Medidas para a promoção da bicicleta em São Paulo: uma análise Multicritério e Multiatores

Autores

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14295/transportes.v29i1.2316

Palavras-chave:

Promoção da bicicleta, MAMCA, São Paulo, Análise multicritério e multiatores

Resumo

Esse estudo, cujo objetivo é identificar barreiras e incentivos para o uso da bicicleta na cidade de São Paulo, a partir da consulta a stakeholders e da adaptação de um método de análise multicritério e multiatores (MAMCA), envolveu planejadores e representantes de organizações não governamentais. Os resultados, obtidos por meio de workshops e consultas, mostraram que os atores envolvidos não possuíam leituras da realidade tão distintas entre si, embora o grupo de influenciadores tenha se mostrado mais crítico que o de planejadores. A infraestrutura cicloviária destacou-se como essencial para atrair ciclistas. A ausência de uma cultura da bicicleta também recebeu atenção. Contudo, mais significativo foi o fato de que o grupo de planejadores ignorou a importância da segurança de trânsito para o uso da bicicleta. Finalmente, a avaliação de cenários demonstrou que, para ambos os grupos, as medidas adotadas por São Paulo são pouco efetivas quando comparadas com outros casos.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Biografia do Autor

Hellem de Freitas Miranda, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo – Brasil

Departamento de Engenharia de Transportes

Antônio Nélson Rodrigues da Silva, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo – Brasil

Departamento de Engenharia de Transportes

Karst T. Geurs, University of Twente, Enschede – Países Baixos

Faculty of Engineering Technology

Anna Beatriz Grigolon, University of Twente, Enschede – Países Baixos

Faculty of Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation

Referências

Aldred, R.; T. Watson; R. Lovelace e J. Woodcock (2019) Barriers to investing in cycling: Stakeholder views from England. Transportation Research Part A, v. 128, p. 149 1–159. DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2017.11.003.

Assunçao-Denis, M. e R. Tomalty (2018) Increasing cycling for transportation in Canadian communities: Understanding what works. Transportation Research Part A, v. 123, p. 288–304. DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2018.11.010.

Basu, S. e V. Vasudevan (2013) Effect of bicycle friendly roadway infrastructure on bicycling activities in urban India. Proce-dia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, v. 104, p. 1139–1148. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.11.210.

Baudry, G. e T. Vallée (2018) Assessing the stakeholder support for different biofuel options in France by 2030 using the range-based Multi actor Multi Criteria Analysis framework. In C. Macharis & G. Baudry (Eds.), Decision-making for sus-tainable transport and mobility, p. 2–27. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Inc.

Benedini, D. J.; P. S. Lavieri e O. Strambi (2019) Understanding the use of private and shared bicycles in large emerging cities: The case of São Paulo, Brazil. Case Studies on Transport Policy. v. 8, n. 2, p. 564–575. DOI: 10.1016/j.cstp.2019.11.009.

Bertolini, L. (2017). Planning the mobile metropolis. Transport for people, places and the planet. Palgrave, Macmillan Publishers Limited, London.

Biernat, E.; S. Buchholtz e P. Bartkiewicz (2018) Motivations and barriers to bicycle commuting: Lessons from Poland. Trans-portation Research Part F, v. 55, p. 492–502. DOI: 10.1016/j.trf.2018.03.024.

Bruhèze, A. A. A. e F. C. A. Veraart (1999) Fietsverkeer in praktijk en beleid in de twintigste eeuw: overeenkomsten en verschillen in fietsgebruik in Amsterdam, Eindhoven, Enschede, Zuidoost-Limburg, Antwerpen, Manchester, Kopenhagen, Hannover en Basel. Ministerie van Verkeer en Waterstaat, Rijkswaterstaat, Hoofdkantoor van de Waterstaat, Den Haag.

Chen, M.; Y. Gong; D. Lu e C. Ye (2019) Build a people-oriented urbanization: China’s new-type urbanization dream and Anhui model. Land Use Policy, v. 80, p. 1–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.09.031.

Cuppen, E.; S. Breukers; M. Hisschemöller e E. Bergsma (2010) Q methodology to select participants for a stakeholder dia-logue on energy options from biomass in the Netherlands. Ecological Economics, v. 69, n. 3, p. 579–591. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.09.005.

Dean, M. e R. Hickman (2018) Comparing Cost-Benefit Analysis and Multi Actor Multi Criteria Analysis: the case of Blackpool and the South Fylde Line. In Macharis, C. e G. Baudry (Eds.), Decision-making for sustainable transport and mobility, p. 2–27. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Inc.

Félix, R.; F. Moura e K. J. Clifton (2019) Maturing urban cycling: Comparing barriers and motivators to bicycle of cyclists and non-cyclists in Lisbon, Portugal. Journal of Transport & Health, v. 15, 100628. DOI: 10.1016/j.jth.2019.100628.

