Resources

This communications guide has evidence based advice for advocates of sustainable transport solutions (including community
advocates, elected representatives, and government staffers). It is informed by the latest Australian research commissioned by the Climate Council, including qualitative research undertaken by MMResearch and quantitative research undertaken by YouGov in 2022. Our recommendations reflect how the Climate Council approaches best practice climate communications: values led, people first and solutions focused.

This report provides coverage of interventions effective in growing active transport mode share.

A prioritisation framework was developed to select the interventions that are most impactful in boosting active transport mode share. Significant increases in mode share are likely to require ambitious initiatives. Two decades of policy support for increasing active transport mode share may have stopped or slowed falls in walking and cycling levels but has not yet succeeded in achieving widespread and large increases.

In addition to impact, an intervention’s cost, and complexity was also included within the prioritisation framework. For each of the prioritised actions, guidance on their suitability to different geographical contexts has been offered (e.g. inner city, suburban, regional etc.)

This report has found that to grow active transport mode share, a mix of interventions is required, including those that reduce or remove current incentives that encourage car use alongside interventions designed to encourage walking and cycling.

The National Urban Policy supports our highest priorities, from equitable access to jobs, homes and services, to climate resilience and lowering emissions.

It includes a shared vision for sustainable urban growth, as agreed by National Planning Ministers. It also outlines our priorities as we work with partner governments on issues that impact our urban areas to be more:

• liveable and equitable 
• productive and innovative
• sustainable and resilient.

It provides a framework and goals that support all cities, large and small—from our central business districts to suburban and peri-urban realms and everything in between.

The National Urban Policy was developed with input from stakeholders including other Commonwealth agencies, state, territory and local governments, industry, urban policy experts and First Nations stakeholders.

The Urban Policy Forum, chaired by Emeritus Professor Barbara Norman, played an integral role in developing the National Urban Policy. These experts in urban development were central to delivering the Government’s revitalised approach to urban policy, highlighting the urgent challenges facing our cities and suburbs.

This work builds on our strong investment in cities and suburbs, including the Thriving Suburbs Program, urban and regional Precincts and Partnerships Programs and the Housing Support Program. 

The National Road Safety Strategy 2021-30 (the Strategy) was agreed to by the Australian Government and all state and territory governments in May 2021. It sets the agenda for co-ordinated and planned government action to improve road safety over the next 10 years.

The National Road Safety Action Plan 2023-25 (the Action Plan) was agreed by all Infrastructure and Transport Ministers in December 2022. The Action Plan was developed cooperatively by the Australian, state and territory government, in consultation with key road safety stakeholders and the Australian Local Government Association.

It is the first Action Plan under the Strategy, and sets out the key actions all governments will undertake to 2025, in pursuit of the agreed priorities identified in the Strategy.

Australian governments at all levels are working together with our communities to change the road transport system to prevent deaths and serious injuries on our roads.

The National Road Safety Strategy represents all governments’ commitment to deliver significant reductions in road trauma, putting Australia on a path to achieve ‘Vision Zero’ or zero deaths and serious injuries on our roads by 2050.

Working to build nationally consistent data to support reducing road trauma in Australia

Australia’s Disability Strategy 2021–2031 is a plan to make life better for people with disability. The Australian Government wrote this plan with people with disability. It talks about what can be done to make Australia more inclusive. If Australia is inclusive, people with disability can take part in everything that happens in Australia.

Supporting document for the Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport 2002. This supporting document assists operators and providers with planning, designing, implementing and delivering accessibility and non-discriminatory public transport services.

These Guidelines have been developed by the Australian Human Rights Commission (the Commission) to provide clear and practical assistance to facilitate compliance with the Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport 2002 (Cth) (the Transport Standards) through the use of equivalent access.

These Guidelines are distinct from the Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport Guidelines 2004 (No. 3) (Cth) (Transport Standards Guidelines), which seek to provide general guidance on the Transport Standards.

The Guidelines provide:

• information about the operation of the federal Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) (the Disability Discrimination Act) in relation to:
  • unlawful disability discrimination in access to premises and the provision of goods, services and facilities
  • when discrimination may not be unlawful
  • the relationship between the Disability Discrimination Act and the Transport Standards
• information about the operation of the Transport Standards in relation to:
  • compliance with the Transport Standards by equivalent access
  • when failure to comply with the Transport Standards may not be unlawful
• practical guidance for using equivalent access to comply with the Transport Standards.

