The Development of a Bike Awareness
Program to Promote Ridership to and on
UW Campus: A Pilot Study
PREPARED BY: Sharmila Setaram
PREPARED FOR: Prof.Greg Michalenko
CLASS: ERS250 "Greening the Campus"
DATE SUBMITTED: July 25, 2002
Sustainability is the concept of reaching a balance of interactions between humans and nature that will ensure a self-sustaining existence for the world (National Research Council, 1999). Modern societys ability to reach this self-sustaining balance is often compromised by the unsustainable desires of humans. A large component that affects the vision of a sustainable world is the varying modes of transportation that are accompanied by many underlying implications and consequences to the environment. Even though some modes of transportation can be considered to be more environmentally friendly, automobiles, planes, trains, buses, bicycles and pedestrian all have ecological consequences that impact the environment. Acknowledging the aspects of the environmental concerns is beneficial in "the promotion of cycling as a sustainable method of transportation that is affordable, non-polluting and health promoting" (Waterloo, 1998).
Cycling has numerous advantages for the campus environment such as reducing level of pollutants being released and the number of green spaces being converted into parking lots. Reducing and replacing automobile use with cycling has many positive impacts towards attaining campus sustainability. The positive impact can be seen when it is shown that cars emit approximately 5.5 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere (WATgreen, 1999). These emissions contribute to global warming and an increased greenhouse effect (Waterloo, 1999).
Cycling is not only a major form of transportation but also encourages exercise and recreational functions. While cycling is encouraged by the university, there are constraining travel conditions such as poor lighting, theft, weather conditions, distance, and time constraints that discourage the number of cyclists (Waterloo, 2000).
We will be studying: what are the safety awareness issues that are preventing students from riding a bike to and on campus and how can these issues be incorporated into a Bicycle Awareness Program (BAP) to promote student ridership? This pilot study of contributing factors affecting bicycle ridership and suggestions for the design and implementation of a BAP will provide the university community with an option to promote sustainable practices on Campus.
The driving motivation behind the study is to work in cooperation with WATgreen to further the University of Waterloos vision of a sustainable campus. Sustainability on campus will be referred to as follows: "the ability to maintain the University campus for an indefinite period of time while limiting negative environmental impacts that are the result of direct or indirect actions occurring within the university" (WATgreen, 1994).
The problem and opportunity in this particular study is considered a proximate level assessment that will look at "the causes of the symptoms that we see on the surface and suggested opportunities related to preventing symptoms from occurring, or replacing undesirable short term results with more desirable ones." (Murphy, 2001) The importance of this study is to determine the causes that have resulted in students becoming concerned about bicycle related issues.
1.2 Project Focus- Purpose and Objectives of the Project
In a personal communication with Kevin Stewart of the Safety Office, it was brought to our attention that there has been an increase in reported occurrences of bicycle related injury. The purpose of the project is to a) identify and address student concerns that are preventing students from riding a bicycle to UW campus and b) to determine and make suggestions of how these factors can be incorporated into a bicycle awareness program, which will promote sustainability. The creation of a BAP from our recommendations would provide UW with the tools needed to promote and encourage an increase of bicycle use on campus. If safety and other bicycle-related student concerns are addressed with educational and prevention programs, this will encourage more students to ride a bicycle to and on campus.
These are the specific objectives of the study:
2.0 Background Information
2.1 Historical and Contextual Information
A number of projects have been completed by University of Waterloo students under the advisement of WATgreen that have studied modes of transportation, concentrating specifically on bicycling as it relates to UW. Listed below is a brief synopsis of relevant information of each of the reports that has lead to further investigation:
The previous studies have reached similar conclusions that "cycling, policies supporting planning, implementation, promotion, education, and law enforcement programs are primary factors identified as encouraging the use of bicycles as a sustainable transportation method," (Waterloo, 1994) in regards to bicycling on campus and in the community. Many of these studies were used to establish and determine the unfulfilled need of UW to create an infrastructure that will support a sustainable cycling system. These previous studies will serve as a foundation to use in combination with a current reassessment survey and the development of a BAP to promote ridership.
Within this project there are many types of participating actors within three major groups: core actors, supporting actors and shadow actors. A variety of actors will be identified with their relationship to bicycles in each phase of the BAP development. Acknowledging the existing actors does not guarantee that they will be contacted during this study. The stakeholders in the core actor group (or key stakeholders) are the only ones that will be contacted during this study because of their decision making power. The level of actor (stakeholder) involvement changes in accordance to differing perceptions of problems and opportunities.
