Britain: More training but less cycling

On the back of an announcement of more money for child cycle training, the Department for Transport in the UK has released a report titled "Cycling to School - A review of school census and Bikeability report data". Sadly, this confirms what I wrote last November about how an emphasis on Bikeability and Cycling Proficiency have failed British cycling.

The new figures shows again how the rates of children cycling to school remain extraordinarily low in the UK. The change over the period of 2006 to 2011 is given as -0.01% for 5-10 year olds and +0.06% for 11-15 year olds. This is also presented as a change of 0% for all ages combined.

I have no doubt at all that those who train child cyclists in the UK do so with the best possible motives. However, effort shouldn't be confused with success. Sadly, the effort of the people doing the training is being squandered on something which looks good in press releases ("More money for school cycle training" !) but doesn't actually make any real difference. While British children are being trained in large numbers, this does not lead to them cycling. Conditions on the streets of the UK simply remain too unpleasant and too dangerous for more than a very small proportion of parents to allow their children to cycle.

There are also new figures for the whole population's cycling activity. These show that the average of 16 bicycle trips per person per year in 2006 has changed to an average of 15 bicycle trips per person per year in 2010.

Both these sets of figures come from a time when many people in the UK have spoken of growth in cycling. While growth is often reported in the UK, those reports are often not based in fact. There's a long history of unsubstantiated claims.

This is not real progress. Real growth can be measured and would appear in these figures. All that we've been able to see for many years in the UK is a change in the least significant digit of a small number, and these new figures again show a continuation of the same statistical noise as I wrote about in 2010.

For comparison, the Dutch population makes on average about 0.8 trips by bike per day, which is equivalent to about 220 trips per person per year. The UK's figures are far lower and as you can plainly see, it's not only children who rarely cycle in the UK, but adults also find the conditions for cycling unpleasant. In the UK, "cyclists" continue to cycle, while the majority of the population continues to think it is too dangerous to cycle.

When even many campaigners in Britain continue not to ask for enough and don't aim at the right people to make a real difference, it's hardly surprising that the government doesn't do so either. To know what is really going on, campaigners need to become less easily satisfied and more critical of claims that cycling is growing.


If you look at the figures for cycling over time, it is very easy to see that the UK has not developed a set of policies which have led to a real increase. It is important to recognize this truth, not to imagine that a non-existant cycling revolution is taking place, not to believe deliberately confusing hype and not to look in the wrong direction for solutions. Rather, it is important to acknowledge the facts for what they are. Yes, it's unfortunate that cycling has stagnated at a very low level. However, by acknowledging this fact, there is a base to work from. What's more, by accepting properly gathered statistics, there is a yard-stick against which any future progress can be measured.

I took a cycling trainer course when I
lived in the UK. Unfortunately we
were told we had to advise children to
hug the kerb putting them in danger.
That's why I never trained children.

For cycling to grow, real change is needed. An emphasis on "soft measures" such as training has failed in the past and will continue to fail in the future. Cycle training and marketing of cycling are but a small part of what is required. These measures do not work in isolation from changing the streets for the simple reason that they do not solve the problems that people face when they try to cycle.

There will be no real increase in cycling in Britain until real funding is provided, excuses stop being made, and the country starts to copy the best parts of the best examples without misunderstanding the intent. This is the only way in which the conditions which can result in real mass cycling can be created.

Update 2013
My attention has been drawn to a very interesting graphic from Joe Dunckley showing the impact of cycle training on the frequency of cycling in the UK.

The data came from Transport for London's Attitudes to cycling report and shows that after they've had cycle training people are as likely to cycle less as they are to cycle more.

More on exaggeration and broken promises. And as for cycling to school, even pre-schoolers can be seen riding their own bikes to day-care in the Netherlands. From an average age of 8.6, very nearly every Dutch child rides independently. See also the Cyclists in the City blog for another view of the same figures, while Joe Dunckley provides a humourous take by pointing out that "press releases announcing the annual funding for cycling training that they've been funding for decades now outnumber actual cyclists".

How "Bikeability" and "Cycling Proficiency" have failed British cyclists.

Bikeability is the current form of cycle training in the UK. It is now almost the only thing to do with cycling which is funded by the British government, and it has become a small industry with "Bikeability registered providers" offering services around the country.

Bikeability is described by the British government as being "cycling proficiency' for the 21st Century!". They say that this training "gives you the skills and confidence to cycle in modern road conditions".

