Introduction
Walking remained an important way of getting to work in several U.S. cities in 2024, particularly in compact urban communities and places with large concentrations of employment, education and residential neighborhoods within relatively short distances. According to U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2024 1-year data, Cambridge, Massachusetts, had the highest walking-to-work share among the cities included in this comparison, at 21.5%.
New Haven, Connecticut, ranked second at 16.3%, followed by Boston, Massachusetts, at 14.6%. Berkeley, California, and Evanston, Illinois, each recorded 12.9%.
The figures are based on workers age 16 and older and their reported usual means of transportation to work. They provide a standardized measure of commuting behavior, but they do not represent the share of residents who walk for all trips or the proportion of people who walk to work occasionally.
What the Walking-to-Work Data Measures
The ranking uses the U.S. Census Bureau’s ACS 2024 1-year estimates. The measure covers workers age 16 and older and focuses on their usual means of transportation to work.
This distinction is important. Someone who walks to work occasionally but normally uses another form of transportation would not necessarily be counted as a walking commuter under the same measure.
The ranking covers published ACS 1-year geographies, generally places with populations of 65,000 or more. Smaller cities, towns and counties are therefore excluded from this particular comparison.
Because ACS estimates are based on survey data, sampling uncertainty can affect close rankings. Cities with similar point estimates should not automatically be considered meaningfully different.
Top 40 U.S. Cities by Walking-to-Work Share
| Rank | City | State | Walking-to-Work Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cambridge city | Massachusetts | 21.5% |
| 2 | New Haven city | Connecticut | 16.3% |
| 3 | Boston city | Massachusetts | 14.6% |
| 4 | Berkeley city | California | 12.9% |
| 5 | Evanston city | Illinois | 12.9% |
| 6 | Somerville city | Massachusetts | 12.5% |
| 7 | Provo city | Utah | 12.0% |
| 8 | Columbia city | South Carolina | 11.3% |
| 9 | Portland city | Maine | 11.0% |
| 10 | Seattle city | Washington | 10.7% |
| 11 | Washington city | District of Columbia | 10.7% |
| 12 | San Francisco city | California | 10.0% |
| 13 | Miami Beach city | Florida | 10.0% |
| 14 | Providence city | Rhode Island | 9.9% |
| 15 | Erie city | Pennsylvania | 9.8% |
| 16 | New York city | New York | 9.6% |
| 17 | Pittsburgh city | Pennsylvania | 9.0% |
| 18 | Fayetteville city | North Carolina | 8.6% |
| 19 | Minneapolis city | Minnesota | 7.2% |
| 20 | Philadelphia city | Pennsylvania | 7.2% |
| 21 | Chicago city | Illinois | 7.1% |
| 22 | Passaic city | New Jersey | 7.1% |
| 23 | Paterson city | New Jersey | 6.9% |
| 24 | Eugene city | Oregon | 6.8% |
| 25 | Madison city | Wisconsin | 6.6% |
| 26 | Bellevue city | Washington | 6.6% |
| 27 | Hartford city | Connecticut | 6.2% |
| 28 | Cincinnati city | Ohio | 6.2% |
| 29 | Syracuse city | New York | 6.2% |
| 30 | New Orleans city | Louisiana | 6.1% |
| 31 | Newark city | New Jersey | 6.0% |
| 32 | Jersey City city | New Jersey | 5.7% |
| 33 | Baltimore city | Maryland | 5.7% |
| 34 | Salt Lake City city | Utah | 5.6% |
| 35 | Rochester city | New York | 5.6% |
| 36 | Reading city | Pennsylvania | 5.4% |
| 37 | Tempe city | Arizona | 5.4% |
| 38 | Buffalo city | New York | 5.4% |
| 39 | Rochester city | Minnesota | 5.2% |
| 40 | Cleveland city | Ohio | 5.1% |
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2024 1-year. Data period: 2024. Source checked October 19, 2026.
Cambridge Leads the 2024 Walking-to-Work Ranking
Cambridge recorded a walking-to-work share of 21.5%, the highest among the 40 cities examined.
The figure was 5.2 percentage points above New Haven, which ranked second at 16.3%. Boston followed at 14.6%.
The leading group also includes Berkeley and Evanston at 12.9%, while Somerville recorded 12.5% and Provo 12.0%.
Only the first three cities exceeded 14%, while the first seven recorded walking-to-work shares of at least 12.0%.
Why Some Cities Have Higher Walking-to-Work Rates
Several characteristics can influence whether residents walk to their workplaces. The Census data describes the commuting pattern but does not, by itself, establish the cause of differences between cities.
Urban Density and Distance
Shorter distances between housing and employment can make walking more practical. Dense urban neighborhoods may place homes, workplaces, schools and services closer together than lower-density development.
Employment Centers
Cities with concentrated employment districts can produce different commuting patterns from communities where jobs are distributed across large geographic areas.
