 4: Are you satisfied with the current provision for walking and walkers in your area? (by local government district) (%)
8 in 10 respondents in Mid Ulster council area were satisfied with walking in their area, which is the highest of all the LGD’s.
Causeway Coast and Glens (58%) is the council area with the lowest proportion of respondents satisfied with walking in their area.
Figure 5: Are you satisfied with the current provision for walking and walkers in your area? (by Deprivation quintile) (%)
Of those living in the least deprived areas 69% were satisfied with the walking facilities in their local area compared to 63% of those living in the most deprived areas.
Figure 6: Why are you not satisfied with the current situation for walking and walkers in your local area at present? (%)
67% of respondents stated poor footpath conditions as a reason for not being satisfied with the current situation for walking and walkers in their area. 41% said there was too much traffic and the footpath were too cluttered, including cars parked on them and 31% said there were not enough pedestrian crossings.
2.2 Likelihood to Walk
Figure 7: Are you likely to walk short journeys (up to 3km / 2 miles)? (%)*
*due to methodology changes figures from 2020/21 are not directly comparable with previous years.
When asked about their likelihood to walk short journeys, 63% said they were likely to walk short journeys (up to 2 miles/3 km), down from 69% in 2020/21 but the longer term trend is up from 56% in 17/18.
Figure 8: Are you likely to walk short journeys (up to 3km / 2 miles)? (by respondent group) (%)
Looking at the likelihood to walk short journeys by respondent group, the oldest age group, 65 and over, were the least likely to walk short journeys (44%) compared to all other age groups.
Male respondents (65%) said they would be likely to walk short journeys, compared with 60% of female respondents.
Respondents living in urban areas (68%) were more likely to walk short journeys than those in rural areas (54%).
Those with a disability (44%) were less likely to walk short journeys compare to 71% of those without a disability.
Figure 9: Are you likely to walk short journeys (up to 3km / 2 miles)? (by local government district) (%)
By council area, 8 in 10 respondents in North Down and Ards Council said they were likely to walk short journeys, which is the highest of all the LGD’s.
Mid Ulster council area (36%) is the council with the lowest proportion of respondents likely to walk short journeys.
Figure 10: Are you likely to walk short journeys (up to 3km / 2 miles)? (by deprivation quintile) (%)
Those living in the least deprived areas (76%) were more likely to walk short distances than those living in the most deprived areas (58%).
Figure 11: What discourages you from walking short journeys of up to 2 miles/3 kms? (%)
The main reasons respondents said they were discouraged from walking short journeys of up to 2 miles/3 kms, were lack of footpaths (29%), cars driving too quickly (26%) and too much traffic and/or having to cross busy roads (25%). 8% also said they were worried about crime/personal safety/being attacked.
Part 3: Cycling in Northern Ireland
This section incorporates the two questions from the 2023/24 Continuous Household Survey (CHS), ‘Cycling in NI’ module which is asked of respondents biennially and the ‘Attitudes towards cycling’ module which has been included in the CHS since 2017/18.
Data is presented on the proportion of people who own or have access to a bicycle, frequency of cycling in the last 4 weeks, attitude towards cycling, satisfaction with cycling facilities in their area, and likelihood to cycle short journeys (up to 3 km/2 miles).
3.1 Bicycle Access
All respondents were asked about their access to a bicycle (excluding exercise bikes).
Figure 12: Do you have access to a bicycle?
In 2023/24, less than 3 in 10 respondents either owned or had access to a bicycle, of which, 25% owned their own bicycle, 2% had use of a bicycle owned by someone else in the household and 1% had use of a bicycle owned by someone else outside the household.
The remaining 71% of respondents had no access to a bicycle.
Figure 13: Do you have access to a bicycle? (by respondent group) (%)
Those aged between 16-24 (43%) were more likely to have access to a bicycle than those aged over 65 (9%).
Male respondents (36%) were more likely to either own or have access to a bicycle than female respondents (22%).
Respondents living in rural areas (30%) were more likely to have access to a bicycle than their urban counterparts (27%).
Repsondents without a disability (33%) were more likely to have access to a bicylce than respondents with a disability (17%).
Figure 14: Do you have access to a bicycle? (by local government district) (%)
When considering access to a bicycle by LGD, 42% of respondents living in Armagh, Banbridge and Craigavon council area had access compared to 15% of those living in Fermanagh and Omagh council area.
Figure 15: Do you have access to a bicycle? (by deprivation quintile) (%)
Those living in the least deprived areas were more likely to have access to a bicycle (34%) than those living in the most deprived areas (13%).
