Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Pedalling Toward Sustainability: A Comparative Study of Bicycle Policies in Stavanger, Norway and Kraków, Poland Cover

Pedalling Toward Sustainability: A Comparative Study of Bicycle Policies in Stavanger, Norway and Kraków, Poland

Open Access
|Oct 2025

References

  1. Adams, W.M. (2006). The Future of Sustainability: Re-thinking Environment and Development in the Twenty-first Century. Report on the IUCN Renowned Thinkers Meeting, 29–31 January 2006. https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/Rep-2006-002.pdf (online: 20.05.2025).
  2. Brey, R., Castillo-Manzano, J.I., Castro-Nuño, M., López-Valpuesta, L., Marchena-Gómez, M., & Sánchez-Braza, A. (2017). Is the widespread use of urban land for cycling promotion policies cost effective? A cost-benefit analysis of the case of Seville. Land Use Policy, 63, 130–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.01.007
  3. Fietsberaad, Expertise Centre for Cycling Policy. (2009). Bicycle policies of the European principals: continuous and integral (Fietsberaad Publications, Issue 7). https://www.cycling-embassy.org.uk/sites/cycling-embassy.org.uk/files/documents/Fietsberaad_publicatie7_Engels.pdf (online: 20.05.2025).
  4. Gössling, S., & Choi, A.S. (2015). Transport transitions in Copenhagen: Comparing the Costs of Cars and Bicycles. Ecological Economics, 113(Supplement C), 106–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.03.006
  5. Gössling, S., Choi, A., Dekker, K., & Metzler, D. (2019). The Social Cost of Automobility, Cycling and Walking in the European Union. Ecological Economics, 158, 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.12.016
  6. Guariso, G., & Malvestiti, G. (2017). Assessing the value of systematic cycling in a polluted urban environment. Climate, 5(3), 65. https://doi.org/10.3390/cli5030065
  7. Statistics Poland (GUS). (2025). https://krakow.stat.gov.pl/ (online: 27.06.2025).
  8. HjemJobbHjem. (2025). https://www.hjemjobbhjem.no/rogaland/ (online: 20.05.2025).
  9. Iwińska, K., Blicharska, M., Pierotti, L., Tainio, M., & de Nazelle, A. (2018). Cycling in Warsaw, Poland – Perceived enablers and barriers according to cyclists and non-cyclists. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 113, 291–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2018.04.014
  10. Jarosz, A.J., & Springer, B. (2023). Carrots Without Sticks: Cycling Policy of Mediumsized Polish Cities. Polish Political Science Review, 11(1), 46–68. https://doi.org/10.2478/ppsr-2023-0004
  11. Kesarovski, T., & Hernández-Palacio, F. (2022). Urban density, accessibility, and proximities: mapping and understanding the relationship between urban densities and cycling accessibility to grocery shops in the 10-minute city in the context of the Stavanger metropolitan area. Annual Conference Proceedings of the XXVIII International Seminar on Urban Form, Glasgow.
  12. KPM 2030. (2022). Krajowa Polityka Miejska. https://www.gov.pl/web/funduszeregiony/polityka-miejska (online: 16.05.2025).
  13. Leung, A. (2018). Alternative ways to pay? A review of non-government sources to fund bikeways. Australasian Transport Research Forum. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333043590 (online: 27.06.2025).
  14. Medeiros, E., & van der Zwet, A. (2020). Sustainable and integrated urban planning and governance in metropolitan and medium-sized cities. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(15). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12155976
  15. Metropolia Krakowska. (2025). Plan zrównoważonej mobilności metropolii krakowskiej i jej obszaru funkcjonalnego.
  16. OECD. (2013). OECD Regions at a Glance 2013: OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/reg_glance-2013-en
  17. OECD. (2024). OECD Regions and Cities at a Glance 2024. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/oecd-regions-and-cities-at-a-glance-2024_f42db3bf-en.html (online: 21.05.2025).
