An economic impact study of bicycling in Arizona: out-of-state bicycle tourists and exports

              The Ec
Bicy
ADOT MPD Task Assignment
Work Plan
Prepared by:
Prepared for:
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
March 12, 2012, Rev. April 10, 2012
conomic Impact
ycling in Arizona
64-12
Contract # ADOT11-013181
, Economic &
EPRPolicy Resources, Inc.
Economists, Policyand FinancialAnalysts
t of
a
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
1 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
Table of Contents
1. PROJECT BACKGROUND AND NEED .......................................................................... 2
2. STUDY OBJECTIVES ......................................................................................................... 3
3. PROJECT TEAM.................................................................................................................. 4
4. TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE........................................................................... 6
5. PROJECT SCHEDULE........................................................................................................... 7
6.WORK TASKS ......................................................................................................................... 9
Project Approach to Work Tasks................................................................................................ 9
Work Task 1: Initial Work Plan Refinements........................................................................... 11
Work Task 2: Literature and Data Source Review and Summary ............................................ 12
Work Task 3: Refinement of Methodology .............................................................................. 13
Work Task 4: Data Collection and Analysis............................................................................. 14
Work Task 5: Draft Final Report .............................................................................................. 17
Work Task 6: Final Report & Executive Summary.................................................................. 18
Presentation and documentation of Study Results .................................................................. 18
FIGURE 1. PROJECT ORGANIZATION CHART ..................................................................... 5
FIGURE 2. WORK PLAN SCHEDULE........................................................................................ 8
TABLE 1. PROJECT TEAM CONTACT INFORMATION ....................................................... 6
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
2 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
1. Project Background and Need
Arizona has long been known as a great place to live, work, visit, and recreate. Arizonans enjoy
a wide range of climates, topography, and natural beauty. ADOT recognizes its role, in partner
with other state, regional, and city agencies, as a driver of the state’s economy. For example,
ADOT’s website identifies its role in Arizona’s economy, as summarized below.
“We [ADOT] continue to examine diverse, integrated transportation options for moving people
and goods to create jobs and deliver economic and quality-of-life benefits for Arizona residents
and businesses. ADOT’s role is to assist policymakers by providing objective information that
helps them decide the best solutions to connect communities across Arizona with the full range of
resources available.”
In addition to building highways that facilitate the transport of goods and services, ADOT is a
strong supporter of tourism and recreation. The Arizona State Transportation Board, according to the
Arizona State Transportation Board Policies revised in January of 2011, is committed to:
“A transportation system that promotes Arizona’s tourism and economic well-being, and serves
the needs of its population and visitors. . . Based on cooperatively developed indicators for each
transportation mode, employ performance-based standards to monitor, plan and select projects
to improve the transportation system performance and integrate a broader range of objectives
such as environmental concerns, quality of life issues and economic competitiveness”
Also, for over 85 years ADOT has published Arizona Highways Magazine, an award-winning
publication that provides travel and tourism information to residents and tourists alike. The
Arizona Scenic Roads Section dedicates staff and resources to fund, designate, inventory and
maintain scenic roads and byways in Arizona.
The ADOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Program has also taken significant steps to support tourism
and economic development. Many of the completed activities were recommendations of the
2003 ADOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. Recent activities include:
 ADOT publishes the Cycle Arizona, Bicycle User Map – Your Guide to Cycling in
Arizona. The map is distributed to individuals all across the country who desire to visit and
cycle in Arizona.
 ADOT’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Program website (azbikeped.org) includes a section on
Bicycle Touring and Recreation.
 The ADOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Program has been recognized as a Bicycle Friendly
State by the League of American Bicyclists. Arizona is one of only 10 states designated by
the League as a “Bicycle Friendly State.”
 In 2011, the League of American Bicyclists (LAB) ranked Arizona number 16 in the nation
for bicycling. The LAB notes that “Arizona plays host to many great recreational and
encouragement events. El Tour de Tucson and the Great Arizona Bicycle Adventure, a
multi-day ride that starts in Northern Arizona and terminates at the Mexico border, are
must-do events for cycling enthusiasts from around the world.” Arizona is home to eight of
the League’s “Bicycle Friendly Communities” including Scottsdale and Tucson (Gold
level), Flagstaff and Tempe (Silver level), and Chandler, Gilbert, Mesa, Sedona (Bronze
level). Only four other states have more designated cities than Arizona.
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
3 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
While the specific economic benefits of bicycling in Arizona are not well known, other studies
have evaluated the economic impact of related outdoor industries. A study recently completed by
the Access Fund evaluated the economic impact of outdoor recreation in Arizona and found
significant economic benefits.
This study, the Economic Impacts of Bicycling in Arizona, will examine the specific benefits of
bicycling in Arizona.