3.2 Cycling in the last 4 weeks
Respondents who said they had access to a bicycle were asked if they had done any cycling in the last 4 weeks. Those who said they had cycled within the last 4 weeks are described as ‘cyclists’ for the purposes of this report.
Figure 16: Have you done any cycling in the last 4 weeks?
In 2023/24, 31% of respondents who had access to a bicycle said they have cycled at least once in the last four weeks.
Figure 17: Have you done any cycling in the last 4 weeks? (by respondent group) (%)*
*due to small sample size, figures for age groups are not available.
Male respondents (39%) were more likely to have cycled in the last four weeks than female respondents (19%).
Respondents living in rural areas (26%) were less likely to have cycled in the last four weeks than their urban counterparts (35%).
There was no significant difference between those with a disability and those without a disability in relation to cycling in the last four weeks.
Figure 18: Have you done any cycling in the last 4 weeks? (by deprivation quintile) (%)
There was no real difference in those who had cycled in the past 4 weeks when comparing those living in the most deprived (27%) and the least deprived (28%) areas.
Figure 19: How many days in the last 4 weeks have you cycled? (%)
Of the 184 respondents who stated they had cycled in the last 4 weeks, 1 in 10 cycled once every 4 weeks, 35% cycled at least once a fortnight, 34% cycled at least once per week, 15% cycled between 2-4 days per week and a smaller proportion (6%) said they cycled 5-7 days per week.
Figure 20: What are your reasons for cycling? (%)
When asked to provide reasons for cycling, 81% said they cycled for exercise, 78% said they enjoyed it while others said it was because there was no suitable public transport in their area (2%) and it was cheap to travel (17%).
3.3 Attitudes towards cycling
Respondents were shown four statements and asked which best describes their attitudes towards cycling. Each of the statements can be associated to a general category of cyclists taken from the ‘Four Types of Cyclists’ typology developed by the Portland Office of Transportation.
Figure 21: What is your attitude towards cycling? (%)
In 2023/24 nearly three quarters (72%) of respondents were in the ‘No way, no how’ group - up 5 percentage points from 2021/22 (67%). 13% said they were ‘interested, but concerned’, 12% of respondents were ‘enthused and confident’. A smaller proportion (3%) were ‘strong and fearless’ in regard to their attitude toward cycling.
Figure 22: What is your attitude towards cycling? (by respondent group) (%)
This chart presents data on those who were ‘strong and fearless’, ‘enthused and confident’ and ‘interested but concerned’.
Those aged over 65 were more likely than any other age group (91%) to say ‘no way, no how’ when describing their attitude towards cycling compared to 60% of 16-24 year olds.
A smaller proportion of females respondents (21%) said they were ‘strong and fearless’, ‘enthused and confident’ and ‘interested, but concerned’ compared to male respondents (35%), while there was no difference between those living in rural and urban areas (28%).
Sixty-eight percent of respondents who do not have a disability described there attitude to cycling as ‘no way, no how’ compared to 83% of those who do have a disability.
Figure 23: What is your attitude towards cycling? (by local government district) (%)
This map presents data on those who were ‘strong and fearless’, ‘enthused and confident’ and ‘interested, but concerned’ by LGD.
In 2023/24, the survey found that residents living in Armagh, Banbridge and Craigavon (43%) were ‘strong and fearless’, ‘enthused and confident’ and ‘interested, but concerned’ when asked about their attitude to cycling the highest of all LGD’s.
Fermanagh and Omagh (17%) is the council area with the lowest proportion of respondents with a ‘strong and fearless’, ‘enthused and confident’ and ‘interested, but concerned’ attitude to cycling.
Figure 24: Attitudes towards cycling (by deprivation quintile) (%)
This chart presents data on those who were ‘strong and fearless’, ‘enthused and confident’ and ‘interested, but concerned’ by deprivation quintile.
Residents living in the least deprived areas (31%) were more likely to be ‘strong and fearless’, ‘enthused and confident’ and ‘interested, but concerned’ compared to 17% of residents living in the most deprived areas.
3.4 Satisfaction with Cycling Infrastructure
Respondents have been asked about their satisfaction with cycling facilities in their area since 2017/2018 and the trend results are displayed in Figure 25 below. However caution should be used when interpreting trend data due to methodology and content changes during the 2020/21 survey period.
Figure 25: Are you satisfied with the current provision for cycling and cyclists in your area? (%)*
*due to methodology changes figures from 2020/21 are not directly comparable with previous years.
