Walking and Cycling in Northern Ireland 2024/2025
Key points
Active Travel
- In 2024/25, the majority of respondents (89%) said that they considered ‘walking’ to be active travel, while more than three quarters (77%) said the same for ‘cycling’.
Walking in Northern Ireland
More than three-fifths of respondents (61%) were satisfied with walking facilities in their area.
Just under two-thirds of respondents (64%) indicated that they would be likely to walk short journeys (up to 3km / 2 miles).
Walking to, and/ or from work was reported by 14% of respondents.
Almost three-fifths of those who indicated walking to work (58%) reported doing so 5 or more days a week.
Cycling in Northern Ireland
Almost half of respondents (48%) indicated that they were satisfied with cycling facilities in their area.
When asked if would be likely to cycle short journeys (up to 5km / 3 miles), 16% of respondents indicated that they would.
Cycling to and/ or from work, was reported by 2% of respondents.
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. 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 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.
Uses of the data
This publication presents information from the 2024/25 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 or cycle short journeys. In addition, data is presented on how often and how far respondents walk or cycle to work.
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 2024/25 Continuous Household Survey.
Figure 1: What modes of transport do you consider to be ‘active travel’? (%)
Almost 9 out of 10 (89%) said they considered ‘walking’ to be active travel, while 77% said the same for ‘cycling’.
Respondents also said they consider car/van (20%), bus (17%) and train (15%) to be active travel.
Part 2: Walking
This section presents data from the 2024/25 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 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. The trend results since 2017/2018 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? (% yes)*
In 2024/25, 61% of respondents said that they were satisfied with walking conditions in their area, down from 66% in the previous year.
Figure 3: Are you satisfied with the current provision for walking and walkers in your area? (by respondent group) (% yes)
Male respondents (64%) were more likely to be satisfied with walking in their area than female respondents (59%).
Respondents living in urban areas (66%) were more likely than those living in rural areas (52%) to be satisfied with walking provisions in their area.
There was no statistically significant difference found in satisfaction for walking provision between age groups.
Figure 4: Are you satisfied with the current provision for walking and walkers in your area? (by local government district) (% yes)
Antrim & Newtownabbey (73%) responded the highest satisfaction to walking provisions of all LGD’s.
Newry, Mourne and Down (51%) is the LGD with the lowest proportion of respondents satisfied with walking provision.
Figure 5: Are you satisfied with the current provision for walking and walkers in your area? (by deprivation quintile and disability) (% yes)
Of those living in the least deprived areas 69% were satisfied with the walking facilities in their local area compared with 61% of those living in the most deprived areas.
Respondents who do not have a disability (63%) were more likely to be satisfied with the walking provisions in their area compared to those who stated they did have a disability (57%).
Figure 6: Why are you not satisfied with the current situation for walking and walkers in your local area at present? (%)
The most selected reason given by respondents who were not satisfied with the current situation for walking and walkers in their area, was “Poor footpath conditions,” (69%). The next most common reasons given were, “Footpaths too cluttered” and, “too much traffic.” (43% and 39% respectively).
2.2 Likelihood to Walk
Figure 7: Are you likely to walk short journeys (up to 3km / 2 miles)? (% yes)*
When asked about their likelihood to walk short journeys, 64% said they were likely to walk short journeys (up to 2 miles/3 km), with the longer term trend up from 56% in 17/18. Please note due to methodology changes figures from 2020/21 are not directly comparable with previous years.
Figure 8: Are you likely to walk short journeys (up to 3km / 2 miles)? (by respondent group) (% yes)
Younger respondents aged 16 to 24 (80%) were more likely to walk short journeys than older respondents aged 65 and over (46%).
Male respondents (68%) said they would be likely to walk short journeys, compared with 61% of female respondents.
Respondents living in urban areas (70%) were more likely to walk short journeys than those in rural areas (54%).
Figure 9: Are you likely to walk short journeys (up to 3km / 2 miles)? (by local government district) (% yes)
By council area, 77% of 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 (48%) 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 and disability) (% yes)
Those living in the least deprived areas (73%) were more likely to walk short distances than those living in the most deprived areas (62%).