"Core actors are continuously and intensely involved with the problem" (Murphy, 2001). In regards to this study, the core actors are highly active in the first three phases of policy development: planning, construction and operation. The core actor stakeholders are listed below:
Patti Cook: University Waste Management and WATgreen
Watgreeen was created in 1990 by UW administration to address UWs ecological profile as it relates to the campus and community.
Sergeant. Wayne Short: Police Services
UW police services maintain records of thefts and accident reports that are filed by cyclists.
Kevin Stewart: Director of Safety Office and Health and Safety Committee
Angelo Graham or Ian Fraser: Members of the Health and Safety Committee
Health and Safety receives information, policies, and reports from a variety of UW bodies such as UW administration, and WATgreen.
Tom Galloway: Plant Operations
Les Van Dongen or Jerry Hutton: Supervisors of Grounds
Plant Operations receives data from various actors and is responsible for the physical functions of the university such as where bike racks will be placed.
The second type of actors, are supporting actors "who are less involved but can exert a significant effect on decisions" (Murhpy, 2001). These actors are most active in the operation phase, when a task is ready to be carried through. Supporting actors can also be found at the planning phase. The supporting actor stakeholders are listed below:
UW Bicycle Centre
The UW Bicycle Centre operates as on organization/service on campus that provides cyclists with general information about bicycle safety and maintenance.
Federation of Students (FEDS)
The primary value related to bicycle issues, is the pursuit for enhanced quality of life for students including a safe, secure, and environmentally conscious campus.
Waterloo Public Interest Research Group (WPIRG)
The WPIRG is an umbrella organization that provides a framework for social, environmental and human rights issues to be brought to the forefront by student initiatives.
Students of the University of Waterloo
It will ultimately be the students that will be involved in the BAP. Students will both attend the promotional and educational events and will be the ones to help in carrying out the BAP. This group would also include the student cyclists.
The last types of actors are shadow actors "who are affected by what happens but for some reason are not involved" (Murphy, 2001). Shadow actors do not participate in any of the phases of policy development because they are unaware that there is a concern. The most common shadow actor is the general public, or in the case of this specific study, it is the involvement and feedback from students at UW campus. The influence and actions of core actors have the ability to impact the decision and actions of other actors.
2.3 System Elements
The inputs of the system are the information gathered and compiled from a student questionnaire and the interviews with the key stakeholders. The throughputs of the system are the analysis of data in order to compare results and design the bike awareness program. The outputs of this report will be in the form of a set of recommendations as to how the university can design and implement a BAP. These recommendations include suggestions for the construction, design and implementation of an awareness program. The boundaries of the survey and the interview were restricted to the UW campus.
By conducting a survey of students about factors that prevent bicycle ridership and interviewing key stakeholders on cycling issue we have answered our research question, which is: What are the safety awareness issues that are preventing students from riding a bike to and on campus and how can these be incorporated into a Bicycle Awareness Program to promote student ridership?.
By conducting the survey, we have obtained the needed data from a sample population that is as representative as possible of all UW student enrolled for the summer term, 2002. Conducting interviews with key stakeholders in the cycling system from the UW community has also been used to gain important information such as: a) what each stakeholder is responsible for in regards to cycling and b) if they have a budget for cycling related programs.
Due to an illness of a group member, our intended methodology was changed during the course of the study because of time constraints. The intended methodology and the actual methodology will both be reported in Sections 3.1.2, 3.1.3, and 3.3 where changes have been made.
3.1 Survey Methodology
3.1.1 Questionnaire Design
Questions were designed to gain important knowledge such as the state of and the factors influencing ridership to gain a better understanding of what needs to be incorporated into a bike awareness program to promote student ridership. Main categories of questions include: how many people have access to a bicycle, how many people cycle to school, reasons for not riding to school (concerns), safety features used, questions relating to theft, bicycle accidents and if the student would participate in possible awareness programs. All of this information is required to see what issues need to be addressed and implemented into an awareness program to promote students riding bicycles to and from campus.
The questions were kept to a minimum to encourage a better participation rate. Plain and neutral language was used in the writing of the questions to ensure that there was no reactivity or bias in the answering of the survey. A cover letter was also constructed to inform the potential participants that the study was being done for an undergraduate class and that the project has gone through the ethics procedure (ethics forms are in Appendix 1). The students were told in the letter that their participation is voluntary and they can stop answering the questionnaire whenever they wish. Contact information was also provided so that the participant may inquire to the Professor supervisor or the ethics committee about our research. A copy of the cover letter and questionnaire are included in Appendix 2.