British children preparing for battle - photo courtesy of Bikeability website.

In a recent press release announcing more funding for Bikeability, it further claimed that “This Government is strongly committed to cycling – it is a crucial part of building a healthy and sustainable transport network for the future. That is why we have provided £11m of funding this year for the Bikeability programme, which not only promotes the benefits of cycling as a healthy and enjoyable way of getting around, but enables children to do it safely and confidently.”. They also say that it "promotes a healthy life style choice and ensures that the children are safer when cycling on our busy roads.”

However, once again the British public are again being sold short. Sadly, the truth is that "modern road conditions" in the UK still look remarkably similar to 40 year old road conditions in the Netherlands.

The same Dutch street in the 21st century.
Not much like Britain any more.

1960s Dutch street scene.
Very like Britain now.

Not only is training not nearly enough to reverse a long term decline. In fact, it's not enough to make any measurable difference at all. Peter Miller made these graphs a few weeks back which show that while walking to school is on the decrease and driving continues to increase, "cycling is lost in the noise at the bottom".

While conditions remain as they are on Britain's roads, cycling for most people will not progress further than the very first achievement in Bikeability level 1, which reads: "Get on your bike, start cycling, then stop and get off".

Where did the training emphasis come from ?
According to the CTC, they proposed "cycling proficiency" in 1936. However, not until 1948 did the government "endorse RoSPA to roll out CP".

Cars vs. bikes in the UK

In other words, the whole history of cycle-training in Britain has been over a period while cycling declined.

The decline of cycling in Britain
It is often not appreciated just how popular cycling once was in the UK. In 1949, no less than a third of the total distance travelled on the roads in the UK was by bike: 23.6 billion vehicle km vs. 46.5 billion km for all motor vehicles combined. Just 20.3 billion vehicles km were by private car and taxi. i.e. more distance was covered each year by bike than by car. This is a remarkable level of cycle usage, and something that no nation, including the Netherlands, can claim today.

Cars vs. bikes in the UK (zoomed)

In 1959, after ten years of cycling proficiency, this was down to 13.6 billion vehicle km by bike and 104.2 billion km for other vehicles. In this initial period of cycle-training, the absolute distance travelled by bike had more than halved and proportionately it had reduced to a third of what it was. As time went on, cycling declined even more.

An enthusiast: Ten years ago with my eldest
daughter "ready for battle" on Britain's roads.

It is quite fair and accurate to say that cycle training, in all its forms, has not only failed to do anything at all to increase cycling rates in the UK, but it has also failed to do enough to stem a very rapid decline.

What we are left with in the UK now is an almost total lack of cycling a few people due to economic reasons and a keen group of enthusiasts. These are the people who have stopped cycling from declining to zero. In Britain I was one of them and of course I trained my children to cycle as safely as possible under the circumstances.

What caused the decline ?
I am, of course, not saying that cycle-training caused a decline in cycling. That's not the case at all. Rather, as cars became more affordable they displaced bikes from Britain's roads. Due to a lack of good subjectively safe conditions for cycling, driving became the least bad option for most people. It costs a lot to drive in the UK. It is often reported that a high percentage of the income of people on low salaries goes into the petrol tanks of their cars. However, people continue to drive despite of this cost. It's not a positive choice, but a reaction from people who don't see that they have a choice. Driving in the rush-hour is a source of stress, not pleasure. However, other alternatives including cycling are worse.

If not only training, then what ?
After 62 years of the same approach producing the same results in Britain, it is time for a change in policy. The only sensible approach is to copy the Netherlands as this is the country where cycling has most successfully resisted the rise of motoring, and even risen once again after the reasons for the decline were noted and action was taken.

Infrastructural change is needed to make cycling desirable. Obviously starting sooner rather than later would be best, and therefore it would be best if recent calls for change were listened to, rather than waiting for another thirty years to pass.

Once the infrastructure is in place, training can then come into its own. The efforts of people who train cyclists will no longer be wasted.

In my view, cycle training, especially of children, is valuable. However, it is only a small part of what is required. It can't result in a higher cycling rate unless conditions are changed such that cycling becomes a desirable activity. Governments which want to increase cycling cannot rely merely on training. They have to invest in cycling infrastructure. The evidence shows that on its own, attempting to train cyclists to cope with ever degrading road conditions simply does not increase cycling rates.

I took a course as a cycle trainer in the
UK and was given this badge. Sadly
this was not a high quality course.