Those with a disability (44%) were less likely to walk short journeys compared with 73% of those without a disability.
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” (28%), “cars driving too quickly” (25%) and “too much traffic/having to cross busy roads” (20%). One-in-ten also said they were “worried about crime/personal safety/being attacked”.
2.3 Walking to work
Respondents were asked if they normally walk to or from work. People who responded that they work from home or are unemployed were excluded from the figures.
Figure 12: Do you normally walk to and/or from work? (% yes)
*Respondents who indicated that they work from home, or are not currently employed have been excluded from these figures.
Of the respondents who travelled to work, 14% said they walk either one or both ways to work and 86% do not walk to or from work.
Figure 13: Do you normally walk to and/or from work?* (by respondent group) (% yes)
*Respondents who indicated that they work from home, or are not currently employed have been excluded from these figures.
Respondents aged 16 to 24 (28%) were more likely to walk to work than respondents aged 65 and over (7%). A similar proportion of male (14%) and female (15%) respondents said they walk to and/or from work however a higher proportion of those in urban areas (19%) do so than those in rural areas (5%).
Figure 14: Do you normally walk to and/or from work?* (by deprivation quintile and disability) (% yes)
*Respondents who indicated that they work from home, or are not currently employed have been excluded from these figures.
Respondents who live in the most deprived areas were more likely to walk to work (24%) compared with those who live in the least deprived areas (14%).
A similar proportion of respondents with a disability (14%) and with no disability (14%) reported walking to and/or from work.
Figure 15: On average, how far, in miles, do you walk to/from work in one direction? (%)
Of respondents who walk to work, 44% said they travel one mile and 36% travel two miles. Only 5% of respondents travel three or more miles.
Figure 16: On average, how many days per week do you walk to/from work? (%)
Of respondents that walk to work, the majority (58%) reported walking to work five days a week or more. Almost a third (31%) walk to work between three and four days a week and 11% walk to work one or two days a week.
Part 3: Cycling
This section presents data from the 2024/25 CHS in relation to satisfaction with cycling facilities in their area and the likelihood to cycle short journeys (up to 5km/3 miles).
3.1 Satisfaction with Cycling Infrastructure
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. The trend results since 2017/2018 are displayed in Figure 17 below. However caution should be used when interpreting trend data due to methodology and content changes during the 2020/21 survey period.
Figure 17: Are you satisfied with the current provision for cycling and cyclists in your area? (% yes)*
In 2024/25, Almost half (48%) of respondents said that they were satisfied with cycling conditions in their area, down from the previous year (55%) and down from 2017/18 (55%).
Figure 18: Are you satisfied with the current provision for cycling and cyclists in your area? (by respondent group) (% yes)
When considering satisfaction with the current provision for cycling, males (50%) were more likely to be satisfied than females (46%). There was no statistically significant difference found between age groups, or those living in urban and rural areas.
Figure 19: Are you satisfied with the current provision for cycling and cyclists in your area? (by local government district) (% yes)*
Respondents from Derry & Strabane LGD were most likely to report being satisfied with the current provision for cycling in their area with 58% indicating they were satisfied.
Newry, Down and Mourne had the lowest proportion of respondents satisfied with cycling provision in their area with just over a third (34%) indicating that they were satisfied
Figure 20: Are you satisfied with the current provision for cycling and cyclists in your area? (by deprivation quintile and disability) (% yes)
Respondents who live in the least deprived areas were more likely (53%) to be satisfied with provisions for cycling in their area than those who live in the most deprived areas (45%).
Those with a disability (46%) were similarly likely to be satisfied with current provisions for cycling in their area as with those with no disability (49%).
Figure 21: Why are you not satisfied with the current situation for cycling and cyclists in your local area at present? (%)
More than three-quarters (79%) of respondents stated “no cycle lanes” as a reason for not being satisfied with the current situation for cycling and cyclists in their area. Over half the respondents (55%) indicated there was “too much traffic” and 32% said “I don’t feel safe cycling”.