2. Study Objectives
The purpose of this study is to assess certain key segments of the economic impacts of bicycling
in Arizona. The study emphasis will be placed on developing an objective and defensible model
for determining direct, indirect, and induced economic impact, in terms of annual costs and
benefits (in dollars) of:
A. The bicycle industry (manufacturing, sales, and service), as measured by revenue and
employment, and
B. Bicycle tourism and visitor spending associated with events that include organized
tours, races, and charity rides.
The results will be used to help educate decision makers, state and local governments, the
business community, planners, advocates, and other stakeholders; and may suggest policy
changes and other actions that should be considered to further the economic and other benefits of
this non-motorized mode of transportation.
Effective planning for public- and private-sector projects and programs, such as ADOT’s Bicycle
and Pedestrian Program, requires a systematic analysis of the economic impacts of this program
on Arizona and its sub-state regions. Furthermore, a systematic analysis provides a definitive
statement of how important the bicycle production/sales industry is to the Arizona economy and
present a defensible picture of the overall economic impacts associated with event-based (and to
some extent other aspects of) bicycle tourism and visitor spending in Arizona. Finally, a
systematic analytical approach provides a benchmark basis for developing subsequent updates of
the final economic report.
Integration with the Efforts and Accomplishments of the ADOT Bicycle and Pedestrian
Program
In 2003, ADOT developed the first Arizona Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. The 2003
Plan has since guided the work activities of the ADOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Program,
including completion of the following:
 2011 ADOT Bicycle Safety Action Plan (BSAP). The BSAP was a comprehensive review
of bicycle-motor vehicles crashes on the State Highway System (SHS).
 2009 Pedestrian Safety Action Plan (PSAP).
 2009 Cycle Arizona Bicycle User Map (noted previously). The map documents bicycle
conditions, including traffic volume, shoulder width, and other conditions applicable to
bicycling on Arizona highways. This is a valuable resource for tourists.
 2009 Complete Street training courses, to spur state and local decision makers to invest in
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
4 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
streets and highways that meet the needs of all users.
 2007 Bicycle and Pedestrian “Be a Roll Model” Safety Campaign.
ADOT recently initiated an update to the Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. The 2012 Plan
will update the most critical elements of the 2003 Plan. This Economic Impacts of Bicycling
Study will provide results that can be integrated into the ongoing update of the Statewide Bicycle
and Pedestrian Plan. For example, this study may inform the ADOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
Update by:
 Recommending strategies that can be developed and implemented by ADOT to attract
more bicyclists to Arizona.
 Identifying key geographic locations, corridors, and events that attract bicyclists to
Arizona, and identifying what ADOT can do, through infrastructure or programmatic
investment, to support and enhance these events.
 Providing a basis for comparing ADOT investment in bicycling infrastructure and
programs to economic benefits.
These prior and ongoing efforts and accomplishments provide a solid foundation on which to
undertake the Economic Impacts of Bicycling in Arizona Study. Findings from this inaugural
economic study will continue the momentum that ADOT has achieved in improving bicycling in
Arizona. Moreover, results from this benchmark study will further demonstrate the integral
relationship between transportation and tourism in Arizona.
3. Project Team
Arizona Department of Transportation, Multimodal Planning Division, will lead the study.
Michael Sanders serves as ADOT Project Manager.
McClure Consulting LLC serves as the prime consultant for the study. The McClure Consulting
Team includes the following firms:
McClure Consulting LLC
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Economic & Policy Resources, Inc. (EPR)
The project organization chart is presented in Figure 1. Project Team contact information is
listed in Table 1.
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
5 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
Figure 1. Project Organization Chart
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
6 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
Table 1. Project Team Contact Information
Name, Organization Role Contact Information
Michael Sanders, ADOT ADOT Project Manager ADOT Multimodal Planning
Division
206 S. 17th Avenue 310B
Phoenix, AZ 85007
msanders@azdot.gov
602-712-8141
Joseph McClure, McClure
Consulting LLC
Project Manager;
economic research and
analysis
2944 N. 44th Street, Suite 101
Phoenix, AZ 85018
(602) 840-3699
jmcclure@jemcclure.com
Brent Crowther, P.E.,
Kimley-Horn and Associates,
Inc.
Deputy Project Manager,
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Planning Considerations
333 East Wetmore Road, Suite 280
Tucson, AZ 85705
(520) 615-9191
brent.crowther@kimley-horn.com
Robert Chase, Economic &
Policy Resources, Inc.
