Socio-economic env. |
population density (1000 pers./) |
0.33 |
0.65 |
0.92 |
|
Administrative env. |
cycling strongly associated with municipality (yes = 1/no = 0) |
0 |
0.11 |
0.31 |
|
need for ATM before Covid-19 (high = 1/low = 0) |
1 |
0.90 |
0.30 |
|
quality of cycling infrstr. before Covid-19 (good = 1/poor = 0) |
0 |
0.27 |
0.45 |
|
Political env. |
mobility transition is priority (yes = 1/no = 0) |
1 |
0.56 |
0.50 |
|
infl. of political parties on ATM decision-making (high = 1/low = 0) |
1 |
0.80 |
0.40 |
|
political parties in favour of ATM (yes = 1/no = 0) |
1 |
0.86 |
0.35 |
|
infl. of interest groups on ATM decision-making (high = 1/low = 0) |
1 |
0.90 |
0.30 |
|
interest groups in favour of ATM (yes = 1/no = 0) |
1 |
0.93 |
0.25 |
|
Temporary measures |
benefits of temporary ATMs overestimated (yes = 1/no = 0) |
0 |
0.22 |
0.42 |
|
temporary ATMs made permanent (yes = 1/no = 0) |
0 |
0.18 |
0.39 |
|
temp. cycling infrastructure is resource intensive (yes = 1/no = 0) |
0 |
0.21 |
0.41 |
|
Covid-19 pandemic |
Covid-19 increased need for cycling infrstr. (yes = 1/no = 0) |
0 |
0.26 |
0.44 |
|
Covid-19 opened window of opp. for ATM (yes = 1/no = 0) |
0 |
0.44 |
0.50 |