These Guidelines do not provide guidance on any other disability standards made under the Disability Discrimination Act or other regulatory instruments relevant to the provision of public transport.

The Australian Human Rights Commission has issued this Advisory Notes on streetscape, public outdoor areas, fixtures, fittings and furniture to assist those responsible for premises who are seeking to improve access on matters not covered by the Disability (Access to Premises – buildings) Standards 2010.

The Guide seeks to encourage policy makers, planners, designers, builders, certifiers and operators to think beyond compliance and the physical and governance boundaries of services and infrastructure and focus instead on people's accessibility needs across their whole journey.

At a glance:

• This document (ATAP Part M4) provides specialist Mode Specific Guidance on active travel. It is supported by a Background Report (M4-BR) in the ATAP Technical Support Library covering detailed and technical material.
• The defining characteristic of active travel is that it is ‘human powered mobility’. In this guidance, we interpret active travel as comprising primarily walking and cycling, but can also include use of e-bikes, skateboards, roller skates, roller blades and non-electric scooters. While e-scooters and e-skateboards are not ‘human-powered’, they are also considered here because they share some of the facilities provided for active travel, and hence experience associated benefits. The term micro-mobility is increasingly used to refer to all of these modes of transport.
• Evidence-based assessment of problems and opportunities is the starting point for considering active travel improvements. Problems include: poor weather; lack of infrastructure or appropriate facilities; poor access and connectivity; physical safety concerns; lack of security; inadequate ancillary infrastructure; and poor knowledge and awareness of available facilities and benefits. Opportunities include: reducing health, environmental and road congestion problems by shifting trips from car to active travel; improving accessibility; and reducing inequity for those too young or old to drive, and other people facing transport access difficulties.
• A wide range of options for addressing a problem or opportunity should be generated and assessed. A full range of options are outlined here. Active travel network design principles are presented: cohesion, directness, safety, comfort, and attractiveness. These assist in the identification of suitable improvement options. A network, and individual improvements, designed with such principles maximises the size of potential mode shifts to active travel.
• Active travel improvement options are assessed using the same approach used elsewhere in the Guidelines, namely: strategic alignment; and appraisal using cost-benefit analysis of monetised benefits and costs, complemented by non-monetised benefits and costs.
• Similar to the assessment of other transport modes, benefits consist of:
  • User benefits to active travellers (safety, travel time, private health benefits from physical activity, walking environment amenity benefits)
  • Any resource cost corrections required for unperceived user costs, and
  • External benefits from reductions in external cost to third parties (road decongestion, reduced emissions and improved air pollution, reduced health system costs).
• The guidance provides explanations of individual benefits, and steps, methodologies and parameter values for their estimation. Appropriate application of the rule-of-a-half to perceived user costs for new active travel trips (diverted from other modes, and newly generated) is also explained.
• The currently available approaches to active travel demand estimation are summarised: a) simpler estimation approaches (comparison studies, sketch planning, aggregate behaviour studies); b) demand elasticities and diversion rates; c) modelling. Also discussed are: influencing factors, active travel data, tools and other considerations. Active travel demand estimation is a fairly under-developed area, and would benefit significantly from further research and development.
• Indicative unit costs are provided for various active transport infrastructure elements.
• Measurement and monitoring of performance of the active travel system is an important final step in the planning and assessment process. It considers whether policies, plans and initiatives are successful in meeting transport system objectives. Performance indicators are required to enable ex-post evaluation and benefit management. The type and timing of monitoring are discussed.
• The guidance concludes with suggestions of areas requiring further active travel research.

The Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (the Act) is in place to eliminate discrimination against people with disability as far as possible, and to promote community acceptance of the principle that people with disability have the same fundamental rights as all members of the community. The Act provides that direct and indirect discrimination on the basis of disability is unlawful in a broad range of areas of public life, including and access to goods, services and facilities.

The Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport 2002 (Transport Standards) provide requirements for public transport operators and providers to make their services accessible and remove discrimination against people with disability. The Transport Standards took effect on 23 October 2002.

The Transport Standards apply to train, tram, bus and coach, ferry, taxi and aviation services and are designed to provide certainty to providers and operators of public transport services and infrastructure about their responsibilities under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992.

The National Walking and Cycling Participation Survey (NWCPS) provides insight into walking and cycling activity across Australia and is a successor to the National Cycling Participation Survey which was conducted biennially from 2011 to 2019.