Economic research and
analysis
400 Cornerstone Drive, Suite 310
P.O. Box 1660
Williston, VT 05495
(802) 878-0346 |
rac@epreconomics.com
4. Technical Advisory Committee
TAC members include at a minimum representatives from the diverse set of stakeholders below:
 ADOT, Communication and Community Partnerships Division (CCP)
 ADOT, Multimodal Planning Division (MPD), Bicycle and Pedestrian Program
 ADOT, MPD, Transportation Analysis
 ADOT, MPD, Research Center
 ADOT, MPD, Tribal Transportation
 Arizona Office of Tourism
 Arizona State Parks
 Federal Highway Administration – Arizona Division
 MPOs and COGs
TAC meetings (approximately two hours) will be held throughout the study at as minimum
according to the Work Plan Schedule (Figure 2). The purpose of these meetings will be to update
the TAC on the project status, receive input in the planning process, and discuss project
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
7 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
deliverables. The team will prepare and present PowerPoint presentations at each TAC meeting.
In addition, we will prepare and distribute agendas and meeting minutes via e-mail for each
meeting. A user-friendly file transfer protocol (ftp) site will be established to facilitate the
transfer of information to and from the TAC. Teleconferencing will be made available for all
TAC meetings. Five TAC meetings are proposed. These will be scheduled to follow major
project milestones and report submittals.
We will seek input from TAC members with respect to technical matters such as review (e.g.,
scope and schedule, preliminary findings), feedback (e.g., on approach, methodologies, and data
sources), and guidance (e.g., verify policy implications/directives, and the potential for obtaining
unpublished data from state agencies such as the Arizona Department of Administration (Office
of Employment and Population Statistics) and Department of Revenue).
5. Project Schedule
The project will be completed within a 12-month timeframe. The project schedule is presented in
Figure 2. Key elements of the project schedule are listed below.
TAC Meetings TAC Meeting Focus
Late March 2012 Work Plan
Early May 2012 Working Paper No. 1 - Literature Review and
Summary of Bicycling Economic Impacts
Studies and Methodologies
June 2012 Working Paper No. 2 - Analysis Approach:
Methodology, Assumptions, and Limitations
October 2012 Working Paper No. 3 - Data Collection and
Analysis (and this phase of work will include
interim deliverables as appropriate)
December 2012 Draft Final Report
February 2012 Final Report and Executive Summary
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
8 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
Figure 2. Work Plan Schedule
Task May-12 Jun-12 Jul-12 Aug-12 Sep-12 Oct-12 Nov-12 Dec-12 Jan-13 Feb-13
Milestones ▲ ★ ▲ ★ ▲ ★ ★ ▲ ▲ ★
Task 1 - Project management, Work Plan
Refinements
Task 2 - Literature Review and Summary
Task 3 - Refinement of Methodology
Task 4 - Data Collection and Analysis
Task 5 - Draft Final Report
Task 6 - Final Report & Executive Summary
= Review period
Milestones Legend
In-person meetings with Technical Advisory Committee = ★
Delivery of Working Papers/Draft = ▲
The Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
Mar-12 Apr-12
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
9 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
6.Work Tasks
Project Approach to Work Tasks
The scope of work in this Work Plan is consistent with the Task Assignment’s specification of
the impact categories to be analyzed, as follows:
A. The bicycle industry (manufacturing, sales, and service), as measured by revenue and
employment, and
B. Bicycle tourism and visitor spending associated with events that include organized
tours, races, and charity rides.
Economic activity associated with the bicycle-related industry can be measured in terms of
employment, personal income, and output (value of total economic activity, roughly similar to
sales). The effects of bicycle-related activity ripple outward throughout the state providing
further business, increased incomes, and additional jobs. Similarly, bicycle-related tourism (via
augmenting visitor spending) will be transmitted throughout the region by these secondary or
indirect economic effects.
As stated in the Task Assignment, impacts will be measured in terms of annual costs and benefits
(in dollars), using “an objective and defensible model for determining direct, indirect, and
induced economic impact.” Once direct impacts are determined using the procedures outlined in
the Work Plan, indirect and induced impacts will be estimated using a third-party modeling
system such as IMPLAN (MIG, Inc.) or REDYN (Regional Dynamics) for specific geographic
areas (see Regional Input-Output Model Options, below).
Impact categories A and B above will be documented and accounted for separately within the
modeling system. The data collection and other documentation will be based on a combination of
approaches for obtaining primary, survey-based data. A number of tools are available for this
purpose, including: web-based surveys, mailed send out/mail back printed survey forms, and
surveys conducted by telephone, in each case targeting specific firms and individuals/titles
within each firm. There are advantages and disadvantages to each of these systems, and the
actual method applied in this study will be derived in the course of refinements of the work
scope in Work Task 1 and Work Task 3. For example, conducting interviews person-to-person
over the telephone allows more control of the process, and is also compatible with a controlled-sample
methodology; although it tends to be more costly on a per-survey basis.