University communities can also have distinctive commuting profiles. Several cities near the top of the ranking have substantial higher-education and institutional employment bases.
Transportation Alternatives
Walking rates also exist within a broader transportation system. Residents may choose between walking, public transportation, cycling, driving and other forms of travel depending on distance, infrastructure and local conditions.
A relatively high walking share therefore does not necessarily indicate that other transportation modes are uncommon.
Regional Patterns in the Ranking
Massachusetts and the Northeast
Massachusetts has three cities in the top six: Cambridge at 21.5%, Boston at 14.6% and Somerville at 12.5%.
The Northeast is broadly represented throughout the ranking, with New Haven, Providence, New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Hartford, Syracuse, Newark, Jersey City, Reading and Buffalo also appearing.
This concentration is consistent with the presence of numerous established urban centers with relatively compact neighborhoods and long-established employment districts.
California and the West Coast
Berkeley ranked fourth at 12.9%, while San Francisco recorded 10.0%.
Seattle also placed among the top 10 at 10.7%. Portland, Oregon, recorded 6.8%, while Bellevue, Washington, recorded 6.6%.
The differences between cities demonstrate that regional location alone does not determine walking-to-work patterns.
Pennsylvania and New Jersey
Pennsylvania has four entries: Erie, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia and Reading. Their walking shares range from 5.4% to 9.8%.
New Jersey is represented by Passaic, Paterson, Newark and Jersey City. Passaic recorded 7.1%, while Jersey City recorded 5.7%.
Midwest and Mountain States
The ranking includes cities such as Evanston, Minneapolis, Chicago, Madison, Provo and Salt Lake City.
Evanston’s 12.9% share places it fifth overall, while Minneapolis and Philadelphia were tied at 7.2%. Madison recorded 6.6%, Provo 12.0% and Salt Lake City 5.6%.
Large Cities Do Not Always Have the Highest Walking Shares
Population size alone does not determine the percentage of workers who walk to work.
New York City ranked 16th with a 9.6% walking-to-work share, while Chicago ranked 21st at 7.1% and Philadelphia ranked 20th at 7.2%.
Meanwhile, smaller cities such as Cambridge, New Haven and Somerville recorded substantially higher shares.
This distinction is important when interpreting city-level transportation statistics. A city can have a very large number of people walking to work while still recording a lower percentage because of the size and composition of its overall working population.
Implications for Workers and Urban Economies
Walking-to-work patterns can provide information about the relationship between housing, employment and transportation within a city.
For households, walking to work can reduce dependence on private vehicles for the commute and may change transportation spending. For local economies, concentrations of pedestrians can influence demand for businesses and services located along residential and employment corridors.
For policymakers and urban planners, commuting data can also help illustrate how residents interact with transportation networks. However, the walking-to-work percentage alone cannot establish whether a city’s infrastructure is sufficient, nor does it measure pedestrian safety, sidewalk quality or the distance of individual commutes.
Those factors require separate data sources.
Risks and Limitations of the Ranking
The ranking should be viewed as a comparison of point estimates, rather than a definitive assessment of which cities are more walkable.
First, the data covers the usual means of transportation to work, not every trip made by residents. Someone may walk for errands or recreation while driving to work and would therefore not necessarily appear in the walking-to-work measure.
Second, ACS estimates are subject to sampling uncertainty. Small differences between cities may fall within the statistical uncertainty of the estimates.
Third, the ranking is limited to published 2024 ACS 1-year geographies, generally covering places with populations of 65,000 or more. Smaller communities are not included.
Finally, the data does not explain why residents walk to work. Distance, housing patterns, employment concentration, public transportation availability, vehicle ownership, income and local infrastructure can all influence commuting choices.
Future Outlook for Walking-to-Work Patterns
Future Census releases will provide additional information on whether commuting patterns are changing across U.S. cities.
Changes in workplace arrangements could also affect walking-to-work statistics. The continued use of remote and hybrid work may reduce the number of commuting days for some workers, while changes in housing costs and urban development can influence where employees live relative to their workplaces.
Long-term comparisons will be most useful when multiple years of comparable ACS data are examined. A single year’s ranking provides a snapshot rather than a complete measure of structural change in urban transportation.
Conclusion
The 2024 U.S. Census ACS data shows substantial variation in walking-to-work rates across major U.S. cities. Cambridge, Massachusetts, led the ranking at 21.5%, followed by New Haven at 16.3% and Boston at 14.6%.
Berkeley and Evanston each recorded 12.9%, while Somerville reached 12.5% and Provo 12.0%. At the other end of the 40-city ranking, Cleveland recorded 5.1%.
The figures highlight differences in commuting behavior across U.S. urban areas, but they should be interpreted within the Census Bureau’s methodology. They measure workers’ usual means of transportation to work and do not independently measure overall walkability, pedestrian infrastructure or walking for non-work purposes.