Of course, some people will question the cost of providing proper cycling infrastructure. The best infrastructure in the world costs about €30 per person per year. This is not a large amount out of the nation's budget. If Britain could achieve just ten percent of journeys by bike, far fewer than in recent history, the payback would be much larger than the cost. The extent of the infrastructure required is no more overwhelming than in the Netherlands. Britain isn't nearly so huge and spread out as some people think. In fact, the population density of England is comparable with that of the Netherlands and the population density even of relatively sparsely populated Wales is comparable with that of the Dutch province of Drenthe, where we live.

Britain's transport budget next year is 22.4 billion pounds or around 420 euros per person per year from central government (this is not the total spent). Building decent infrastructure for people to cycle in the UK is easily affordable, but Britain seemingly prefers to spend money on such things as ever larger ships for the navy, trying to rejuvenate the same rather antique military aircraft not just once, but twice. Britain's defence budget is one of the largest in the world. For next year is over 47 billion pounds, is approximately €880 euros per person per year. That's substantially more than the total amount of money than leaves the country each year.

Wasteful projects such as these, and an over-reliance on imported fuel for motorized transport, are the means by which Britain has achieved a cumulative deficit three times as large as that of Greece. Cycling is part of the solution to the country's financial problems.

I was initially prompted to write this after reading the response by a cycle trainer, Londonneur to a post by David Arditti on the Movement for Liveable London. Cycle trainers in the UK work very hard at what they do. However, one should never confuse "working hard" with "achieving results". Cycle training can help a few nervous but keen individuals to cycle in a hostile environment. However, it's not something which scales to support the entire population in cycling for a significant proportion of all journeys. To achieve this requires cycling to be an efficient and safe means of transport. Changing the streets to increase subjective safety and give cyclists more direct routes is the way to achieve this.

All figures were published by the DfT.

I cycle, so you could cycle too

Many existing cyclists in other countries make statements of the form "I cycle, so you could cycle too".

There's a lot of emphasis on riding "vehicularly", on gaining speed to get past junctions, on training people to avoid common problems. These are fine survival techniques in an environment which is hostile to cyclists, but they are not a way to make cycling a normal means of transport for the masses. Those with a desire to cycle, who are fearless enough and strong enough will continue to do so, while those who are more easily scared away from cycling will never start in such conditions. Cycling needs to be something other than an extreme sport to make the majority of people see it as something for themselves.

On the way home recently I found myself behind a rather elderly gentleman who was making his way slowly through a village near here by bike:

Explanatory video captions are displayed only if the video is played on a computer and not when played on a mobile device
You'll also see how children had met friends on the same cycle path. The infrastructure makes this possible. No-one has to be a "road warrior" to cycle. Parents don't worry about the safety of their children. Older people also see cycling as a perfectly reasonable way to get around.

Compare and contrast with this video made by someone who says "you can ride your kids to school" in Bristol:


It's laudable that this parent has taken great care in teaching his son to ride so safely as possible given the conditions. In the UK it's quite exceptional for an eight year old to cycle to school, even with a parent "just behind and out a bit to offer some protection and direction if needed" precisely because of the conditions in which this cycling would have to take place. Most parents simply don't feel that this is a safe thing to subject their children to. Meanwhile, just over the North Sea here in the Netherlands the average age for a child to go to school unaccompanied is about 8 and a half.

So what explains the difference ? The infrastructure ! Britain's streets are not subjectively safe. This is why attempts to train people to cycle are not working. It's also why in that second video you don't see other children cycling to school, older people cycling, nor indeed many other people riding bikes at all. It doesn't look much like any video of a Dutch school run by bicycle.

You are a member of a self selected group
Campaigners often ignore the reasons why they are cyclists while the majority of the population are not. It's very simple, those who cycle now in low cycling countries are by definition members of the easy demographic for cycling, made up largely of enthusiasts and relatively fit young adults, while those who do not cycle are from different demographic groups who are not naturally given to cycling especially if it involves risk.

Cyclists in most countries are an out-group. To change this, it's no good to say that conditions are OK for you. You need to reach the people who are not part of your group and you need to tackle the reasons why other people do not cycle.

We are here to help. Our cycling study tours
demonstrate how the Netherlands made
made attractive to the whole population

Different people have very different needs for safety, and in particular, subjective safety. People who are scared to cycle now, will remain scared to cycle unless conditions are made very much better, to grow the modal share past the usual easy demographics and to include people who are more difficult to attract to cycling requires not just a little more, but for the standard of facilities to increase exponentially.