The detailed approach outlined in the work tasks of this Work Plan assumes that the survey
method will rely primarily on telephone interviews with key informants conducted by senior-level
consultant staff, using structured questionnaires.
This primary data collection process will be supplemented by relevant secondary data that will
be used to help calibrate the survey data and provide other insights into the analysis topics. A key
element of the data collection process will be identifying bicycle industry establishments, event
sponsors, and the like, and this will be accomplished through a combination of networking with
stakeholders and other industry informants and the use of directories, organizational membership
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
10 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
lists, etc.
For all data employed in this study, the McClure Team will adhere to the process of triangulation
and reconciliation of all data sources to ensure high-quality impact estimates that are credible
and defensible. Triangulation and reconciliation are estimation techniques EPR has successfully
employed elsewhere in their benchmark studies of the economic contribution of the tourism
industry as well as the economic impact of bicycling and walking activities to the Vermont
economy. This process included rigorous tests and reconciles all activity estimates using at least
two independent data sources before such activity estimates were accepted and used in the
impact assessment analyses. Because of the success of that process in these prior studies, we will
employ the same approach for defining data sources for the economic impact assessment of
biking in Arizona.
This project has certain specific areas of technical focus, as described in this Work Plan and in
the Task Assignment. The McClure Team will conduct the project with this focus firmly in
mind, while recognizing that there are other potential benefits that are described in other studies,
which are of interest to some of this study’s stakeholders. The review of existing studies (Work
Task 2) will in some cases involve some of these other benefit topics that are beyond the scope
of this particular Work Plan. In such cases we will summarize, qualitatively, key issues
associated with these ancillary economic benefits, strategic directions, etc. including their
applicability to Arizona. Also, notwithstanding the fact that investments in infrastructure are not
a part of this project, the McClure Team will use readily obtainable data on the miles of bike
lanes, shared paths, etc. by city/county, to compare with the economic data, in order to provide
additional insight into the relationship between investment in bicycling facilities and usage.
Regional Input-Output Model Options
Economic impact analysis is a technique for measuring the net effects of new spending and
investment on a region’s employment, wages, and business output (e.g., sales). This is
accomplished by estimating the amount of net new spending as a direct result of the project
(direct effects). The principal tool used in ascertaining economic impacts associated with bicycle
activity is an input-output model. Effective planning for public- and private-sector projects and
programs at the state and local levels requires a systematic analysis of the economic impacts of
these projects and programs on affected regions. In turn, systematic analysis of economic
impacts must account for the inter-industry relationships within regions because these
relationships largely determine how regional economies are likely to respond to project and
program changes. Regional input-output models, which account for inter-industry relationships
within regions, are useful tools for conducting regional economic impact analysis.
For this project, we propose to use either the REDYN or IMPLAN input-output models for
estimating the direct, indirect, and induced impacts associated with bicycle activity in the state.
REDYN is an internet-based model and is the newest and in many ways most advanced input-output
model available. It was developed by people formerly affiliated with the REMI model,
and employs a number of innovative concepts and analysis frameworks. The REDYN model is
currently maintained from an office in Scottsdale, Arizona.
The IMPLAN model is also an option and is a tool that calculates job creation for each category of
economic activity. This model and other input/output models are based on the concept of a
production function, which determines the quantities of inputs required to produce a unit of output.
The basic data are collected by the U.S. Commerce Department from a variety of sources, such as
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
11 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
the Annual Survey of Manufacturers and various annual surveys of the service sector. The
IMPLAN model is maintained by the Minnesota IMPLAN Group, Inc. The model has been widely
used for the type of analyses discussed in the Task Assignment for this project by public entities
(particularly the U.S. Forest Service) and in the private sector.
As part of this study, the McClure Team will evaluate which input-output tool will be employed
for this impact assessment analysis based on the results of the Literature and Data Review (Task 2
of our Work Plan). The technical “Pros and Cons” of each tool will be evaluated, input will be
solicited from the TAC, and a final decision will be made based on which tool will provide the
most accurate, supported impact estimates. In addition to the technical aspects of the evaluation,
factors to be considered in this decision include agency preferences, matching the desired format
and content of results with modeling system capabilities and their strengths and limitations, and
ease of use for periodic updates.
Depending on the methodology chosen, we will develop a functioning input-output model at the
state level as well as the sub-state regional level, which will measure the short-and long-term
economic (and fiscal) benefits (e.g., output, jobs, and personal income; revenues and
expenditures) of:
 The “Visitor Spending” impacts related to bike tourism, and
 Bicycle-related business/industry activity.
Specific Work Tasks to be completed are outlined below. Our Work Plan consists of six tasks,
consistent with the Task Assignment, and enhanced based on our expertise conducting similar
studies.