  18. Okraszewska, R., Grzelec, K., & Jamroz, K. (2016). Developing A Cycling Subsystem as Part of a Sustainable Mobility Strategy: The Case of Gdansk. Scientific Journal of Silesian University of Technology. Series Transport, 92, 87–99. https://doi.org/10.20858/sjsutst.2016.92.9
  19. Parkin, J., Ryley, T., & Jones, T. (2007). Barriers to Cycling: An Exploration of Quantitative Analyses. In D. Horton, P. Rosen, & P. Cox (Eds.), Cycling and Society. Ashgate Publishing Company.
  20. park4SUMP. (2025). https://park4sump.eu/ (online: 27.06.2025).
  21. Pedestrian Space. (2021). https://pedestrianspace.org/editors-notes-first-impressions-of-urban-mobility-in-krakow/ (online: 22.06.2025).
  22. Pinto, A. J., Remesar, A., Brandão, P., Nunes Da Silva, F., & Fernando, S. (2010). Planning public spaces networks towards urban cohesion. 46th ISOCARP Congress 2010.
  23. Poklewski-Koziełł, D., Dudzic-Gyurkovich, K., & Duarte, C.M. (2023). Investigating urban form, and walkability measures in the new developments. The case study of Garnizon in Gdansk. Land Use Policy, 125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106471
  24. Pritchard, R., Lovelace, R. (2022). Sykkelpotensial og bysykler. En beregning av potensialet for økt hverdagssykling og evaluering av bysykkelordningene på Nord-Jæren, i Trondheim og i Bergen (Rapport 14-2022, NORCE Helse og samfunn).
  25. Public Transport Authority. (2025). ztp. 2025. https://ztp.krakow.pl/rower (online: 22.05.2025).
  26. Pucher, J., & Buehler, R. (2008). Making Cycling Irresistible: Lessons from The Netherlands, Denmark and Germany. Transport Reviews, 28(4), 495–528. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441640701806612
  27. Pucher, J., & Buehler, R. (2010). Walking and cycling for healthy cities. Built Environment, 36(4), 391–414. https://doi.org/10.2148/benv.36.4.391
  28. Reggiani, G., van Oijen, T., Hamedmoghadam, H., Daamen, W., Vu, H.L., & Hoogendoorn, S. (2022). Understanding bikeability: a methodology to assess urban networks. Transportation, 49(3), 897–925. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-021-10198-0
  29. Rowerowy Maj. (2025). Rowerowy Maj. https://rowerowymaj.eu/# (online: 22.05.2025).
  30. Rudolph, F., Werland, S., & Jansen, U. (2021). Sustainable mobility in Bratislava. An indicator-based assessment. http://www.wupperinst.org (online: 10.06.2025).
  31. Saeidizand, P., Fransen, K., & Boussauw, K. (2022). Revisiting car dependency: A worldwide analysis of car travel in global metropolitan areas. Cities, 120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103467
  32. Shahriari, S., Siripanich, A., & Rashidi, T. (2024). Estimating the impact of cycling infrastructure improvements on usage: A spatial difference-in-differences approach. Journal of Transport Geography, 121, 104012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2024.104012
  33. Staten Vegvesen (n.d.). Den Nasjonale Reisevaneundersøkelsen. https://www.vegvesen.no/fag/fokusomrader/nasjonal-transportplan/den-nasjonalereisevaneundersokelsen/reisevaner-20242/ (online: 16.05.2025).
  34. Stavanger Kommune (n.d.-a). Klimakontrakten. https://www.stavanger.kommune.no/klimastavanger/klimanoytral-by/klimakontrakten/ (online: 16.05.2025).
  35. Stavanger Kommune. (n.d.-b). Stavanger på sykkel. https://www.stavanger.kommune.no/vei-og-trafikk/stavanger-pa-sykkel/ (online: 16.05.2025).
  36. Stavanger Kommune. (2024) Sykkelundersøkelser og statistikk. https://www.stavanger.kommune.no/vei-og-trafikk/stavanger-pa-sykkel/sykkelstatistikk/ (online: 16.05.2025).
  37. Strange, T., & Bayley, A. (2008). OECD Insights Sustainable Development Linking Economy, Society, Environment: Linking Economy, Society, Environment. OECD Publishing.
