A review of the recent academic literature on cycle superhighways and regional cycling networks in the Nordic countries reveals that most studies use Denmark, and specifically the Copenhagen region, as their focus, with fewer studies emerging from Sweden, Finland, or Norway. No academic studies were found on superhighways and regional cycling networks within Iceland. Despite the potential for cycle highways to be utilised in smaller urban or rural areas (Vierø & Szell, 2025; Schmidt et al., 2024), the studies from Sweden, Finland, and Norway mainly focus on capital regions or large urban areas (De Jong et al., 2023; Lamuela Orta, 2025; Tozluoğlu et al., 2024). Several articles focus on specific cycle highway projects to understand their value, to identify the effects on cyclists’ behaviour and perceptions, and to test whether the development of cycle highways can lead to increased cycling overall (Rich et al., 2021; Lamuela Orta, 2025; Skov-Petersen et al., 2017; Hallberg et al., 2021). Most of the articles evaluate cycling networks more generally, with reference to regional cycle highways as a form of high-quality infrastructure.
Common themes mentioned in the Nordic studies on regional cycling networks include existing and potential value (i.e., societal benefits like overall costs and emissions reductions); the specific attributes that make them successful (compared to other cycling infrastructure, for example); and the use of the electric bicycles (e-bikes) on such paths. The literature also presents and expands upon some existing mobility concepts (e.g., accessibility, bikeability, suitability; Vierø & Szell, 2025; Nielsen & Skov-Petersen, 2018) and frameworks (e.g., the classification of levels of traffic stress; (Vierø & Szell, 2025). Several articles also provide insights on methods for future planning of regional cycling networks (Steinacker et al., 2025).
The value of cycle highways
Cycle highways are often developed as initiatives to improve cycling conditions, particularly for commuters across municipalities within a region. Cycle highways have many of the attractive attributes that are shown to be favoured by cyclists, and cyclists who used upgraded cycling highways in Copenhagen also reported an increase in satisfaction with the quality of the infrastructure compared to control sites (Skov-Petersen et al., 2017). However, the value of cycle highways extends beyond those who directly use them. A cost-benefit analysis has shown that the proposed bicycle infrastructure for the Greater Copenhagen cycle superhighways project exceeds the positive value of other types of network infrastructure that is often prioritised (Rich et al., 2021). In addition to user benefits like time savings, the researchers found the most significant benefits in the area of health, showing how use of the cycleways can enable people to live and work longer, thus saving money and relieving pressure on the health system (Rich et al., 2021).
While not directly evaluating cycle highways, another study from Västra Götaland in Sweden shows the potential of e-bikes to replace passenger cars and reduce transport-related emissions between 10.1% and 22.8% compared to 2018 levels (depending on which kinds of trips are replaced; Tozluoğlu et al., 2024). The potential for reductions is greater in municipalities with high population density—for example, in Gothenburg, where the research reports a potential of 45% of car emissions due to e-bike substitutions. Based on their findings, the researchers suggest that policymakers can promote e-bike usage and develop appropriate infrastructure that supports e-bikes to achieve emission reduction goals (Tozluoğlu et al., 2024). This includes regional cycling networks, like cycle highways.
Cycle highways as attractive cycling infrastructure
Often, cycle highways are mentioned in studies looking at qualities of effective cycling paths, as many studies highlight that the cycle highway includes meaningful elements in its design and inherently in its definition. The studies prove that efficiency is not the only key factor when choosing where to cycle, and cyclists will deviate from the shortest paths based on qualities of the cycling infrastructure or the perceptions of the space around them (Chou et al., 2023; De Jong et al., 2023). Attractive qualities include fewer crossings/intersections and less disruptions, separated or dedicated cycle paths, flatter topography, and scenic paths (Chou et al., 2023; De Jong et al., 2023; Lamuela Orta, 2025; Łukawska et al., 2023; Nielsen & Skov-Petersen, 2018; Prato et al., 2018; Skov-Petersen et al., 2017; Vierø & Szell, 2025). Several articles also emphasize the importance of network density and geographical reach of the network routes (Nielsen & Skov-Petersen, 2018; Vierø & Szell, 2025). Fragmentation is a concern for cyclists, but “even minor expansions of existing infrastructure can have significant effects if these expansions are carried out at locations that increase network connectivity” (Hallberg et al., 2021, p. 413).
