The following infographic from Active Living Research recently came across my email. It is nicely presented; it is a fair representation of some of the research. But……
…while it might satisfy some central purposes of an infographic, we have argued elsewhere, it is best to to consider the balance of the research and not rely on what one study here or there has to offer about a particular factoid.
The larger issue is that based on an article in the recent issue of ensia, knowledge and information have little to do with behavior change. Moral suasion does not work either (my favorite quote from the article: “If educating people about an issue would solve the problem, we would have no obesity and no smokers in our country”).
Two reactions: First, competition (what they call “gamification”) and peer pressure are paramount. We are getting there with the both–in terms of cycling, at least–but these elements take time to engender in society. Second, talk is cheap. Most everyone says they want to save water and the planet; action is less so.
Cyclists recently came out in hoards to repel the comments from the Washington State politician who claimed, “Since CO2 is deemed to be a greenhouse gas and a pollutant, bicyclists are actually polluting when they ride.” Both the 
Based at the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, the Leopold Leadership Program provides academic environmental researchers with skills and approaches for communicating and working with partners in NGOs, business, government and communities to integrate science into decision‐making.
Our perception study examining some of the key tenets of accessibility, recently 
I have long considered The Economist as a somewhat reliable barometer for mostly, writing style…but also for reliable news about world events. Sure, its a bit liberal, but one could argue that writing style usually makes up for it.