  38. Szmelter-Jarosz, A., Chmiel, B., & Nozari, H. (2023). The mobility choices in Poland: is there a chance to transition from owned cars to a shared ones? European Journal of Transformation Studies, 11(1).
  39. Useche, S. A., Alonso, F., Boyko, A., Buyvol, P., Castañeda, I.D., Cendales, B., Cervantes, A., Echiburu, T., Faus, M., Gene-Morales, J., Gnap, J., Gonzalez, V., Ibrahim, M.K.A., Janstrup, K.H., Makarova, I., Mikusova, M., Møller, M., O’Hern, S., Orozco-Fontalvo, M., McIlroy, R.C. (2024). Yes, size does matter (for cycling safety)! Comparing behavioral and safety outcomes in S, M, L, and XL cities from 18 countries. Journal of Transport Geography, 114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2023.103754
  40. Urbanek, A. (2021). Potential of modal shift from private cars to public transport: A survey on the commuters’ attitudes and willingness to switch – A case study of Silesia Province, Poland. Research in Transportation Economics, 85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2020.101008
  41. Urry, J. (2004). The ‘System’ of Automobility. Theory, Culture & Society, 21(4–5), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276404046059
  42. Urząd Miasta Krakowa (UMK). (2005). Strategia Rozwoju Krakowa. https://strategia.krakow.pl/252788,artykul,strategia-rozwoju-krakowa.html (online: 16.05.2025).
  43. Urząd Miasta Krakowa (UMK). (2021). Polityka zrównoważonej turystyki Krakowa na lata 20212028. https://www.bip.krakow.pl/?sub_dok_id=20667&bip_id=1 (online: 17.05.2025).
  44. Urząd Miasta Krakowa (UMK). (2024). Zajmą się rozwojem infrastruktury rowerowej w KrakowieOficjalny serwis miejski – Magiczny Kraków. https://www.krakow.pl/aktualnosci/285201,26,komunikat,zajma_sie_rozwojem_infrastruktury_rowerowej_w_krakowie.html (online: 22.05.2025).
  45. Urząd Miasta Krakowa (UMK). (2025). Rowerem do pracy. https://roweremdopracy.um.krakow.pl/campaign-editions/4 (online: 16.05.2025).
  46. Włodarek, P., & Olszewski, P. (2020). Traffic safety on cycle track crossings– traffic conflict technique. Journal of Transportation Safety and Security, 12(1), 194–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/19439962.2019.1622615
  47. Wolf, S., Teitge, J., Mielke, J., Schütze, F., & Jaeger, C. (2021). The European Green Deal — More Than Climate Neutrality. Intereconomics, 56(2), 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10272-021-0963-z
  48. Wolniak, R., & Turoń, K. (2025). The model of relationships between benefits of bike-sharing and infrastructure assessment on example of the Silesian Region in Poland. Applied System Innovation, 8(2), 54. https://doi.org/10.3390/asi8020054
  49. Wołek, M. (2018). Sustainable Mobility Planning in Poland. Research Journal of The University of Gdańsk; Transport Economics and Logistics, 76. http://dx.doi.org/10.26881/etil.2018.76.01
  50. World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our common future (UN Doc. A/42/427). United Nations. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/139811 (online: 27.06.2025).
  51. Yanatma, S. (2023). Cycling in Europe: Which countries and cities are the most and least bicycle-friendly? https://www.euronews.com/next/2023/09/19/cycling-in-europe-which-countries-and-cities-are-the-most-and-least-bicycle-friendly (online: 16.05.2025).
  52. Ziegler, R. (2016). Climate Neutrality – Towards an Ethical Conception of Climate Neutrality. Ethics, Policy & Environment, 19(3), 256–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/21550085.2016.1226241
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37705/TechTrans/e2025013 | Journal eISSN: 2353-737X | Journal ISSN: 0011-4561
Language: English
Submitted on: Jul 14, 2025
Accepted on: Oct 9, 2025
Published on: Oct 27, 2025
Published by: Cracow University of Technology
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2025 Fabio Hernández Palacio, Karolina Dudzic-Gyurkovich, published by Cracow University of Technology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License.