Work Task 1: InitialWork Plan Refinements
Purpose: Interactively derive a detailed scope of work (acknowledging that certain
methodological matters will be finalized in Work Task 3), which will include:
 Study goals and objectives
 Problem and need statement
 Key issues and challenges
 Project schedule
Approach: This task will involve a refinement of the proposed work scope, in consultation with
the ADOT project manager and the TAC. This refinement will be carried out with the
understanding that further refinements to the project methodology will be produced in Work
Task 3, based on the Literature Review and Summary of the Work Task 2.
Activities: The task will be carried out with a workshop session involving the TAC in which
TAC members and ADOT management share their goals, interests, objectives, perceptions of
challenges, and other issues and observations related to this project.
1.1. Prepare for and conduct a kick-off meeting with the ADOT Project Manager and other
ADOT representatives to discuss the Work Plan. The McClure Team will prepare a
meeting summary.
1.2. Develop a draft Work Plan. The Work Plan will include a detailed description of work
tasks and associated products, schedule, problem and need statement, initial
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
12 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
interpretations of study goals and objectives, and key issues and challenges.
1.3. Address ADOT’s comments to the Work Plan. Submit a revised Work Plan to the
ADOT Project Manager for review and approval for distribution to the TAC.
1.4. Schedule, prepare for, and attend TAC Meeting No. 1. Present the Work Plan to the
TAC for review and comment. The McClure Team will prepare a meeting summary.
1.5. Address TAC comments made at TAC Meeting No. 1 and prepare the final work plan;
submit the final work plan to the ADOT Project Manager.
1.6. Coordinate schedules for meetings, as depicted in the Project Schedule on page 27, to
update the TAC on the project status, discuss findings, and receive input in the planning
process.
1.7. Prepare monthly status reports, update schedule, and identify any issues that may impact
the project’s schedule and budget.
Deliverables:
 Kick-off meeting agenda, presentation materials, and meeting summary.
 Draft and Final Project Work Plan, subject to further revision in Task 3: detailed scope of
work, key issues and challenges, preliminary/draft study goals and objectives, problem
statement and need, and project schedule.
 TAC Meeting No. 1 agenda, presentation materials, and meeting summary.
 Monthly status report format and updated project schedule.
Work Task 2: Literature and Data Source Review and Summary
Purpose: The purpose of this task is to conduct a comprehensive review of all available data and
literature sources for the purposes of conducting this analysis.
Approach: The approach to this work task will be similar to the recently completed and relevant
Economic Impact of Bicycling and Walking in Vermont study. In this prior study, EPR
conducted a thorough literature and internet search, reviewing prior studies with respect to
coverage, metrics, approach, and utilization (such as, in policies and programs). The task in this
prior study included an unpublished annotated bibliography addressing, among other things, an
assessment/appropriateness of methods utilized in determining economic impacts. [For example,
this annotated bibliography includes an assessment of appropriate uses, misuses, and abuses
(e.g., pitfalls to avoid) in conducting economic analyses of bicycling.]
Activities: The McClure Team will complete a full literature and internet search of (1) recent
studies of the economic (and fiscal) impacts of bicycling; (2) methodological approaches utilized
as well as identification of data and information sources that could be used directly and/or
indirectly for the study; and (3) recent and ongoing activities of state/provincial department of
transportation bicycle and pedestrian programs. We will also inventory all appropriate state,
tribal, and local sources, including ADOT, the Office of Tourism, ADOA (Office of
Employment and Population Statistics), Arizona Department of Health Services, ADOR, and
Arizona Commission of Indian Affairs, for any and all valid data that could be reasonably
employed to develop the bicycle-related estimates.
Deliverables: Results will be summarized in Working Paper 1 for review and comment by the
ADOT Program Manager and TAC.
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
13 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
Following TAC review of Working Paper 1, the McClure Team will prepare the final Working
Paper No. 1 and meet with the TAC to formally present our review findings, recommended
approach(es), and preliminary observations. This meeting will provide the TAC and stakeholders
with an opportunity to comment on our approach and to help identify other factors that should be
considered as the study moves forward.
Work Task 3: Refinement of Methodology
Purpose: This task provides a formal process for the further refinement of the study
methodology based on the findings of the literature review performed under Work Task 2.
Approach: This work task will combine the results of Work Tasks 1 and 2 in order to derive a
detailed methodology for collecting and analyzing the data relevant to the project, obtaining
appropriate and timely input, etc. As part of this function we will be refining our understanding
of data sources, etc. (this may include processing some baseline work that is performed within
the Task 4 time allocation, including perhaps initial stakeholder outreach), to help ensure that the
Task 3 process is well informed.
