As cities and governments work to accelerate the ecological transition, developing sustainable mobility has become a strategic priority. Strengthening cycling infrastructure plays a central role in this effort鈥攔educing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, improving urban quality of life, and encouraging more active, inclusive modes of transportation.聽
On September 30, 2025, researchers, policymakers, advocates and practitioners gathered at 黑料社鈥檚 Donald E. Armstrong Building for a full day dedicated to cycling research and policy innovation.
This conference centered the findings of the ACCEPTER le v茅lo research project led by Drs. Kevin Manaugh (黑料社) and Owen Waygood (Polytechnique Montr茅al), and overseen by postdoctoral researcher Dr. J茅r么me Laviolette. Co-organized by Bieler School of Environment at 黑料社, the 黑料社 Sustainable Growth Initiative, and V茅lo Qu茅bec, the conference was supported by the Fonds de recherche du Qu茅bec 鈥� Nature et technologies (FRQNT).
The morning sessions were presented by the doctoral, masters, and undergraduate students involved in the project, followed by the keynote lecture by Dr. Meghan Winters.
Panel 1: What is the state of cycling today?
The evolution of cycling infrastructure in Montr茅al (Ella Osboda)
Ella Osboda opened the morning with an overview of significant increases in cycling infrastructure on and around the Island of Montr茅al between 2018 and 2023. She highlighted the importance of distinguishing among different types of infrastructure, introducing the Can-BICS classification鈥攃o-developed by keynote speaker Dr. Winters鈥攖o assess levels of comfort and density.
The most significant improvements in terms of both density and comfort had been made in central Montreal, and these were also visible in terms of the change in modal share.
Impact of cycling infrastructure on travel mode choice and GHG emissions (Hamed Naseri)
Hamed Naseri examined how increased cycling can contribute to meeting Canada鈥檚 and Quebec鈥檚 decarbonization targets. He noted that transportation accounts for 23 per cent of Canada鈥檚 total greenhouse gas emissions and 43 per cent of Quebec鈥檚. Since three-quarters of these emissions are from road transportation, cycling has the potential to be an important part of reduction strategies.
Naseri reported on a study of trips undertaken by respondents in Montr茅al and Laval, from their home and of short to medium distance. His analysis was aimed at ascertaining what determines cycling as the chosen mode of transport and what hypothetical changes in cycling infrastructure led to determine number of cycling trips and greenhouse gas emissions. His findings showed that greenhouse gas emissions decline steadily as more high-comfort cycling infrastructure is built.
Behaviour change towards cycling: Who鈥檚 at which stage? (Zahra Zarabi)
The point of departure for Zahra Zarabi鈥檚 presentation was to understand why residents of Montreal and Laval do not always respond to improved bicycle infrastructure in predictable ways. Zarabi emphasized the importance of avoiding an assumed dichotomy of cyclists and non-cyclists and instead seeking to understand different motivational or behavioural stages among cyclists, for example between those who never cycle to those who have built it into their daily life. With this in mind, she presented a 鈥渟tage model鈥� with six different profiles of cyclist, ranging from pre-decision to post-action.
The data she had collated showed one third of respondents in the Montreal area are interested in, but not yet actively cycling. Most importantly, the psychology of people at each of the six stages has a big influence on what kinds of policy intervention will likely be successful. She argued that behavioural and infrastructural factors must be addressed in tandem, recognizing both those who view cycling as 鈥渋mpossible鈥� and those who cycle out of necessity.
Panel 2: Acceptability of cycling infrastructure
Do only cyclists support cycling infrastructure development? (J茅r么me Laviolette)
J茅r么me Laviolette presented social demographic data on popular support for cycling infrastructure, both for across Montreal and in specific neighbourhoods. A majority of respondents (69 per cent) agreed that more infrastructure would increase cycling participation, with similar views across neighbourhoods, but when this became framed as a trade-off with car traffic lanes or parking, support dropped off to 44 and 39 per cent respectively.
Many respondents expressed concerned about pedestrian and accessibility safety聽in view of increased cycling infrastructure. Laviolette noted that social demographics could not easily explain broad trends in the public response to biking infrastructure, made clear by his presentation of 鈥渦nlikely supporters and opponents.鈥�
Who supports cycling and how to increase support? A moral foundation theory and political orientation perspective (Lexi Kinman)
Lexi Kinman extended the discussion on 鈥渂ikelash,鈥� making a case for applying the moral foundation theory framework to the ways in which municipalities communicate the benefits of increased biking infrastructure. The aim of her research was to consider how best to frame these increases so as to achieve a wide as possible buy-in from across the political spectrum. The theory in question posits six moral values, such as care and authority, through which to understand the perceived benefits and disadvantages of policy interventions.