Using data from 16 cycling counters across Helsinki, Lamuela Orta (2025) evaluated the increase of cycling between 2018 and 2024 throughout the city. The research revealed that, on the whole, the counters measured a decline in bicycle trips during this period; however, there were two exceptions from the two counters located along the North Cycling Highway, which revealed a 50% increase in traffic. The article highlights several characteristics of the cycle highway that likely contributed to this success, such as the geographical extension of the route, its separation from car intersections, approved plans for further expansion of the route (which signals its continued relevancy), increasing amenities along the route, and high-quality public transport alternatives along the route (Lamuela Orta, 2025). Liu et al. (2025) identified similar attributes in their study of route choice in Greater Gothenburg, showing that those who commute by bicycle prefer bike paths separated from car traffic and aim to avoid signalized intersections. For planners and policymakers, this could mean prioritizing signal timing for cyclists or redesigning paths that enable cyclists to avoid intersections. However, some of these attributes, such as facilitating higher speeds, may discourage more vulnerable cyclists to use these paths (Schneider et al., 2023). This was also noted by Lamuela Orta (2025) who found that children made up only 2% of the total cyclists/pedestrians observed on the North Cycling Highway in Helsinki. Based on this observation, they posit that the cycle highways are not a typical path for children to bike to school. In a Copenhagen-based study, researchers also note that “interactions with other motorised and non-motorised transport modes are … a deterring factor for cyclists,” which could mean that cycle superhighways themselves may make cyclists uncomfortable if there is not enough space to navigate among different speeds and forms of mobility within the shared path (Łukawska et al., 2023, p. 1).
While some articles focus on which factors attract cyclists to use cycling infrastructure, other articles identify what drives cyclists to make detours away from the shortest-distance routes (Chou et al., 2023; De Jong et al., 2023; Prato et al., 2018). While cycling is typically higher in dense urban areas compared to suburban or rural areas, research shows that cyclists tend to make detours to avoid city centres in which there is a high concentration of pedestrians or which may involve more stop-and-go traffic and less smooth and efficient travel, such as shopping streets (Chou et al., 2023; De Jong et al., 2023). In their study of cycling demand and route choice in Oslo, De Jong et al. (2023) found that cyclists deviate from the shortest route to avoid highway environments with heavy car traffic. Prato et al. (2018) found similar results among cyclists in the Copenhagen Region, who revealed an aversion for unpaved and hilly surfaces and were willing to make detours to avoid industrial areas.
Several studies revealed interesting results with regards to choosing more scenic routes. Research on cyclists’ behaviour and route choice in Oslo and Copenhagen shows that water-facing routes are preferred (De Jong et al., 2023; Łukawska et al., 2023). Interestingly, green spaces did not necessarily have a positive correlation with cyclists in the research. While Łukawska et al. (2023) suggest that cyclists generally prefer scenic water and green areas over high-rise urban environments for longer trips, other studies from Oslo and Copenhagen show that people deviate from green spaces or recreation areas, potentially due to poor lighting or inappropriate surfaces for cycling. Chou et al. (2023) distinguishes these areas from zones with dedicated cycling infrastructure and cycle superhighways, away from which significantly few detours are made. Prato et al. (2018) provide a caveat to these conclusions. Their study of Copenhagen cyclists shows that cyclists make detours to enjoy scenic routes (parks, forests, and coastal locations) and perceive them as shorter, but this is somewhat dependent on time of day and air temperature—when temperatures are less than five degrees Celsius, cyclists are less likely to make such detours (Prato et al., 2018). However, it should be noted that the study did not focus exclusively on cycle superhighways but on route choice behaviour of cyclists throughout the Copenhagen Region.
Electric bicycles and cycle highways
One of the most common topics coupled with cycle superhighways and regional cycling network is the rise of the e-bike. The literature highlights that e-bikes are used for longer distances (Steinacker et al., 2025) and are more gender-balanced than conventional bikes (Lamuela Orta, 2025). In their 2024 study on e-bike potential in Västra-Götaland (Sweden), Tozluoğlu and colleagues show that e-bikes could replace 57.6% of car trips. According to their models, if the top 70% of feasible car users (ranked by shortest to longest daily travel distances) switch to e-bikes, emissions could be reduced by 10.1% compared to 2018 levels. If all feasible car users adopt e-bikes, a reduction of up to 22.8% in emissions could be achieved (Tozluoğlu et al., 2024).