3.1.2 Sample Size Calculation
A stratified simple random sampling procedure was intended to be used to obtain a representative sample. We decided to stratify our sampling procedure in reference to the different faculties on campus. This decision was made as we assumed that different faculties may have different perceptions on the use of bicycles and thus, to get an accurate representation of the views of the University of Waterloo community, our sampling should be done to represent the true proportion of students present in each Faculty. An example of a Faculty having a different perception on bike ridership than other Faculties would be the Environmental Studies Faculty. A greater proportion of Environmental Studies students would be expected to ride bicycles to and on campus due to their environmental conservation views. Other factors that could be used to stratify the sampling procedure would be such things as the sex of the students and the specific Department that they are in. From all possible stratifying methods, it was thought that Faculty would have the largest impact and that a combination of more than one method would be much too time consuming.
The number of undergraduate and graduate students on campus during the spring term 2002, for each of the Faculties was obtained from Mary Thompson of the office of Institutional Analysis and Planning. For the purpose of our research, undergraduates and graduates were grouped together for each Faculty. The Faculty sizes were used to calculate representative sample sizes for all Faculties except Independent Studies. The Independent Studies Faculty was not included, as their size of 10 undergraduate students is too small to include. The calculated sample sizes added to a total of 254 participants. Realizing that 100% certainty cannot be achieved and that the participants must be able to be surveyed in the given time, these sample sizes have been calculated using a confidence interval of 90% with a maximum allowable error of ±10%. This allowed for a 1 in 20 chance of our results being reproduced in a study being conducted with the exact same methodology as ours, which is required for statistical significance. 90-95% confidence intervals are most widely used by researchers (Abbey-Livingston et al., 1982, p.59). To give an example of the sample size calculation, Science, with a size of 884 on-campus students at a confidence interval of 90% and with a maximum allowable error of ±10% needs a sample size of 41 students to be statistically significant.
Due to the time constraints, and the advice of our supervising Professor, the sample size of our survey was reduced to 100 students. The numbers from our original sample size calculations were reduced proportionally so that the total students added up to 100. This reduction has limited the statistical significance of our data, but due to this study being a pilot study, 100 students has been has been agreed on by our supervising Professor as being a good number.
3.1.3 Randomizing the Sampling Procedure
To obtain a representative sample, the researcher must ensure that all potential participants have an equal chance of being selected and that there is no selection biases (Palys, 1997). This is a very difficult objective to accomplish as biases are usual subconscious and the researcher may not be aware of them. With this known, it was imperative that we designed our sampling procedure to allow for the possibility of all students having the same chance of being selected as a participant in the survey.
The intended sampling procedure that we designed would have given us the highest probability of every student being able to participate, thus allowing us to generalize to the entire UW population. Six locations that were representative of the six faculties were to be used for surveying. For example, to sample Math students, we would have located ourselves at the Math building and only survey students from the Math Faculty. This procedure would have allowed all math students an opportunity to participate if they were randomly chosen. No selection biases would have been used when approaching potential participants; the first person the researcher saw would have been approached. The potential participant would have first been asked if they are from the current Faculty being sampled and then would have been given the questionnaire cover letter which they would then use to determine if they would like to participate in the research.
Six locations were still sampled, but not all of the six buildings mentioned above were used. Buildings were selected more on the basis of convenience to save time, as advised by our supervising Professor. These locations were: the Student Life Center, Math & Computer building, the Davis Center, Environmental Studies 1, Biology 1, Modern Languages and a class at St. Jeromes University. Another change was that all faculties were sampled at all locations. All faculties were sampled until the required number of surveys per Faculty was obtained.
The Student Life Center and a class at St. Jeromes are both poor sampling choices as they are not random sampling due to the fact that a certain type of people may associate in the Student Life Center or partake in the St. Jeromes class. But, as the Student Life center is a place of congregation for the entire University of Waterloo student community, one could assume that an even distribution of all faculties may be there. Also, the class that was surveyed had a distribution of students from all faculties.
3.1.4 Questionnaire Data Analysis
The data was analyzed by looking at the percentage of participants that provided an answer for each of the questions on the questionnaire. By looking at the percentages that were calculated during the analysis, it was be possible to determine the most pressing issues stopping students from riding to school. We were also able to use these percentages to calculate the distances that students found acceptable to ride to school and whether they would participate in possible bicycling awareness programs or events. It was possible to represent these findings graphically so that our results can easily be seen in our Results section.
