Bicycle commuting in New Jersey nearly doubled during the 1990s, according to “journey to work” data from the 2000 Census.  Bike commuting’s share of the census commuting survey also increased more than 60% in NY State from 1990 to 2000.

The survey indicates that in both New Jersey and New York, bicycling was far and away the fastest growing commute mode during the decade.  Mass transit’s share of survey responses, for instance, increased 29% in New Jersey and 8.29% in New York State.  Driving’s share fell slightly in both states.

Nationally, bicycling increased its share more than any other mode except “other” — its share of all U.S. responses to the survey increased nearly 9%.

Connecticut appears to be missing out on the bike boom, showing a cycling share increase of only 1.1%.

Although DOT-type planners frequently lump bicycling and walking together, the Census data shows a sharp divergence in where the two modes are heading.  Nationally, walking declined more than any mode except motorcycling, whose overall numbers barely register.  Plummeting rates of U.S. foot commuting are reflected around the region: In New Jersey, walking’s share dropped over 35%; in Connecticut, down over 28%; in New York, down nearly 24%.

Shares of Journey to Work  Responses	1990 bike	2000 bike	1990-2000 % change	1990 walk	2000 walk	1990-2000 % change
NJ	.24%	.47%	97%	4.11%	2.67%	-35%
NY	.25%	.40%	62.5%	7%	5.3%	-23.9%
CT	.171%	.172%	1.1%	3.67%	2.63%	-28.5%
U.S.	.41%	.44%	8.98%	3.9%	2.68%	-31.3%

While it’s difficult to speculate about the genesis of state-wide data like the journey-to-work responses, a variety of factors may be at work.  Walking’s overall decline likely reflects the continuation of sprawl development that is moving jobs from main streets to office parks, and residential and commercial street designs that are hostile or dangerous to pedestrians.  Increasing trip distances may also have caused transit and cycling to capture some walking trips, although sprawl-related street design is often unfriendly to cycling as well. 

The survey undercounts walking because it asks for one primary commute mode.  Walking as a function of transit use does not appear in the picture at all.  It also omits occasional bike or foot commuting — someone riding a bus three days a week and walking the other two would appear under “transit.”

The development of pro-cycling infrastructure and street design as a result of new funding opportunities in ISTEA and TEA-21 apparently is producing a stronger effect on cyclists than on pedestrians, to the extent that new projects in NY, NJ and across the country are factors.  In CT, bike advocates have persistently criticized ConnDOT for emphasis on a few expensive greenway-type projects than on street networks that better accommodate bicycling.

The divergence of bike and walk commute trends may also in some way reflect a bifurcation of the U.S. population in terms of attitudes toward exercise.  Health consciousness among some segments of society appears to be rising alongside record obesity rates.  The “Generation X” population bulge may also have created a favorable demographic for cycling at the end of the century.

MTR search facility and back issues:

Search our database of all past issues of Mobilizing the Region since Fall, 1994.

Go to index of all Mobilizing the Region back issues