The process of refining the methodology and formulating the research design to be used in this
study will address, at a minimum, the following topics, which are also discussed in more detail in
Work Task 4:
 Procedures in addition to Work Task 1 for coordinating TAC and other stakeholder input
into the process.
 Assessment of third-party data from Task 2, completion of a rigorous assessment of the
best data sources that could be employed to develop a defensible estimate of state and
regional economic (and fiscal) impact. Identification and evaluation of data sources from
recognized, high-quality sources for relevance to the defined objective of the study—
including data to support the input/output model, and fiscal data to support bicycle
transportation infrastructure planning. These data will be assembled into a data set suitable
for preliminary interim impact assessment analysis purposes.
 The targets, protocols, samples, question structures, and other details associated with the
primary research – interviews of business persons, organizational representatives, tourism
representatives, etc.
 The types, sources, etc. of secondary data that will be compiled as a backup to the primary
research, as described in more detail under Work Task 4.
 Details of the data collection and analysis process and a plan for periodic updating of the
final report for this project. The update plan will address: 1) the data used in the analysis and
also various benchmarking indicators that can be used for developing index-based interim
updates, and 2) the work required and associated costs of updating the report findings at
various levels of specificity.
Activities
3.1. Prepare and submit to the ADOT Project Manager an outline of Working Paper 2. Refine
the outline based on ADOT Project Manager input.
3.2. Prepare draft Working Paper 2. Working Paper No. 2 will address the topics described
above, as identified in Task 3.
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
14 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
3.3. Submit draft Working Paper 2 to the ADOT Project Manager for review and approval
for distribution to the TAC.
3.4. Schedule, prepare for, and attend TAC Meeting No. 2 where we will present Working
Paper 3. The McClure Team will prepare a meeting summary.
3.5. Address TAC comments and prepare the final Working Paper 2 and submit the final
Working Paper to the ADOT Project Manager.
Deliverables:
Working Paper 2, containing: 1) a detailed methodology for the work to be done in Task 4, and
2) a plan for updating the project at varying levels of detail and time frames.
Work Task 4: Data Collection and Analysis
Purpose: This task is the heart of the data collection and analysis process from which the
quantitative findings will result. Economic impact data and analysis will be performed for the
following two major categories:
A. The bicycle industry (manufacturing, sales, and service), as measured by revenue and
employment, and
B. Bicycle tourism and visitor spending associated with events that include organized
tours, races, and charity rides.
Approach: Impact categories A and B above will be documented and accounted for separately
within the modeling system. The data collection and other documentation will be based on a
combination of alternative approaches for obtaining primary, survey-based data. While a number
of tools are available for this purpose, as discussed in the prior section “Project Approach to
Work Tasks,” there are advantages and disadvantages to each of these systems, and the actual
method applied in this study will be derived in the course of refinements of the work scope in
Work Task 1 and Work Task 3. The detailed approach outlined in the work scope of this Work
Plan assumes that the survey method will rely primarily on telephone interviews with key
informants conducted by senior-level consultant staff using structured questionnaires.
This primary data collection process will be supplemented by relevant secondary data that will
be used to help calibrate the survey data and provide other insights into the analysis topics.
A key element of the data collection process will be identifying bicycle industry establishments,
event sponsors, and the like, and this will be accomplished through a combination of networking
with stakeholders and other industry informants and the use of directories, organizational
membership lists, etc.
Activities
4.1. Obtain data for the bicycle industry in Arizona – manufacturing, sales, and service.
4.1.1. From an outline of information to be obtained from stakeholders, implement
procedures for obtaining stakeholder input, according to procedures designed in
Work Task 3, which might include one or more workshops, in-person and phone
interviews, etc. Stakeholder processes will simultaneously obtain input on the
bicycle industry and bicycle tourism.
4.1.2. Compile databases of each relevant industry category, using 1) typical industry
directories and 2) institutional knowledge obtained from stakeholders (above):
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
15 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
4.1.2.1. Bicycle manufacturing and manufacturers of key components and
accessories.
4.1.2.2. Retail establishments, including bicycle shops, regular and discount
department stores, and other outlets, and the service component of
establishments.
4.1.3. Compile secondary data, as a complement to primary data (below) and backup for
data that are likely to be limited, such as department store sales of bicycles. Data
sources will include published material from the Economic Census, published and
possibly unpublished data from the ADOR, Arizona Office of Employment and
Population Statistics, and others.
4.1.4. Set up database format and review with stakeholders. Establish geographic extent
of regions by which data will be analyzed and reported.
4.1.5. Prepare documents and protocols for interview processes:
4.1.5.1. Prepare separate questionnaires for manufacturers, wholesalers/distributors,
retailers, and repair service providers. Questionnaires will generally be
structured to progress sequentially into increasing levels of detail, for
example from questions about employment (by full-time, part-time, etc.) to
questions about sales. Questions will also probe aspects of manufacturers’
locational choices, for example the relationship between the “bicycle
friendly” nature of Arizona and/or specific communities, and the presence of
the firm in that particular place.
