A push for public health: the effect of e-bikes on physical activity levels

Abstract

BackgroundCycling is considered to have a positive effect on public health through increased physical activity. In Norway, the e-bike is seen as a way of getting more people to cycle. However, the motorized assistance of an e-bike potentially eliminates any physical activity associated with its use. It is possible that the assumed health effect of increased cycling is “erased” through a reduction in other physical activities (a substitution effect). In this paper we study the public health effects of e-bikes using a combined cross-sectional and quasi-experimental design. First, we explore the existence of potentially hedonistic values in relation to interest in acquiring an e-bike and, second, we conduct an intervention study of physical activity pre- and post-purchase.MethodsA sample of 340 people responded to a questionnaire before buying an e-bike and follow-up 4 weeks later, when 45 had bought one. A further 28 (mainly physically inactive) were recruited through a Norwegian NGO. For a comparison group, 1995 people were recruited through the Falck National Register of Bicycle Owners. All respondents were asked about the intensity of their cycling, (kilometres cycled in the previous week), walking and physical activity in addition to cycling as means of transport (days and hours).ResultsA structural equation model showed that hedonistic life values, and general physical activity, were predictive of interest in buying an e-bike. However people who already cycled a lot showed less interest. The trial showed that increased cycling – whether as a mean of transport or exercise –was related to higher levels of total physical activity in both groups compared to a comparison group (one-way ANOVA).ConclusionsOur findings indicate that in the Norwegian cycle population there is no substantial substitution effect of physical activity with the introduction of an e-bike. The appeal of the e-bike is strongest among those with little existing interest in, or levels of, physical activity. The net effect of the e-bike therefore seems positive from a public health perspective.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-017-4817-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The impact of e-cycling on travel behaviour: A scoping review

“…However, e-bikes appear to be used more frequently as a utilitarian mode of transport rather than for a leisure activity. Studies with samples aged ≤55years reported the e-bike being used primarily for commuting ( Dill and Rose, 2012 ; Winslott Hiselius and Svensson, 2017 ; MacArthur et al, 2014 ; Plazier et al, 2017a ; Popovich et al, 2014 ; Schleinitz et al, 2014 ; Cappelle et al, 2003 ; Kairos, 2010 ; MacArthur et al, 2018 ; Lobben et al, 2019 ; Behrendt, 2018 ; Sundfør and Fyhri, 2017 ) whilst older adults used the e-bike for shopping and visiting friends but rarely for commuting. In addition, older adults used the e-bike for recreational purposes.…”

Public employees in South-Western Norway using an e-bike or a regular bike for commuting – A cross-sectional comparison on sociodemographic factors, commuting frequency and commuting distance

“…On the other hand, survey data on early adopters in Australia, reported e-bike owners to have lower education and income, yet higher age, than the population in general (Wolf and Seebauer, 2014). Other studies recruiting convenience samples from e-bike retailers (Hiselius and Svenssona, 2014; Sundfør and Fyhri, 2017), found the appeal to e-bikes to be stronger among those with little interest in, and low levels of PA in general, and also differing motivation for buying an e-bike between the younger and the elderly.…”

Assessment of Bicycle Use Among Residents in Affordable Housing in New York City

“…Inadequate physical activity is associated with an increased risk of obesity with consequences including development of many chronic diseases leading to significant morbidity, premature mortality and economic loss [1][2][3][4][5]. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommend that adults meet the goal of 150 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic activity or 75 minutes of vigorous aerobic activity per week [6].…”

“…However, when measured by accelerometers, these self-reported statistics were grossly over-estimated, with less than 5% of U.S. adults meeting the CDC recommendations in 2008 and 29% of New Yorkers meeting the recommendations in 2011 [9][10][11]. While vigorous physical activity achieves the highest level of fitness, the greatest health effects are seen in those individuals who progress from being sedentary to completing moderate physical activity regularly [5].…”

“…Active transportation, such as bicycling or walking to a destination, can contribute to total physical activity levels and has been inversely correlated with body mass index (BMI) [5,[24][25][26]. A cross-sectional study reported large differences between nations in their use of active transportation and obesity rates.…”