3.1.5 Limitations to Survey Methodology
Care must be taken in the representation and use of the data compiled by this report. Statistical significance was not achieved due to the decreased sample size, which puts limitations on our conclusions. Also, the surveying locations did not guarantee a completely random sampling procedure. But, as this is a pilot study, statistical significance is not required and the data obtained can be used for the implementation of a bicycle awareness program.
One other limitation is that the data compiled in this report is Spring-term specific. Factors preventing bike ridership in the Fall and Winter terms would need to be identified and included in the bike awareness program.
3.2 Interview Methodology
3.2.1 Interview Design
The survey and interviews with key stakeholders were conducted during the same time period. These interviews were used to determine which stakeholders are willing to participate in the bike awareness program. If they are willing to participate, we determined what they could offer toward the program. A large emphasis was placed on the need for being able to access the necessary funds that will be associated with the implementation of the bicycle awareness program. Key stakeholders (Patti Cook, WATgreen; Tom Galloway, Head of Plant Operations; Sgt. Wayne Short, Police Services; and Kevin Stewart, Safety Office) were contacted by telephone to ask for their participation in an interview regarding our research. If they agreed, a date and time was negotiated and a letter of thanks detailing our research was delivered to them. This letter included the same information as the questionnaire cover letter, but also included a place where a signature of cooperation could be given from the interviewee. The signature indicated an agreement to participate in our research and the proceedings may be used in our final report. A copy of the interview consent letter and example questions are included in Appendix 3.
3.2.2 Interview Proceedings
Each stakeholder was asked questions having to do with their departments mandate on cycling issues and whether or not they have a budget that could accommodate expenditures on the promotion of a bike awareness program. The interview data will be used in the design and implementation of the bike awareness program that will be recommended in this report.
3.3Bike Awareness Program
Searches would have been conducted at other universities and institutions for bike awareness programs already in effect that we can model in the design of our bicycling program. The concerns of the students, determined by the questionnaire, will be addressed and implemented into the program. By addressing UWs student bicycling are promoting ridership to and on campus.
Departments with bicycle promotion mandates in the UW community, determined by the interviews, such as Health Services would have needed to be approached to fund the program events. Funding would have been required to pay for pamphlets, flyers, frosh educational packages and many other things. Waterloo community sponsors would have also been approached such as bicycle shops to sponsor events such as bicycle races around ring road and possibly other events, depending on the suggestions that come out of this report.
Instead of designing and implementing a bicycle awareness program, we were limited to only making suggestions for the design and implementation of an awareness program. Interviews with the key stakeholders gave insight into how the university community should go about promoting awareness of bicycling concerns.
From the factors preventing students from riding a bicycle to and on campus identified by our survey, suggestions could also be made as to what concerns need to be addressed by the bicycle awareness program.
4.1 Questionnaire Data
The data for all 100 surveys was entered into Microsoft Excel and from this spreadsheet the statistics for each question were calculated. Comparisons were not done between sex or Faculty of the respondents as the conclusions that would be drawn for them would not help to address our research question, which focuses on the entire UW community.
The most important information obtained with the questionnaire is the factors identified by the respondents as deterring them from riding a bicycle to and on UW campus. These results can be found below in Figure 1. Safety factors (e.g., injury, bike lanes, and traffic), theft and distance are the main causes deterring student ridership to and on campus.
Figure 1. Factors Deterring Student Ridership to and on UW Campus
The complete breakdown of the various modes of transportation used by students to get to UW campus can be seen in Figure 2. Figure 2 shows that walking was found to be the most used form of transportation for getting to campus (44%), followed by cycling (29%), then public transport (15%) and then arriving by car (12%). From these results, it can be seen that an increase in bike ridership is possible if necessary steps are taken.
Figure 2. How Respondents Usually Travel to UW
59% of respondents indicated they either own a bicycle or have access to a bicycle, but if one looks at the results represented in Figure 2, it is found that only 29% of the sample population actually rides a bike to campus often. Of the total 59% of respondents that have access to a bicycle, 47% indicated that they ride their bike to school often, 25% said they sometimes ride their bike to school and 27% said that they never ride to school. 46% of respondents indicated that they would ride a bike or ride their bike more often if there were bike racks at the entrances to every building.
When looking at safety features that are used by bicycle users (Figure 3 below), it is found that there is a lot of opportunity for improvement. The most widely used items are a bell, helmet and reflectors. All of these items are used at a rate of less than 50% of the respondents. It is also interesting to note that a bell and reflectors are required for all cyclists on the streets of Waterloo and a helmet is also mandatory for cyclists under the age of 18.