An overview of active travel to schools programs across Australia and New Zealand, their key features and what makes them successful. Also includes a comparison of the number of children that use active travel to school from around the world.

PROGRAM FEATURES: 

DATE IMPLEMENTED: Not available

COST: Not available. Free for schools.

RESULTS OF EVALUATION: Not available

PROGRAM FEATURES: 

DATE IMPLEMENTED: Not available

COST: Not available

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

Ride Nation funds:

• The framework and set up for a bike donation day or connection with a partner that will accept and repurpose donated bikes to create the library.
• Access to the online instructor training course and the conduct of the practical session and assessment onsite at the school at a time convenient to the participants.
• Lesson plans and resources for the Ride Nation Schools bike education program, which consists of three levels – Skills, Confidence and Explore.
• Ongoing support for the school to keep providing bike education for all students.

Plus they:

• Facilitate the connection with community mentors to lead the donation drive and ensure the donated bikes are in good working order.

RESULTS OF EVALUATION: Not available

PROGRAM FEATURES: 

Ride Nation Schools is a learn-to-ride Bike Education Program delivered in schools Australia-wide. It is a fun and interactive learning experience that teaches young people to develop their riding skills and confidence – supporting kids in their independence and giving parents peace of mind.

DATE IMPLEMENTED: Not available

COST: Not available

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

There are three levels of bike education programs in schools:

Ride Nation - Skills (Playground): Recommended for grades 2-3, this 4–6-week program focuses on developing the essential bike control skills braking, balancing and riding. The skills learnt in this program will allow them to ride around in traffic free environments (school yard, park and around the block).

Ride Nation - Confidence (Pathways): Recommended for grades 3-5. Once grasping the essential bike control skills, participants are ready to develop their riding confidence. This 4-6-week program focuses on riding and situational awareness, providing students with the skills and competences to enable them to start riding on footpaths and shared pathway in low traffic environments. This program is ideal to start having students riding to and from school!

Ride Nation - Explore (Places): Recommended for grades 5-6. Looks at utilising all the skills learnt through previous programs and develop them in different cycling situations and explore their local area by developing road safety and situational awareness. The program consists of four weeks of practical skill development and learning and ends with two local community rides for children to understand what is in their community.

RESULTS OF EVALUATION: Not available

PROGRAM FEATURES: 

DATE IMPLEMENTED: Not available

COST: Not available

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

Suite of programs to help break down the barriers that prevent more students from staying active on their journey to school. Culminates in National Ride2School Day.

RESULTS OF EVALUATION: Not available

STREET NAME: Treatment area located between Alexandra Parade (north), Hoddle Street (east), Johnston Street (south) and Nicholson Street (west)

SUBURB: Fitzroy and Collingwood

MUNICIPALITY: City of Yarra, Melbourne

STATE & COUNTRY: Victoria, Australia

SPEED REDUCTION: From 40 km/h to 30 km/h

DATE IMPLEMENTED: January 2020 (trial start October 2018)

SCHEME INCLUDED: 

• Implementation of trial area (30km/h) and control area (40km/h)
• Replacement of speed limit signs with 30km/h signs
• Pavement marking
• 91 sites where speeds were recorded

COST: Not available

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

• Modest reductions in mean speed: average travel speed fell by 0.3km/h
• Reductions were more apparent at higher speeds where risk of severe injury or death to vulnerable users is more likely
• Unexpected speed reductions in adjacent control sites
• “Treatment effect” showed 11% reduction of likelihood of a vehicle travelling above 40km/h in treatment area and 25% reduction above 50km/h
• 4% reduction in risk of severe injury for pedestrians
• Increase of people supporting the 30km/h area from 42.7% to 50.3% within the trial area

Observations of pedestrian and cyclist activity were undertaken at a limited number of locations within the treatment and non-treatment areas during three days before the trial implementation and three days at 12 months into the trial. The small number of locations and survey days limits the ability for general conclusions. The data shows a 12.7% drop in pedestrian activity (largely driven by a single site) and a 27.8% increase in cycling activity.

LESSONS LEARNED:

For some members of the community there was confusion about how the pedestrian priority at the crossings worked, how to determine when to enter and how to exit the roundabout.

There are feelings of frustration caused by inconvenience to the driving experience which are perceived to be caused by the Wombat Crossings.