Freeman, R. E. e J. A. McVea (2001) Stakeholder approach to strategic management. Darden Business School Working Paper, n. 01–02. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.263511.

Harms, L.; L. Bertolini e M. te Brömmelstroet (2016) Performance of municipal cycling policies in medium-sized cities in the Netherlands since 2000. Transport Reviews, v. 36, n. 1, 134–162. DOI: 10.1080/01441647.2015.1059380.

Irlam, J. H. e M. Zuidgeest (2018) Barriers to cycling mobility in a low-income community in Cape Town: A Best-Worst Scaling approach. Case Studies on Transport Policy, v. 6, n. 4, p. 815–823. DOI: 10.1016/j.cstp.2018.10.003.

Iwińska, K.; M. Blicharska; L. Pierotti; M. Tainio e A. Nazelle (2018) Cycling in Warsaw, Poland – Perceived enablers and bar-riers according to cyclists and non-cyclists. Transportation Research Part A - Policy Pract, v. 113, p. 291–301. DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2018.04.014.

ITDP (2015) Políticas de mobilidade por bicicleta e rede cicloviária da cidade de São Paulo: análise e recomendações. Instituto de Políticas de Transporte & Desenvolvimento. Disponível em: <http://itdpbrasil.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Relatorio-CIclovias-SP.pdf>. (Acesso em: 06/06/2019).

Jones, T. e L. N. Azevedo (2013) Economic, social and cultural transformation and the role of the bicycle in Brazil. Journal of Transport Geography, v. 30, p. 208–219. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.02.005.

Lemos, L.; M. K. Harkot; P. F. Santoro e I. B. Ramos (2017) Mulheres, por que não pedalam? Por que há menos mulheres do que homens usando bicicleta em São Paulo, Brasil? Revista Transporte y Territorio, v. 16, p. 68–98. ISSN 1852-7175.

Lemos, L.e H. Wicher Neto (2014) Cycling infrastructure in São Paulo: Impacts of a leisure-oriented model. In: Spinoffs of Mobility: Technology, Risks & Innovation - 12th Annual Conference of the International Association for the History of Transport, Traffic and Mobility (T²M), Filadélfia. Spinoffs of Mobility: Technology, Risks & Innovation.

Li, H.; H. Ding; G. Ren e C. Xu (2018) Effects of the London cycle superhighways on the usage of the London cycle hire. Trans-portation Research, v. 111, p. 304–315. DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2018.03.020.

London (2018) Mayor's Transport Strategy. Greater London Authority, London, UK.

Louw, E. e K. Maat (1999) Enschede: measures in a package. Built Environment, Travel Reduction: Policy into Practice, v. 25, p. 118–128.

Lyons, G. e C. Davidson (2016) Guidance for transport planning and policymaking in the face of an uncertain future. Trans-portation Research, v. 88, p. 104–116. DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2016.03.012.

Macharis, C.; L. Turcksin e K. Lebeau (2012) Multi actor multi criteria analysis (MAMCA) as a tool to support sustainable decisions: state of use. Decision Support Systems, v. 54, n. 1, p. 610–620. DOI: 10.1016/j.dss.2012.08.008.

Macharis, C. e G. Baudry (2018) The Multi Actor Multi Criteria Analysis framework. In Macharis, C. e G. Baudry (Eds.), Deci-sion-making for sustainable transport and mobility, p. 2–27. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Inc.

Macharis, C.; K. de Brucker e K. van Raemdonck (2018) When to use Multi Actor Multi Criteria Analysis or other evaluation methods? In Macharis, C. e G. Baudry (Eds.), Decision-making for sustainable transport and mobility, p. 28–47. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Inc.

Marshall, W. E. e N. F. Ferenchak (2019) Why cities with high bicycling rates are safer for all road users. Journal of Transport & Health, v. 13, 100539. DOI: 10.1016/j.jth.2019.03.004.

Martens, K. (2007) Promoting bike-and-ride: The Dutch experience. Transportation Research Part A, v. 41, n. 4, p. 326–338. DOI:10.1016/j.tra.2006.09.010.

Metrô (2019) Pesquisa Origem Destino 2017. Relatório Técnico, Companhia do Metropolitano de São Paulo, São Paulo.

Nkurunziza, A.; M. Zuidgeest; M. Brussel e M. van Maarseveen (2012) Examining the potential for modal change: Motivators and barriers for bicycle commuting in Dar-es-Salaam. Transport Policy, v. 24, p. 249–259. DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2012.09.002.

Pucher, J. e R. Buehler (2008) Making cycling irresistible: Lessons from the Netherlands, Denmark and Germany. Transport Reviews, v. 28, n. 4, p. 495–528. DOI: 10.1080/01441640701806612.