Respondents were asked to indicate whether or not they are satisfied with the current situation for cycling and cyclists in their local area taking consideration of condition of footpaths, pedestrian crossings, and street lighting etc.
In 2023/24, 55% of respondents said that they were satisfied with cycling conditions in their area, up from 46% in 2021/22.
Figure 26: Are you satisfied with the current provision for cycling and cyclists in your area? (by respondent group) (%)
There was no significant difference between the youngest and oldest age groups, those living in urban and rural areas and those with or without a disability.
58% of male respondents were satisfied with cycling in their area compared to 51% female respondents.
Figure 27: Are you satisfied with the current provision for cycling and cyclists in your area? (by local government district) (%)*
*due to small sample size, figures for Fermanagh and Omagh are not available.
8 in 10 respondents in Mid Ulster council area were satisfied with cycling in their area, which is the highest of all the LGD’s.
The council areas with the lowest proportion of respondents satisfied with cycling in their area was Newry, Mourne, and Down (36%).
Figure 28: Are you satisfied with the current provision for cycling and cyclists in your area? (by deprivation quintile) (%)
There was no significant difference between those living in the most deprived and least deprived area in regards to satisfaction with cycling facilities in their local area.
Figure 29: Why are you not satisfied with the current situation for cycling and cyclists in your local area at present? (%)
Three quarters of respondents stated no cycle lanes as a reason for not being satisfied with the current situation for cycling and cyclists in their area. For over half of the respondents there was too much traffic and 32% said they did not feel safe cycling.
3.5 Likelihood to Cycle
Figure 30: Are you likely to cycle short journeys (up to 5km / 3 miles)? (%)*
*due to methodology changes figures from 2020/21 are not directly comparable with previous years.
When asked about their likelihood to cycle short journeys 16% said they were likely to cycle short journeys (up to 5km / 3 miles), down from 19% in 2022/23.
Figure 31: Are you likely to cycle short journeys (up to 5km / 3 miles)? (by respondent group) (%)
Looking at the likelihood to cycle short journeys by respondent group, the oldest age group (65 and over) were the least likely to cycle short journeys (4%) compared to all other age groups.
Male respondents (22%) said they would be likely to cycle short journeys, compared with 9% of female respondents.
There is no significant difference between respondents living in urban areas compared with those in rural areas in relation to liklihood to cycle short journeys.
When asked if they would be likely to cycle short journeys 10% of respondents with a disability said there would cycle short journeys compared to 18% of those without a disability.
Figure 32: Are you likely to cycle short journeys (up to 5km / 3 miles)? (by local government district) (%)
By council area, 24% of respondents in Armagh, Banbridge and Craigavon council area said they were likely to cycle short journeys with 8% of respondents in Derry and Strabane saying the same.
Figure 33: Are you likely to cycle short journeys (up to 5km / 3 miles)? (by deprivation quintile) (%)
Respondents in the least deprived area (17%) were more likely to cycle short journeys compared to 7% of respondents in the most deprived area.
Figure 34: What discourages you from cycling journeys of up to 3 miles/5 kms? (%)
Other than not having access to a bike, the main reasons respondents said they were discouraged from cycling journeys of up to 3 miles/5 kms, were too much traffic/speed of traffic (21%), bad weather (17%) and lack of cycle lanes/poor cycling infrastructure (17%). 3% said they already cycle journeys of up to 3 miles/5kms and nothing would put them off cycling short journeys.
Contact information
Appendices
Appendix A: Technical Notes
The Northern Ireland Continuous Household Survey
Data Collection
The information presented in this publication derives from the Northern Ireland Continuous Household Survey (CHS), a Northern Ireland wide household survey administered by Central Survey Unit (CSU), Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA).
It is based on a sample of the general population resident in private households and has been running since 1983. The survey is designed to provide a regular source of information on a wide range of social and economic issues relevant to Northern Ireland. The Active and Sustainable Travel in Northern Ireland questions which were commissioned by DfI are included in Appendix C of this report.
Note: Due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, NISRA suspended all face to face household interviews in March 2020. In the reporting periods, April 2020 - March 2021 and April 2021 - March 2022, all interviews carried out on the Continuous Household Survey (CHS) were conducted by telephone. For this reporting year, April 2023 - March 2024, face to face interviewing was the preferred method of data collecting however telephone interviewing was an option, thus making the survey dual-modality. There are a number of factors. which users should take into consideration when interpreting the 2020-21 results and care should be taken when comparing these to previously published findings from the survey and more information is available on the NISRA website.