Intercept surveys at the Wombat Crossings found people using them thought they created a more convenient walking experience however there was still concern about understanding how the crossings worked and the expectations of people walking and people driving.

Information about the benefits of the crossings and the expectations of all road users would assist the community to understand the role they play in creating a pedestrian priority city centre.

The CWANZ Design Innovations Working Group undertook a review of contraflow cycling lanes in quiet streets. This report presents the evidence, technical advice, and implementation and design. Examples of streets with contraflow cycling lanes in Australia and New Zealand are given.

LOCATION:

Cavill Avenue/Orchid Avenue, Surfers Paradise
Hedges Avenue/Old Burleigh Road, Mermaid Beach
Garfield Terrace/Northcliffe Terrace, Surfers Paradise
Jefferson Lane, Palm Beach
James Street, Burleigh Heads
Connor Street, Burleigh Heads
Pacific Parade, Tugun
Griffith Street, Coolangatta
Thomas Drive, Chervon Island
Cloyne Road, Southport
Marshall Lane, Southport
Tedder Avenue, Main Road
Broadbeach area – Queensland Avenue, Albert Avenue, Old Burleigh Road, Victoria Avenue, Surf Parade and Charles Avenue

SPEED REDUCTION: Various – some 50 km/h to 40km/h, 50km/h to 30km/h and 40km/h to 30km/h

MUNICIPALITY: City of Gold Coast

STATE & COUNTRY: Queensland, Australia

SCHEME INCLUDED: 

• Signs and lines
• Raised crossings and wombats
• Contraflow bicycle lanes
• Placemaking

DATE IMPLEMENTED: Various

COST: Noted as low-cost initiative in the Gold Coast Road Safety Plan 2021-2026
Speed reviews done internally (although Department of Transport and Main Roads grants available for these speed reviews) and minimal operational budget required for signs and linemarking and threshold treatments if required.

ADDITIONAL INFO: General support and now going back to some 50km/h to 40km/h zones and undertaking further reviews to reduce to 30km/h

LESSONS LEARNED:

• Lesson around now going straight to 30km/h, rather than 50km/h to 40km/h and then second review 40km/h to 30km/h (this has come from taking a conservative approach initially and now being more comfortable with going straight to 30km/h following the speed limit review process documented in MUTCD Part 4.
• Tools now support 30km/h (MUTCD Part 4)
• Importance of looking at a broader area, get the data and use engineering knowhow to develop consistent precinct wide approach for speed limits
• Queensland Police Service supportive of 30km/h (note they have had challenges enforcing loud cars in café precinct but can enforce speed breach)
• Importance of working with community and Councillors, and that when the speed reduction requests come via their offices, they are more supportive/less concerned
• Value of placemaking project supporting traffic speed changes in centre projects

The CWANZ Design Innovations Working Group undertook a review of the use of banana deflection rails (banana bars) in Australia. In undertaking this review, they considered the Traffic and Road Use Management Volume1–Guide to Traffic Management Part 6: Intersections, Interchanges and Crossings (2020) prepared by the Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR), and Municipal Infrastructure Standards (MIS) 05 – Active Travel Facilities Design, prepared by Transport Canberra City Services (TCCS).

Research has repeatedly shown that the more people walking or riding a bike, the safer it is for everyone. Reducing the number of cars and speed limits in built-up areas reduces the risk of death or injury to our most vulnerable road users. Growth in cycling is best achieved through separated cycle lanes and reduced speed limits.

We can save millions of dollars in reduced health and congestion costs by increasing the number of people that walk or ride a bike for every day trips and reducing the number of people that drive.

 Benefits of lower speed limits in high activity areas and local access streets. What happens when vehicles travel more slowly in areas with lots of pedestrians and bike riders?

Physical inactivity is one of the top 10 risk factors contributing to disease in Australia, contributing to 2.5% of the total burden of disease and is the 5th highest behavioural risk factor, behind tobacco use, diet, alcohol and illicit drug use.

Congestion costs, transport costs and healthcare costs of physical inactivity.

When bike riding is easy, safe and more convenient than other transport options, more people will ride. Increasing physical activity improves health, saves costs and takes the
pressure off other forms of transport, benefitting the entire community.

Walking is for everyone, regardless of age and ability. Walkers include people on foot, people with crutches, people with canes, people in wheelchairs, and people in mobility scooters. Evidence consistently shows that by providing pedestrian-friendly neighbourhoods, quality public spaces, a mix of land uses, and housing densities, more people will walk, giving health, environmental, transport and community benefits.