Pucher, J.; J. Dill e S. Handy (2010) Infrastructure, programs, and policies to increase bicycling: An international review. Pre-ventive Medicine, v. 50, p. S106–S125. DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.07.028.

Rietveld, P. e V. Daniel (2004) Determinants of bicycle use: do municipal policies matter? Transportation Research, v. 38, i. 7, p. 531–550. DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2004.05.003.

Roukouni, A.; C. Macharis e S. Basbas (2018) Evaluation of value capture financing schemes for urban transportation infra-structure with the aid of Multi Actor Multi Criteria Analysis focusing on a Greek city. In Macharis, C. e G. Baudry (Eds.), Decision-making for sustainable transport and mobility, p. 2–27. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Inc.

São Paulo (2020) Infosiga, Base de dados. Governo do Estado de São Paulo, São Paulo. Disponível em: <http://www.respeitoavida.sp.gov.br/>. (Acesso em: 02/02/2020).

São Paulo (2016) Decreto municipal nº 56.834, de 24 de fevereiro de 2016. Institui o Plano Municipal de Mobilidade Urbana de São Paulo – PlanMob/SP 2015, Município de São Paulo.

Savan, B.; E. Cohlmeyer e T. Ledsham (2017) Integrated strategies to accelerate the adoption of cycling for transportation. Transportation Research A, v. 46, p. 236–249. DOI: 10.1016/j.trf.2017.03.002.

Sharifi, M. A.; L. Boerboom; K. B. Shamsudin e L. Veeramuthu (2006) Spatial multiple criteria decision analysis in integrated planning for public transport and land use development study in Klang Valley, Malaysia. ISPRS Technical Commission II Symposium, Vienna, p. 12–14.

Silva. A.; I. Pinto; D. Ribeiro e J. Delgado (2014) Multicriteria analysis for evaluation of bike lane routes integrated to public transportation. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, v. 162, p. 388–397. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.220.

Silva, L. M. e A. N. Rodrigues da Silva (2009) Planejamento estratégico de uma experiência pedagógica inovadora. Pesquisa e Tecnologia Minerva, v. 6, n. 1, p. 99–106.

Sousa, A. A.; S. Sanches e M. A. G. Ferreira (2014) Perception of barriers for the use of bicycles. Procedia - Social and Behavior-al Sciences, v. 160, p. 304–313. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.142.

Taleai, M.; A. Sharifi; R. Sliuzas e M. Mesgari (2007) Evaluating the compatibility of multi-functional and intensive urban land uses. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, v. 9, n. 4, p. 375–391. DOI: 10.1016/j.jag.2006.12.002.

Tennøy, A.; L. Hansson; E. Lissandrello e P. Næss (2015) How planners’ use and non-use of expert knowledge affect the goal achievement potential of plans: experiences from strategic land-use and transport planning processes in three Scandi-navian cities. Progress in Planning, v. 109, p. 1–32. DOI: 10.1016/j.progress.2015.05.002.

Turcksin, L.; C. Macharis; K. Lebeau; F. Boureima; J. van Mierlo; S. Bram; J. de Ruyck; L. Mertens; J. Jossart; L. Gorissen e L. Pelkmans (2011) A multi-actor multi-criteria framework to assess the stakeholder support for different biofuel options: The case of Belgium. Energy Policy, v. 39, n. 1, p. 200–214. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.09.033.

Van Goeverden, K.; T. S. Nielsen; H. Harder e R. van Nes (2015) Interventions in bicycle infrastructure, lessons from Dutch and Danish cases. Transportation Research Procedia, v. 10, p. 403–412. DOI: 10.1016/j.trpro.2015.09.090.

Van Lier, T.; D. Meers; H. B. Rai e C. Macharis (2018) Evaluating innovative solutions for sustainable city logistics: an en-hanced understanding of stakeholders perceptions. In Macharis, C. e G. Baudry (Eds.), Decision-making for sustainable transport and mobility, p. 2–27. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Inc.

Withanaarachchi, J. e S. Setunge (2014) Decision making on transport network planning and the impact on community, economy and the environment. Procedia Economics and Finance, v. 18, p. 882–891. DOI: 10.1016/S2212-5671(14)01014-4.

Downloads

Publicado

2021-04-30

Como Citar

Miranda, H. de F. ., Rodrigues da Silva, A. N. ., Geurs, K. T. ., & Grigolon, A. B. . (2021). Medidas para a promoção da bicicleta em São Paulo: uma análise Multicritério e Multiatores. TRANSPORTES, 29(1), 194–210. https://doi.org/10.14295/transportes.v29i1.2316

Edição

Seção

Artigos