Data Quality
Data were collected by CSU and various validation checks were carried out as part of the processing. CSU is the leading social survey research organisation in Northern Ireland and is one of the main business areas of NISRA, an Agency within the Department of Finance. CSU has a long track record and a wealth of experience in the design, management and analysis of behavioural and attitude surveys in the context of a wide range of social policy issues. CSU procedures are consistent with the Code of Practice for Statistics.
The CHS sample was assessed and considered to be a representative sample of the Northern Ireland population at household level.
Whilst data quality is considered to be very good, note that all survey estimates are subject to a degree of error and this must be taken account of when considering results. This error will be reasonably small for the majority of Northern Ireland level results but care should be taken when looking at results based on smaller breakdowns.
Respondents
The Continuous Household Survey is a Northern Ireland wide household survey administered by Central Survey Unit, Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency. The sample for this survey consists of a systematic random sample of 8,940 addresses selected from the NISRA address register. The findings reported for 2023/24 are based on 2,439 respondents, aged 16 and over.
The number of respondents who answered each question, i.e. the base number, is stated in the commentary and/or the associated chart. The base number is the unweighted count.
Some questions were only asked if the respondent had answered ‘yes’ to a previous question. The base number may also vary between questions due to some respondents not answering certain questions.
Weighting
Analysis of the Walking and Cycling in Northern Ireland module of the CHS has been weighted for non-response.
A chi square goodness-of-fit test showed that the CHS sample was not representative of the population by age and sex when compared with the 2022 Mid Year Population Estimates for Northern Ireland NISRA 31 August 30 2023. As a result, separate weights were produced for age and sex, and combinations of these variables.
Non-response weighting sometimes increases standard errors, although the impact tends to be fairly small, i.e. the adjustment may be less or greater than 1, but will generally be reasonably close to 1. In the case of the walking and cycling modules of the CHS, the values of the adjustment for all three weighting systems are so close to one, it is not necessary to take account of this in the calculation of standard error and confidence intervals.
While weighting for non-response (also called post-stratification) should reduce bias, it must be acknowledged that it will not eliminate bias. The reasons individuals choose to take part in surveys are complex and depend on lots of factors specific to the individual. As a result, the non-response biases in surveys are likely to be complex. Post-stratification works on the assumption that, by aligning the survey to the population along a small number of dimensions such as age, gender and MDM, many of these complex biases will reduce. However, it would be misleading to suggest that they will be eliminated.
Confidence Intervals
No sample is likely to reflect precisely the characteristics of the population it is drawn from because of both sampling and non-sampling errors. An estimate of the amount of error due to the sampling process can be calculated. For a simple random sample design, in which every member of the sampled population has an equal and independent chance of inclusion in the sample, the sampling error of any percentage, p, can be calculated by the formula: s.e. (p) = √(p*(100 – p)/n where n is the number of respondents on which the percentage is based. The sample for the Continuous Household Survey is drawn as a random sample, and thus this formula can be used to calculate the sampling error of any percentage estimate from the survey. Confidence intervals are included in Appendix B of this report.
Multiple Response Questions
Multiple response questions are those for which respondents can give
more than one response if they wish. In such questions, when individual
percentages are summed they may add to more than 100%.
Rounding Conventions
Percentages have been rounded to whole numbers and as a consequence some
percentages may not sum to 100.
0% may reflect rounding down of values under 0.5.
Significant Difference
Any statements in this report regarding differences between groups such
as males and females, different age groups, dependant status, etc., are
statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. This means that
we can be 95% confident that the differences between groups are actual
differences and have not just arisen by chance. Both the base numbers
and the sizes of the percentages have an effect on statistical
significance.
Therefore on occasion, a difference between two groups may be statistically significant while the same difference in percentage points between two other groups may not be statistically significant. The reason for this is because the larger the base numbers or the closer the percentages are to 0 or 100, the smaller the standard errors. This leads to increased precision of the estimates which increases the likelihood that the difference between the proportions is actually significant and did not just arise by chance.
Respondent Groups
The following respondent groups were considered:
Age group
The age of the respondent is grouped into the following age bands:
16-24, 25-34, 35-49, 50,-64, 65 and over.
Sex
Sex of respondent is defined as whether the respondent is male or
female.
Urban and rural areas
Urban and rural areas have been classified using the statistical
classification of settlements defined by the Inter-Departmental
Urban-Rural Definition Group.