Cyclists are vulnerable road users and the most severe injury outcomes for on-road cyclists are from collisions involving a motor vehicle. Research undertaken in this thesis aimed to identify contributing factors in unsafe cyclist-driver events to inform efforts to reduce the incidence of cyclist-driver crashes and cyclist injury severity outcomes. The research was conducted in three stages, primarily in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia and is presented as a thesis by publication. The Safe System Framework was used as the theoretical model for the research and the research stages included i) an observational study using a covertly positioned video camera at signalised intersections across metropolitan Melbourne; ii) a naturalistic cycling study using a compact video camera attached to commuter cyclists’ helmets which recorded their trips to and from work; and, iii) a national online survey of drivers and cyclists of their cycling-related behaviours, knowledge and attitudes. The role of driver behaviour in cyclist-driver crashes and near-crash events was identified and was the most significant finding of this doctoral research. In-depth analysis of near-collision events revealed that drivers’ behaviour immediately prior to an event contributed to the majority of unsafe interactions between cyclists and drivers. The most frequent driver behaviour associated with near-collision events was turning left across a cyclists’ path. Three important components of this behaviour were: indicating (signalling) before turning, driver head checks before turning left and clearance distance when overtaking cyclists. These three behavioural components were investigated further, with a particular focus on the influence of cycling-related knowledge and attitudes. Findings supported the concept of safety in numbers which proposes a positive association between cycling participation and cyclist safety. A significant finding was that drivers who were also cyclists (driver-cyclists) were more likely than drivers who were not cyclists to report safe driving behaviours. Driver-cyclists also reported more positive attitudes towards cyclists and good knowledge of road rules for cycling facilities. Cyclist behaviour had also been identified as a potential crash risk factor, particularly red light running behaviour. Encouragingly, however, only a small proportion of observed cyclist infringed and predictive factors included direction of travel (left turn) and gender (male). The presence of other road users (cross traffic and in the same direction) had a deterrent effect. Last, the presence of cycling facilities was associated with cyclist-driver interactions. Cyclist and driver behaviour at two cycling facilities at intersections (bike boxes and continuous bike lane) was measured. Despite the high level of knowledge of bike boxes, many drivers were non-compliant at this type of facility. In contrast, both cyclists and drivers were more likely to be compliant at the facility that provided a continuous parallel bike lane compared with the bike box facility. Findings of this research provide new insights into the influence of behavioural factors and presence of cycling facilities on cyclist safety. Greater cyclist-related driver education and training are essential to improve cyclist safety. It is anticipated that the findings from this research will inform programs and initiatives that will improve the safety of on-road cyclists.

Given the lack of participation data and the underreporting of cyclist injury crashes, it is difficult to determine the magnitude of cyclist road trauma with any precision. This lack of data highlights the neglect in Australia of cyclist-focused monitoring that is essential to understanding injury rates and factors that contribute to cyclist crashes. The Amy Gillett Foundation (AGF) has developed a systematic policy development approach that identifies two issues: safe overtaking distances and cyclist-open vehicle door crashes, explored in this paper.

This study investigated the behavioural, attitudinal and traffic factors contributing to red light infringement by Australian cyclists using a national online survey. The survey was conducted from February to May 2010. In total, 2061 cyclists completed the survey and 37.3% reported that they had ridden through a signalised intersection during the red light phase. The main predictive characteristics for infringement were: gender with males more likely to offend than females (OR: 1.54, CI: 1.22–1.94); age with older cyclists less likely to infringe compared to younger cyclists 18–29 years (30–49 yrs: OR: 0.71, CI: 0.52–0.96; 50+ yrs: OR: 0.51, CI: 0.35–0.74), and; crash involvement with cyclists more likely to infringe at red lights if they had not previously been involved in a bicycle–vehicle crash while riding (OR: 1.35; CI: 1.10–1.65). The main reasons given for red light infringement were: to turn left (32.0%); because the inductive loop detector did not detect their bike (24.2%); when there was no other road users present (16.6%); at a pedestrian crossing (10.7%); and ‘Other’ (16.5%). A multinomial logistic regression model was constructed to examine the associations between cyclist characteristics and reasons for infringement. Findings suggest that some cyclists are motivated to infringe by their perception that their behaviour is safe and that infrastructure factors were associated with infringement. Ways to manage this, potentially risky, behaviour including behaviour programmes, more cyclist-inclusive infrastructure and enforcement are discussed.