4.1.5.2. Prepare introductory materials for contacts in coordination with the TAC,
explaining the purpose for interviews, asking for key contacts, preferred
methods of contact, etc.
4.1.5.3. Establish interview samples, contact protocols, follow-up procedures,
options by which respondents can provide input, etc., with procedures based
primarily on Work Task 3. Our working assumption for the Work Plan is
that we will attempt to interview 90+% of manufacturers/wholesalers, 100-
125 bicycle shops/rental establishments, and target 40-50 other retail
(department stores, sporting goods, etc.) establishments. While outreach
processes will be structured to maximize responses, to the extent responses
are limited, additional effort can be applied to using secondary data,
analysis, etc. to refine results. Special questionnaires, interview processes
etc. will be designed for the other retailers, and the use of secondary data is
anticipated since interview results will probably be limited for that specific
group.
4.1.6. Conduct interviews.
4.1.7. Record interview results into formatted database structures and project-defined
regions.
4.2. Obtain data for bicycle tourism and related visitor spending, related to both casual
tourism, and seasonal visitors, to the extent possible (although there are numerous
challenges to accomplishing this) and specific events.
4.2.1. Compile database of each bicycle-tourism-related category of interest to this
project, including bicycle rentals, events, use of bicycles at resorts, bicycle tours,
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
16 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
etc., using 1) available databases, and 2) institutional knowledge obtained from
stakeholders (above).
4.2.2. Compile secondary data, as a complement to primary data (below) and backup for
data that may be limited, such as the relationship between general tourism and
tourism where bicycling is a major motivating factor.
4.2.3. Set up database format that reflects the geographic distinctions and review with
the TAC.
4.2.4. Prepare documents and protocols for interview processes.
4.2.4.1. Prepare questionnaires for representatives of events and other contacts who
might be identified in the course of stakeholder input, such as tourism-industry
key informants, etc. Questionnaires for event representatives will be
structured to obtain, at a minimum, information about the organizations
themselves, overall participation and participation from outside the state, and
(to the extent practical) information about the travel and other characteristics
of outside visitors. If necessary and practical within the time constraints of
this project and other considerations, it might be possible to coordinate with
one or more event sponsors to obtain additional detail about visiting event
participants, potentially even devising methods for surveying visiting
participants.
4.2.4.2. Prepare introductory materials for interview contacts in coordination with
appropriate project representatives, explaining the purpose for interviews,
asking for key contacts, preferred methods of contact, etc.
4.2.4.3. Establish contact protocols, follow-up procedures, options by which
respondents can provide input, etc., based primarily on Work Task 3 input. If
necessary, prepare introductory materials for contacts.
4.2.5. Conduct interviews.
4.2.6. Record interview results into formatted database structures and project-defined
regions.
4.2.7. Compare economic data (both direct and within the regional analysis models as
described below), by sub-state region, to readily obtainable data on the miles of
bike lanes, shared paths, etc. by city/county, to provide additional insight into the
relationship between investment in bicycling facilities and the economic impacts.
4.2.8. Data Reconciliation: As noted above, the McClure Team will conduct an
independent reconciliation of multiple data sources to help assure a
comprehensive and accurate impact assessment analysis. This process is
envisioned to be similar to that employed by EPR in its prior work. The intent is
to approach the activity estimates of each segment of the analysis and the
measures of economic impact from at least two different directions—looking for a
congruence of primary data secondary data, and analysis work.
4.3. Set up and execute the input-output modeling system.
4.3.1. Estimate expenditures for Bicycle Activities. Similar to many other studies our
team has completed for similar projects, the third-party data will be condensed
into an estimate of final demand change related to the various segments or activity
areas (businesses, tourism inputs to I/O model) associated with bicycling to
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
17 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
produce the most reliable estimates in the state and sub-state regions.
4.3.2. Set up the system for using and processing results through a regional analysis
modeling system such as IMPLAN or REDYN, specifying, analyzing, and
reporting results using procedures that make clear the distinction in what the
model output figures mean, in terms of local versus general impacts, etc. The
model will be set up to run separately for the defined sub-state regions, from
Work Task 3, and also reflect state totals. Work Task 3 will be the basis for
choosing a regional analysis model from available alternatives. The goal of that
process will be to establish a system for completing a fully considered and
defensible estimate of the major economic benefits of bicycling activity in the state
and sub-state regions using the best available information that is available and can be
developed to complete this estimate.
4.3.3. Compile results for the state and by sub-state regions selected as part of the work
scope refinement process.