Currently the city messaging focuses freedom and fairness, but Kinman鈥檚 study and analysis showed that emphasizing benefits associated with the loyalty value (for those leaning left politically) and purity value (for those leaning right) might achieve a broader support base. Kinman argued that this approach will help depolarize the often-fractious debate on this issue and could be deployed by municipalities across other policy areas. Following this presentation, a communications representative from the City of Montreal committed to present the research to her wider team.
Panel 3: How to increase cycling uptake?
Winter cycling in Sherbrooke: Impact of clearing a major bike route (Mohammad Nikkah)
Mohammad Nikkah took attendees from Montreal to Sherbrooke, presenting on a study of winter cycling in the city. He talked through public attitudes to winter cycling, the effect of snowploughing the city鈥檚 main bike path, and the demographic profile of winter cyclists. His survey data was drawn from the winter of 2023-2024, before Bixi expanded into Sherbrooke.
A majority of local residents (59 per cent) supported the clearing of the main bike path. In general, those cycling in winter were more likely to be men, in a higher income bracket and under the age of 44, but after the city began clearing these paths more women began to cycle. Nikkah also noted that cleared routes benefited pedestrians, runners and wheelchair users.
Information and travel behaviour: What鈥檚 the impact? (Alessia Vinet)
Where much of the research conducted analysed quantitative survey data, Alessia Vinet鈥檚 presentation set out a qualitative approach to assessing readiness to continue or start cycling among Montreal residents. She conducted group discussions with participants holding a range of views on cycling infrastructure to identify 鈥渄eal breakers鈥濃�攃onditions that discourage or prevent people from cycling.
While non-cyclists cited concerns such as traffic, weather and low-comfort routes, even regular cyclists noted similar deterrents. Vinet鈥檚 work suggests that understanding these nuanced barriers can inform more effective infrastructure design and communication strategies.
Evaluating the impacts of new cycling infrastructures in Laval and Montr茅al: A longitudinal perspective (J茅r么me Laviollette)
In a follow-up study, Laviolette assessed the effects of new protected bike lanes in one Montr茅al and one Laval neighbourhood, along with adjacent control areas without such infrastructure. Both these areas had not yet had any protected bike lanes, and Laviolette also surveyed an adjacent 鈥渃ontrol鈥� neighbourhood in both cases that had not yet benefited from this infrastructure.
Since this longitudinal study gathered data at the start and end of a twelve-month period, Laviolette made clear that it was not easy to ascertain causality over correlation. While it was clear that in the Montreal and Laval cases there had been a significant decrease in driving, it was unclear whether this was primarily because of increased cycling or reduced parking. There had also been increases in walking. In addition, there were decreases in levels of concern and stress among residents in both cases; many respondents, for example, perceived decreases in the speed of motorists. Both cyclists and walkers believed they had become safer overall.
Keynote lecture by Dr. Meghan Winters
From research to policy: Promoting active transportation in Canadian cities
The morning鈥檚 keynote lecture was delivered by Dr. Meghan Winters of Simon Fraser University, who leads the Cities, Health, and Active Transportation Research Lab (CHATR Lab). Dr.聽Winters focused her lecture on the ways in which transportation and urban planning can best support effective policymaking, an aim she framed via the key words 鈥渄ata and dialogue.鈥�
She presented four case studies from the work of the CHATR-Lab under the headings programs, public opinion, policy, and infrastructure. The first of these concerned research in support of Vancouver鈥檚 bike-sharing system, Mobi, and the impact of standard passes and special community passes. On public opinion, the lab had polled city dwellers across Canada on four or five transit interventions and found greater acceptance among those in eastern cities than western cities. On policy, Dr. Winters had led a study of policy documents to track the variety of interpretations of the descriptor for 鈥淎ll Ages and Abilities.鈥� Finally, under the infrastructure rubric,聽 Winters talked through a large-scale research project on the equity impact of cycling infrastructure in Vancouver over a fifteen-year period.
She concluded by discussing her current priorities, which include research on caregivers鈥� transit decisions and lessons Montr茅al might draw from Vancouver鈥檚 micromobility initiatives such as electric scooters.
The discussion that followed underscored key takeaways: cities today are eager to prioritise upgrades and 鈥渜uick builds,鈥� while transit research must combine sensitivity to financial realities with compelling storytelling.
Sustainable Growth Initiative (SGI)
The SGI is dedicated to building practical, constructive, and applies solutions for key issues challenging sustainable growth. SGI was launched in 2022 as a cross-faculty partnership that presently also involves the Faculty of Law, the Department of Economics, and the Max Bell School of Public Policy, the Department of Mechanical Engineering, and the Department of Geography.