- Bands A to E are classified as Urban. This includes Belfast
Metropolitan Urban Area (Band A), Derry Urban Area (Band B) and large,
medium and small towns (Bands C-E) with populations greater than or
equal to 5,000 people.
- Bands F to H are classified as rural. This includes intermediate settlements (Band F), villages (Band G) and small villages, hamlets and open countryside (Band H) with populations of less than 5,000 people and including open countryside.
Local Government District
Local Government Districts include the 11 district council areas:
Antrim and Newtownabbey
Armagh, Banbridge and Craigavon
Belfast
Causeway Coast and Glens
Derry and Strabane
Fermanagh and Omagh
Lisburn and Castlereagh
Mid and East Antrim
Mid Ulster
Newry, Mourne and Down
North Down and Ards
Multiple Deprivation Measure
The measures, known as NIMDM 2017, were informed through public consultation and Steering Group agreement, and provide a mechanism for ranking the 890 Super Output areas (SOAs) in Northern Ireland from the most deprived (rank 1) to the least deprived (rank 890).
They include ranks of the areas for each of 7 distinct types (or domains) of deprivation, which have been combined to produce an overall multiple deprivation measure (MDM) rank of the areas.
Deprivation quintiles
1 - Most deprived 2 3 4 5 - Least deprived
Disability
‘Disability’ is measured using ‘limiting long-standing illness’. Respondents are defined as having a limiting long standing illness if they have any physical or mental health conditions or illnesses lasting or expected to last for 12 months or more, and the condition(s) or illness(es) reduce their ability to carry out day to day activities.
Appendix B: Confidence intervals
A confidence interval represents the range of values in which the true population value is likely to lie. It is based on the sample estimate and the confidence level. As the percentages are calculated from a representative sample of the Northern Ireland population (aged 16 and over), a confidence interval can be calculated to estimate the level of uncertainty in the sample estimate.
95% confidence intervals were calculated for the headline figures. Table B1 summarizes the confidence intervals for satisfaction with Walking and Cycling and Northern Ireland.
Table B1: Confidence intervals for Active and Sustainable Travel in Northern Ireland
| Measure | Estimate (%) | Sample (n) | 95% Confidence Range +/- | Confidence Interval |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| % who are satisfied with the current situation for walking and walkers in their local area at present. | 66 | 2,406 | 2 | 64-68% |
| % who are likely to walk short journeys (up to 2 miles/3km) | 63 | 2,427 | 2 | 61-65% |
| % who are satisfied with the current situation for cycling and cyclists in their local area at present. | 55 | 2,173 | 2 | 53-57% |
| % who are likely to cycle short journeys (up to 3 miles/5km) | 16 | 2,381 | 2 | 14-18% |
The 95% confidence interval for respondents who are satisfied with the current situation for walking and walkers in their local area at present is 66% +/- 2%. This means that there is a 95% probability that the proportion of the Northern Ireland adult population who are satisfied with the current situation for walking and walkers in their local area at present lies between 64% and 68%.
The 95% confidence interval for respondents who are likely to walk short journeys is 63% +/- 2%. This means that there is a 95% probability that the proportion of the Northern Ireland adult population who are likely to walk short journeys lies between 61% and 65%.
The 95% confidence interval for respondents who are satisfied with the current situation for cycling and cyclists in their local area at present is 55% +/- 2%. This means that there is a 95% probability that the proportion of the Northern Ireland adult population who are satisfied with the current situation for cycling and cyclists in their local area at present lies between 53% and 57%.
The 95% confidence interval for respondents who are likely to cycle short journeys is 16% +/- 2%. This means that there is a 95% probability that the proportion of the Northern Ireland adult population who are likely to cycle short journeys lies between 14% and 18%.
Appendix C: Active and Sustainable Travel in Northern Ireland Questionnaire
ACTIVE AND SUSTAINABLE TRAVEL
WALKING AND CYCLING
[ACTIVE1] Which of the following modes of transport would you consider to be ‘active travel’?
- Walking
- Cycling
- Bus
- Train
- Car/Van
- Motorcycle/Scooter/Moped
- Taxi
- Other
[WALK5] Are you satisfied with the current situation for walking and walkers in your local area at present? By this I mean condition of footpaths, pedestrian crossings, street lighting etc.