Figure 3. Safety Features Used by Students While Riding Their Bicycle
Theft was identified above as being a significant factor deterring ridership. Our survey results indicate that 17% of the respondents have either had their bike stolen or a part of their bike stolen. This seems like a high rate until it is found that 78% of the thefts occurred while the bike or bike part was unlocked. This means that 13.3% out of the total 17% of thefts could have been avoided just by using appropriate locking mechanisms. The locations of the bike thefts are represented in Figure 4. An increase in surveillance or monitoring in these areas may also help to deter theft.
Figure 4. Locations Where the Bikes or Bike Parts Were Stolen
When asked if they had ever been involved in an accident while riding a bicycle, 24% of the responds indicated that they had. 6% of respondents said that they have been in a collision with another cyclist while riding their bicycle on campus and 10% said that they have been hit by a cyclist while walking around campus.
There is a very optimistic outlook on the possible participation rate if a bicycle awareness program is initiated. It was found that 40% of the respondents would have attended an information session on bicycle awareness during their Frosh Week activities. 40% may seem like a small number, but it exceeded our predictions. It was also indicated that 52% of the respondents would have read a pamphlet on bicycle awareness if it were included in their Frosh Week package. This number is not as high as we anticipated, but is still optimistic. Both of these statistics are positive as there was not found to be any direct opposition to a bicycle awareness program.
4.2 Interview Data
Kevin Stewart- Safety Office
Mr. Stewart informed us that the role of the Safety Office regarding bicycle issues is only advisory. They are connected to the Joint Health and Safety Committee who are interested in bicycle safety because of an increase in reported occurrences of injury on campus. The Safety Offices budget is driven by legislation and bicycle safety does not come into compliance, but they could potentially approach senior management for funds.
In the past, the Safety Office has sponsored brochures and has been involved in promotional activities with the bike center. Other activities have also included conducting surveys of where injuries occur on campus, having discussions with Plant Operations and Police Services about issues relating to pathways and making recommendations for future constructions to make roads safer for cyclists. The Safety Office does not play a role in promoting bike usage, but does promote safe usage.
A key factor that was identified by Mr. Stewart as preventing students from riding to campus is access to the campus, especially from the East side. He indicates that that there needs to be proper street crossings with appropriate signals.
The Safety Office would be able to help in a bicycle awareness program by arranging facilities for events, making brochures, advising on promotional programs and the taking on of a work-study student. They have had work-study students before and would be glad to provide the space for another.
Patti Cook- WATgreen
WATgreen has been involved in bicycle awareness by raising the issue to the forefront as an issue of transportation. WATgreen also does not have a budget that would allow for financial support of any initiatives.
Key factors indicated as preventing student ridership were access to campus and speed limits on campus. Mrs. Cook also suggested that education is what is needed to address the students concerns. She would be willing to aid in any capacity possible such as public speaking, organization and playing an advisory role in a committee.
Tom Galloway- Plant Operations
The only issue that Plant Operations deal with in regards to bicycling is the distribution of bike racks throughout campus. Plant Operations does not have any extra money to spend on issues relating to bicycles. In the last little while, Plant Operations has been responsible for replacing old bike rack with new double racks that can allow for locking both front and back tires to prevent thefts. They also watch for areas that have increased bicycle activity and will add bicycle racks to those locations.
Issues that were identified pertaining to Plant Operations were the safety of bicycles and winter biking. Winter biking is a problem because Plant Operations does not have the man-power to clear away snow from bike racks. Mr. Galloway has said that if it is requested, they will make and post signage around campus.
Sergeant Wayne Short
In relation to bicycle issues, the mandate of Police Services is to enforce the highway traffic act, as bicycles must follow the rules of the road. Police Services also does not have a budget for bicycle issues.
In the past, Police Services has put information reminders in the Gazette and Imprint. They have also attempted to establish dismount zones around campus, but the signs were torn down. Police Services does not have a role in promoting bike usage, but are responsible for promoting safe bicycle usage. Sgt. Short identifies that vehicular traffic leading to campus from major arteries may be deterring student ridership. He suggests that promoting more safety features for bicycles and for the rider to wear may promote ridership and that an education program would be necessary.
Police Services would provide help in a bicycle awareness program by informing students about legal ramifications, risk management in terms of liability, proper riding procedures and equipping bikes with proper safety equipment.