4.4. Develop Working Paper 3.
4.4.1. Prepare and submit to the ADOT Project Manager an outline of Working Paper 3.
Refine the outline based on ADOT Project Manager input.
4.4.2. Prepare draft Working Paper 3. Working Paper 3 will summarize each component
of the analyses conducted in Work Task 4 and other details as noted below.
4.4.3. Submit draft Working Paper 3 to the ADOT Project Manager for review and
approval for distribution to the TAC.
4.4.4. Schedule, prepare for, and attend TAC Meeting No. 3 where we will present
Working Paper 3. The McClure Team will prepare a meeting summary.
4.4.5. Address TAC comments and prepare the final Working Paper 3, and submit the
final Working Paper to the ADOT Project Manager.
4.4.6. Deliverables: Working Paper 3, summarizing each component of the analyses
conducted in Work Task 4, and describing the methodologies applied, relating these
back to the outcome of Work Task 3 and Working Paper 2.
Work Task 5: Draft Final Report
Purpose: Prepare a Draft Final Report of The Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
Approach: The Draft Plan will compile findings from Working Papers 1, 2, and 3. The Draft
Final Report will in addition make reference, in a qualitative sense, to the relationship of broader
benefits, outside the scope of this project but identified through literature reviews and other
project activities, to the technical aspects of the impacts that are the focus of this study.
The Draft Final Report will also address recommendations for enhancing the economic benefit of
bicycling in Arizona, based on the research findings, and suggestions/steps for the most feasible
approaches to generating periodic updates to these benchmark findings.
The Draft Final Report will be presented at TAC Meeting No. 4. The Draft Final Report may
also be made available for public comment. Comments received from the TAC and the public
review will be discussed with the TAC and addressed in a revised Final Report in Task 6.
Activities
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
18 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
5.1. Prepare a Final Report and Executive Summary outline that provides the most relevant
information from Working Papers No. 1, 2, and 3. Present to the ADOT Project Manager for
approval. Prepare draft Final Report and draft Executive Summary in conformance with the
approved outline.
5.2. Submit the draft Final Report and draft Executive Summary to the ADOT Project Manager
for review, approval, and distribution to the TAC.
5.3. Schedule, prepare for, and attend TAC Meeting No. 4 at which the draft Final Report and
Executive Summary will be presented. The McClure Team will prepare a meeting summary.
5.4. Compile comments received on the draft Final Report and draft Executive Summary and
prepare a comment resolution summary.
5.5. Prepare a PowerPoint presentation for use by ADOT to present findings of the study.
Deliverables
 Draft Final Report of The Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona.
 Draft Executive Summary.
 PowerPoint Presentation.
 TAC Meeting No. 4 agenda, presentation materials, and meeting summary.
Work Task 6: Final Report & Executive Summary
Purpose: Prepare a Final Report and Executive Summary.
Activities
6.1. In conformance with comments provided on the Draft Final Report and draft Executive
Summary, prepare the Final Report of The Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona, and
an Executive Summary describing the key aspects of the research and findings. Present to
the ADOT Project Manager for approval.
6.2. Produce and distribute to each member of the TAC one hard copy and one CD containing
the Working Papers, Final Report, and the Executive Summary. In addition, produce and
submit to the ADOT project manager 10 hard copies and 5 CD copies of the same materials.
Deliverables
 Final Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona.
 Final Executive Summary.
 PowerPoint presentation of the Final Report.
 Working Papers and Final Report and Executive Summary on CDs.
Presentation and documentation of Study Results
As a summary, our team’s deliverables will include meeting materials (presentation, agendas,
meeting summaries), working papers, an executive summary, and a final report:
 Refined Work Plan (Work Task 1)
 Working Paper 1: Literature Review and Summary of Bicycling Economic Impacts Studies
and Methodologies (Work Task 2)
Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona
19 PROJECT WORK PLAN
March 12, 2012
 Working Paper 2: Analysis Approach: Methodology, Assumptions, and Limitations (Work
Task 3)
 Working Paper 3: Data Collection and Analysis (Work Task 4)
 Draft Final Report: (Work Task 5)
 Final Report, Executive Summary, and PowerPoint Presentation (Work Task 6): One hard
copy and one CD copy delivered to each TAC member, plus up to ten hard copies and CD
copies delivered to ADOT. Each CD will contain all working papers and the final report.
The McClure Consulting team has a number of reporting and presentation tools to assist us in
serving ADOT. We will prepare each deliverable usingMicrosoft Office (Word, Excel,
PowerPoint) software and maximize the use of tables and graphics. Study products will be
delivered in Word and Adobe .pdf format. Working files of all study products will be made
available upon request of the ADOT Project Manager. These products will enable ADOT to
effectively communicate study results to other technical staff, stakeholders, management, and
elected officials.