- Yes
- No
[WALK6] Why are you not satisfied with the current situation for walking and walkers in your local area at present? RUNNING PROMPT - CODE ALL THAT APPLY - SHOWCARD 63 1. Poor footpath conditions 2. Too much traffic 3. Not enough pedestrian crossings 4. Footpaths too cluttered, including cars parking on them 5. No direct links to where I want to get to 6. Other → [WALK6oth]
[WALK7] Would you be likely to walk any journeys you have to make that are up to 2 miles / 3kms?
- Yes
- No
[WALK8] Which of the following options, if any, discourage you from walking short journeys of up to 2 miles / 3kms? RUNNING PROMPT - CODE ALL THAT APPLY SHOWCARD 64 1. Cars driving too quickly 2. Lack of footpaths 3. Too much traffic / have to cross busy roads 4. Clutter on the pavement, including cars parked on them 5.Worried about crime / personal safety / being attacked 6. Other → [WALK8oth] 7. I already walk short journeys of up to 2 miles or 3km (spontaneous) 8. No, nothing would put me off walking short journeys (spontaneous)
[CYCLE5] Are you satisfied with the current situation for cycling and cyclists in your local area at present?
- Yes
- No
[CYCLE6] Why are you not satisfied with the current situation for cycling and cyclists in your local area at present? RUNNING PROMPT - CODE ALL THAT APPLY SHOWCARD 65 1. No cycle lanes 2. Too much traffic 3. Personal safety – I don’t feel safe cycling 4. Cars parked in cycle lanes 5. No direct cycle links to where I want to get to 6. Other → [CYCLE6oth]
[CYCLE7] Would you be likely to cycle any journeys you have to make that are up to 3 miles / 5kms?
- Yes
- No
[CYCLE8] Which of the following options, if any, discourage you from cycling journeys of up to 3 miles / 5kms? RUNNING PROMPT - CODE ALL THAT APPLY SHOWCARD 66 1. Don’t own/ have access to a bicycle 2. Too much traffic / Speed of traffic 3. Bad weather 4. Lack of cycle lanes / poor cycling infrastructure 5. Poor road conditions, e.g. potholes 6. Other → [CYCLE8oth] 7. I already cycle short journeys of up to 3 miles or 5km (spontaneous) 8. No, nothing would put me off cycling short journeys (spontaneous)
CYCLING IN NI
[BIKE1] Excluding exercise bikes, do you . . . RUNNING PROMPT CODE OWN A BICYLE IF OWNS A BICYCLE AND HAS USE OF ANOTHER
- own a bicycle yourself
- have use of a bicycle owned by someone else in the household
- have use of a bicycle owned by someone else outside the household
- or have no use of a bicycle? -> [BIKE5]
[BIKE2] In the last 4 weeks, that is since XX/XX/XXXX have you done any cycling? 1. Yes 2. No -> [BIKE5]
[BIKE3] How many days in the last 4 weeks have you cycled? 1..28
[BIKE4] SHOWCARD 67 Could you look at this showcard and tell me the reasons why you cycle?
- I find it convenient (I live close to work/education/shops etc)
- It is a cheap way to travel (no fuel costs/car parking/bus/train fares)
- I enjoy it
- Environmental reasons
- Exercise
- It saves time (for example to avoid traffic jams)
- I have no car
- I cannot drive
- I don’t like using public transport
- There is no suitable public transport where I live
- I cycle with my children to ensure they are safe
- Other -> [BIKE4oth]
[BIKE4oth] Please specify the other reason for cycling
[BIKE5] SHOWCARD 68 Could you look at the statements on SHOWCARD and tell me which statement best describes your attitude to cycling?
- I will ride my bicycle regardless of road conditions. I am a cyclist; cycling is a strong part of my identity and I am generally undeterred by road conditions
- I am comfortable riding my bicycle and sharing the roadway with other vehicles. I could be attracted to more regular cycling if the barriers on shorter trip distances continued to be addressed, for example, better bicycle facilities (more cycle lanes, cycle paths, cycle priority at junctions) and better end of trip facilities (showers at work, safe bike storage etc.)
- I would like to use my bicycle more but I am afraid to cycle. I don’t like the cars travelling at speed and I get nervous thinking about what would happen to me on a bicycle when a car passes too closely and/or too fast. I would cycle if I felt safer on the roads - if cars were slower and less frequent and if there were more quiet streets with few cars and paths without any cars at all
- I am not interested in cycling at all as I am not able or simply have no interest
Open Government Licence
You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0.
©
Crown Copyright 2020
To view this licence visit: Open Government Licence
or email: psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk
Where we have identified any third party copyright information, you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.