The growing interest in cycling in Australia and New Zealand, as in other parts of the world, is underpinned by three major concerns: health and fitness, congestion and liveability, pollution and climate change.

Australasian researchers, practitioners, policy makers and community members are engaged in a global discussion on the role of cycling in addressing these concerns. Contributors to (this) book report on and extend this discussion as they explore the insights generated locally and internationally on the past, present and future of cycling.

The focus of the first half of the book is largely on the current engagement with cycling, challenges faced by existing and would-be cyclists and the issues cycling might address. The second half of the book is concerned with strategies and processes of change. Contributors working from different ontological positions reflect on changing socio-spatial relations to enable the broadest possible participation in cycling.

Cycle Safe Communities provides community groups, councils and organisations access to cycle safety campaign resources.

Developed by the Amy Gillett Foundation, Cycle Safe Communities enables consistent messaging about bike rider safety to be adopted and embedded in the Australian community. Everyone has the right to ride safely for work and play. A safer future is possible!

Cycle Aware is an Australia wide research project looking at how drivers learn to interact with cyclists. It focuses on the education and training received by people in the early stages of driving such as pre-learner, learner and probationary drivers. The ultimate aim of the project is to foster safer driver-cyclist interactions.

Sharing Roads Safely is a training course developed suitable for heavy vehicle drivers to increase safe interactions with vulnerable road users, specifically motorbike riders, cyclists and pedestrians.

Based on international best practice, the course was developed in consultation with the government, the heavy vehicle industry and vulnerable road user groups for drivers in Australia.

Sharing Roads Safely is a recognised training course and meets compliance requirements for vulnerable road user awareness training.

• Designed for Australian drivers
• Meets government project contract requirements for driver training

NB: currently not available

This research provides a number of mathematical formulas for predicting the quality of the walking environment from the perspective of the user using operational and physical variables. The formulas were derived by combining the perception data gathered from participants in the community street reviews with measurements of the walking environment.

The two main areas that were researched to enable the derivation of formulas were:

• when walking along the road (path length)
• when crossing the road (road crossing).

This research describes the process for obtaining the data and deriving the formulas, and recommends the formulas most suitable for practitioner use.

This report seeks to provide a per-kilometre value for the health benefits of active transport modes (such as walking and cycling) that is compatible with the Land Transport New Zealand Economic Evaluation Manual Volume 2 (EEM2). The first two sections of the report begin by explaining the scope of the project and the background. Section 3 investigates the evidence of the connection between physical activity and health outcomes. Section 4 clarifies the role of active transport modes as physical activity, and reports the New Zealand-specific data about active transport mode engagement. Section 5 gives a brief comparative summary of the literature review of cost-benefit analyses and valuation techniques used overseas to value the health benefits of active modes. This report uses population attributable fractions (PAF) to estimate the annual burden of mortality and morbidity costs per inactive adult. Annual estimates of the costs of inactivity are applied to the New Zealand adult population using a weighted sum to establish a per-kilometre value for each mode. The valuation presented in this report is limited by a poverty of data, but the final values are considered to be a reasonable estimate of the health benefits of active modes. While further research is recommended to obtain more precise estimates of the costs of inactivity in New Zealand, it is considered that the values presented in this report are a sound interim estimate for inclusion in the EEM2.

The links provide different guides to developing programme/project logic models.

Towns and cities everywhere are facing the challenge of keeping communities healthy and happy. Healthy Streets® offers clients around the world an evidence-based approach to creating fairer, sustainable and attractive urban spaces.

The National Walking and Cycling Participation Survey (NWCPS) provides insight into walking and cycling activity across Australia and is a successor to the National Cycling Participation Survey which was conducted biennially from 2011 to 2019.

The National Cycling Participation Survey (NCPS) is a standardised survey that has been repeated biennially since March/April 2011, with minor changes to the survey structure between 2011 and 2013. The NCPS provides data on cycling participation at a national level and allows for estimates of participation for each state and territory, and the capital cities and non-capital areas within each state and territory.

The Pedestrian Facility Selection Tool is designed to help Australian and New Zealand practitioners select the most appropriate type of pedestrian crossing based on walkability, safety and economic outcomes.