Interventions to increase cycling: A critical assessment of effectiveness

Cycling is widely promoted as a sustainable mode of transport, yet evidence on the effectiveness of interventions remains mixed. Existing research often compares interventions by type, with less attention to the behavioural mechanisms through which they are expected to increase cycling. This study addresses this gap through a synthesis of 124 empirical studies evaluating cycling interventions. A rule-based classification framework is used to compare outcomes across heterogeneous study designs and measures, assessing interventions by type, cost, and behavioural mechanisms, and the direction, strength, and confidence of observed cycling outcomes. No-change findings are common, including in higher-confidence studies. Structural interventions such as bike paths and street redesign, often increase cycling on specific routes but do not consistently lead to population-level change, suggesting that some observed increases reflect redistribution of existing cyclists rather than new cycling uptake. Behavioural interventions such as campaigns and training programs frequently improve knowledge, confidence, or skills, but do not reliably translate into sustained cycling behaviour on their own. In contrast, resource and incentive interventions such as e-bike access, subsidies, and bike shares schemes, are most consistently associated with increases in cycling, particularly where they improve practical access to cycling. Other behavioural mechanisms, including motivation, habit formation, and social influence, appear to reinforce change rather than drive it independently. These findings suggest that increasing cycling depends less on influencing decision-making alone and more on changing the conditions that make cycling possible. The study provides a structured approach for comparing diverse evidence and highlights the importance of aligning intervention design with the behavioural mechanisms most likely to support cycling uptake.