5.1 Questionnaire Data
It was found that cycling was the second most-used form of transportation to UW campus with walking being the first. But, as 29% of respondents indicated that they ride to campus, there is definitely an opportunity for improvement.
The factors that were identified by students as most influencing their decision not to ride a bike or ride a bike more often to or on campus were safety related concerns. Combined, all safety factors on the questionnaire (e.g., scared of injury, not enough bike lanes too much traffic) received 88 votes. When one looks at the idea that less than 50% of students surveyed indicated that they wear a helmet and all other safety devices were used at a rate of less than 30%, if students were educated on the use of safety equipment students may feel more comfortable riding to and on campus.
Theft was found to be the second-most influencing factor deterring students from riding to and on campus with 39 votes. This fear is based on a pretense that there is a high rate of bike and bike part theft on campus. 17% is a high rate of theft, but 13.3% of the total 17% of thefts most likely could have been avoided by simply locking the bike or bike part properly. This is evident as 78% of the respondents that indicated that they have had a bike or bike part stolen did not have the bike or bike part locked when it was taken. An education program informing students on the necessity of locking their bike and all part of their bike will reduce the number of thefts and encourage more students to ride to school.
The other major factors identified by the survey were that the respondent lived too far from campus to bike and that there is not enough convenient bike racks. Both of the responses received 27 votes. Distance is a factor that may not be able to be addressed to increase ridership, but a promotional program may influence potential riders to endure a longer ride. Work can be done in collaboration with Plant Operations to get more accessible and convenient bike racks where students identify that they are needed.
All of these factors identified by the survey should be implemented into a bike awareness program that will address the UW student populations concerns and promote bicycle ridership.
5.2 Interview Data
Many similarities were found between what was said by the key stakeholders interviewed. Access to campus was identified as a factor deterring ridership that should be looked at by the Region. It was also suggested that appropriate street crossing and signals be established at current and future access points.
Each interviewed stakeholder was willing to participate some way in the implementation of a bicycle awareness program. Potential contributions included the production of pamphlets and other promotional items, arranging of facilities needed for events, participation in advisory roles, public speaking, replacing single-wheel bike racks with new double-wheel bike racks and helping in education programs to encourage safe riding. Out of all of the possible contributions that were identified by the interviewees, none could provide financial assistance. No department has any financial responsibility for bicycle issues, but funding could be located from other facets of the university (e.g., FEDS, WPIRG).
Another suggestion was the hiring of a work-study student. A work-study student could be hired by a stakeholder in bicycle issues to spend a semester putting together a bicycle awareness program. Funding would come from the university.
From the information gathered in this study, we recommend that a key stakeholder (preferably FEDS) hire a workstudy student, paid by the university, to develop and possibly implement a bike awareness program. The duties of the workstudy student would be:
All of the information presented in this report should be taken into consideration
during the development of the bike awareness program. The involvement of the key stakeholders, as outlined in Section 5.2, should be used to assist in the BAP initiatives.
The launch of the BAP and other initiatives should occur during Frosh Week, as there are a high number of students congregated on campus at one time. Incorporating the BAP into the Frosh Week activities will allow for the education of all in-coming students on bicycle-related issue and show them how UW operates in regards to bicycles. Although BAP initiatives should be concentrated at the Frosh Week activities, there should be events occurring throughout the year with a focus on events in the fall semester because of the higher student population on campus.
Bowman, B., S. Cook, S. Thompson, P. Wisken. 2000. Bike Lanes to Campus.Waterloo:WATgreen, University of Waterloo.
Beasley, B., S. Gibbon, D. McKay, K. Papple, L. Simard and A. Walkley. 1994. Bikeways.Waterloo: WATGreen, University of Waterloo
Daniels, H., E. Jarritsma and Y. Leicht.1991.Transportation to and from Campus.Waterloo: WATGreen, University of Waterloo.
Ewing. D., R. Houlihan, M. Dunning, D. Russel,and J. Whitfield. 1997.
Cycling at UW. Waterloo: WATgreen, University of Waterloo.
Murphy, Stephen. Autumn 2001. ERS 100. Course Syllabus. Waterloo: University of Waterloo.
National Research Council. 1999. Our Common Journey: A Transition Toward Sustainability.
Palys, Ted.1997. Research Decision Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives. Simon Frasier University. Harcourt Bruce Company Canada.
Ethier, N., L. Daar, K. Cooper, J. MacGowan, M. Narinesingh, J. Vanstone. 1999.
Transportation Study.Waterloo: WATgreen, University of Waterloo