3.2 Likelihood to Cycle
Respondents were asked if they are likely to cycle short journeys up to 5km/3 miles.
Figure 22: Are you likely to cycle short journeys (up to 5km / 3 miles)? (% yes)*
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 2017/18.
Figure 23: Are you likely to cycle short journeys (up to 5km / 3 miles)? (by respondent group) (% yes)
Younger respondents aged 16 to 24 (25%) were more likely to cycle short journeys than respondents aged 65 or over (7%).
Male respondents (22%) said they would be likely to cycle short journeys, compared with 10% of female respondents.
Figure 24: Are you likely to cycle short journeys (up to 5km / 3 miles)? (by local government district) (% yes)
By local government district, 22% of respondents in Armagh, Banbridge and Craigavon council area said they were likely to cycle short journeys with 8% of respondents in Mid and East Antrim saying the same.
Figure 25: Are you likely to cycle short journeys (up to 5km / 3 miles)? (by deprivation quintile and disability) (% yes)
Similar proportions of respondents living in most deprived areas (12%) and least deprived areas (14%) indicated that they were likely to cycle short journeys.
Respondents with a disability (11%) were less likely to cycle short journeys, than those with no disability (17%).
Figure 26: What discourages you from cycling journeys of up to 3 miles/5 kms? (%)
Other than not having access to a bike (69%), 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 (24%), bad weather (20%) and lack of cycle lanes/poor cycling infrastructure (19%).
3.3 Cycling to work
Respondents were asked if they normally cycle to or from work. People who responded that they work from home or are unemployed were excluded from the figures.
Figure 27: Do you normally cycle to and/or from work? (% yes)
*Respondents who indicated that they work from home, or are not currently employed have been excluded from these figures.
Of the respondents who said they travel to work, 2% said they normally cycle to and/or from work. The majority (98%) said they do not cycle to or from work.
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 2024 - March 2025, 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. Fieldwork for 2024/25 CHS started on 1 April 2024 and ended on the 31 March 2025. A total of 3,790 households took part in the survey; within those 3,790 households, a total of 4,584 individuals took part in the survey.
The number of respondents who answered each question, i.e. the base number, is stated in the commentary and/or the associated tables in the accompanying tables document. 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.
Walking and Cycling questions were included in even versions of the questionnaire only.
Weighting
To address non-response bias, data presented based on individual responses have been weighted by sex and age; unweighted total respondent counts have also been provided where appropriate.
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. | 61 | 2,294 | 2 | 59-63% |
| % who are likely to walk short journeys (up to 2 miles/3km). | 64 | 2,300 | 2 | 62-66% |
| % who are satisfied with the current situation for cycling and cyclists in their local area at present. | 48 | 2,098 | 2 | 46-50% |
| % who are likely to cycle short journeys (up to 3 miles/5km). | 16 | 2,272 | 1 | 14-17% |
| % who walk to or from work. | 14 | 1,073 | 2 | 12-16% |
| % who cycle to or from work. | 2 | 1,063 | 1 | 1-3% |
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
[WALK1] Do you normally walk to/from work? 1. Yes, I normally walk to work AND from work 2. Yes, I normally walk to work OR from work i.e. one way 3. No 4. Works from home 5. Not currently in employment
[WALK2] On average, how far, in miles, do you walk to/from work in one direction?
[WALK3] And would that be walking all the way to work or just part of the way? 1. All of the way 2. Part ofthe way
[WALK4] On average, how many days per week do you walk to/from work?
[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)
[CYCLE1] Do you normally cycle to or from work? 1. Yes, I normally cycle to work AND from work 2. Yes, I normally cycle to work OR from work i.e. one way 3. No 4. Works from home
[CYCLE2] On average, how far, in miles, do you cycle to/from work in one direction?
[CYCLE3] And would that be cycling all the way to work or just part of the way? 1.All they way 2. Part of the way
[CYCLE4] On average, how many days per week do you cycle to/from work?
[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)
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
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.