The main finding from Hallberg and colleagues (2021) is that bicycle type (conventional versus electric) plays a key factor in the overall impact and importance of a bicycle network. If electric bicycles are not considered, travel time benefits will be underestimated by as much as 25% (Hallberg et al., 2021). The authors also found that the emergence of the e-bike means people may use the bicycle for longer distances and a wider range of trips. Furthermore, they suggest that cycle superhighways, in combination with increasing shares of electric bicycles, can cause more substitutions of car trips for bicycle trips. This is somewhat contradictory to results from Skov-Petersen et al. (2017) whose evaluation of the effects of upgrading to cycle highways in Copenhagen showed that significant increases in weekday cycling traffic could be mainly attributed to the relocation of cyclists from other routes. It is worth noting, however, that the latter study evaluated results only two years after improvements were made, and at that point, showed that induced cycling trips (trips not previously made by cycling) were estimated at about 4-5%.
In their cost-benefit analysis of the cycle superhighways in the Capital Region of Denmark, Rich et al. (2021) note that, while the return on investment for the cycle superhighways project in the Capital Region of Denmark is higher than traditional public transport or road infrastructure projects, the intensity of this return is somewhat less when calculating for electric bikes compared to conventional bikes. This is because most of the societal benefits come from external health benefits that result in expense savings in health systems. Their research also notes several challenges to the emerging bicycle technologies within the cycle superhighways network, such as different speeds of travel, adjustments of infrastructure design that benefit some speeds over others, and the different pace of market uptake and adoption of e-bikes and other non-traditional bicycles (e.g., cargo bikes, pedelecs; Rich et al., 2021).
Planning at the regional scale
The regional scale plays a significant role in cycling planning. As Nielsen and Skov-Petersen (2018) demonstrate in their research in Denmark, the regional scale has a strong influence on overall bikeability and accessibility. Bikeability is the “ability of a person to bike or the ability of the urban landscape to be biked” while accessibility refers to “the ease of reaching an important destination from a given origin, given a radius of activity based on a distance or time budget” (Nielsen & Skov-Petersen, 2018, p. 36; 37). Their study notes that larger cities have an advantage in supporting cycling between residential areas and workplaces, but this does not have to be the case. Also, in the context of Denmark, Vierø & Szell (2025) highlight the uneven distribution of low-stress cycling infrastructure: “It is crucial that cycling research and planning also addresses rural and suburban areas, as cycling requires safe and well-connected bicycle infrastructure everywhere” (Vierø & Szell, 2025). Lukawska et al. (2023) also emphasize the importance of “building long, continuous stretches of dedicated, protected bicycle infrastructure outside of high-rise urban environments in order to make cycling more attractive” (p. 1).
Several articles provide insights into different approaches for effective future planning and expansion of regional cycling and superhighway infrastructure. Considering the case of growing the cycle superhighway network in Copenhagen, Paulsen and Rich (2023) introduce a reverse geographical mapping approach that allows a more detailed breakdown at the level of network links and makes it possible to apply a more stringent optimisation approach with respect to the timing and prioritisation of network expansions. Two years later, alongside two additional researchers, another study was carried out to compare two approaches for planning cycle superhighway extensions in Copenhagen—an optimisation method that looks at social benefits of network extensions, and a network science approach that seeks to understand qualities that are considered efficient like connecting fragmented components, shortest path distances, and network coverage (Steinacker et al., 2025). By applying both methods to the evaluation of the cycling superhighway network in Copenhagen, the authors identified that the optimisation approach achieves a “higher net present value” while the abstract conceptual planning “achieves comparable performance with simpler and often more robust evaluation functions” (Steinacker et al., 2025, p. 9). While both approaches have advantages and disadvantages according to the authors, they both require multiple stages and revisions within planning processes, and neither are sufficient in themselves for planning network expansions. Public participation and other planning aspects must also be considered. On the whole, the authors suggest that “both approaches may help design more efficient bike path networks to support cycling and the transition to more sustainable urban mobility” (Steinacker et al., 2025, p. 10).