Click for more on out-groups.

School cycle training

Video by Mark Wagenbuur showing traffic education of children
In the video above, children are being educated in school. There is also a final practical examination in the Netherlands, which involves a fairly long cycle journey in a prescribed route, with volunteer inspectors watching what the children do as they cycle along and at road junctions. In the case of my daughter, who in the video below, the prescribed route was about 6 km long and children rode around it two by two. Volunteers stood on each corner, observing whether the children were doing the right thing.


Children returning from practical education
The most interesting point about this is that it's quite normal for children to cycle to and from the place where the test is being performed. i.e. they cycle before they've taken the test. In fact, as the test is taken in the last year of primary school, the children in the video had actually been cycling to and from school and for many other purposes for many years before taking their traffic examination.

How important is this ?
By the time this training takes place, in the last year of primary school (age 10 or 11), the children have been riding to school for years. Many of them have been doing this unaccompanied as the average age from which children ride to school on their own is 8.6 years.

Also note that there is no traffic education at secondary school or above and no training of adults, save for specific training of some immigrant groups - though that's an integration policy more than it's to do with cycling.

Traffic education is not what makes the Dutch safe when riding their bikes.

Much is sometimes made of how the Dutch train children, but it's not as important as it is made out. Nor does it result in all children behaving perfectly. Quite the opposite in fact as kids will be kids, and of course, teenagers will be teenagers. They won't necessarily really behave perfectly when they cycle after training.

Traffic education in New Zealand in the 1970s
These photos show my sister (and a friend) having school cycle training in New Zealand in the 1970s.

The training took place in a tennis court, not the road, and included such useful activities as cycling on a narrow plank.

I don't remember if I also did this test at school in New Zealand, but I quite possibly did. It's a fair test of skill, but I'm not sure it translates usefully to an ability to survive on roads which don't take cyclists' needs into account. When I was a child living in that country in the 1970s, all my friends also cycled to school. However, cycling in New Zealand is now very much a minority pursuit, and far fewer children cycle there now than was the case when we lived there.

Not the same in NL
School cycling in the Netherlands is not just about getting too and from school. It's also very common here for children to take school trips by bike. For instance, to visit sport facilities as Dutch schools don't have their own sports facilities but share them so children have to cycle several times a week to reach those facilities. The trips out of school go to museums, forests, farms or to city centres and these journeys are also made by bike. Sometimes, cycling is a sport activity in itself. At the end of primary school, many Dutch schools take entire classes for multi day trips by bike. My youngest daughter, with the rest of her class, went camping by bike and covered 150 km over three days. All of this is made possible by infrastructure which goes everywhere and makes the entire country accessible to children by bike.

Note that cycle training does not come out of the cycling budget, but is part of the education budget. The cycling budget (in Assen this worked out over the last few years as about €27 ( around $36 or £23 at the time of writing ) per person per year and is spent on new infrastructure in the city.

Cycle paths and the disabled

Cycle paths don't only provide utility for cyclists. They are also useful for other groups, such as those with disabilities. In the Netherlands it is quite common here to see people riding on electric buggies, hand cycles or adult tricycles. The paths make cycling by any means a good way of getting about, and there is the social aspect that people with disabilities can join in rides with able bodied friends.

This photo was taken on the direct West-East cycle path through one suburb of Assen.

This person is riding in an electric powered buggy which transports the owner in her wheelchair. This is next to a busy road in the area of the industrial estate, but here as everywhere else, the subjective safety is good enough that everyone can cycle.

And here are some traffic education cards (I featured some of these earlier) handed out to primary school children. The first one explains that in Dutch law, wheel chair users are also cyclists so should be expected n cycle-paths. The second refers to pedestrians and explains that while a cycle path may be compulsory for cyclists, it is not forbidden to walk on it (especially in the unusual cases when there is no separate walking path).

Strange but true: wheel chair users are also cyclists!      Compulsory for cyclists but not forbidden for pedestrians

Being truly "inclusive" and providing for all its members is one of those things which marks a mature and responsible society. In the Netherlands, cycling is truly something for all, just as it should be.

Where cycling is only for a brave or "foolish" few, it remains a minority interest.

Excuses

There are many excuses for not cycling. Most of them are the same in all countries, and we'll all have heard people make these excuses.

The cards shown here are one set from a "happy families" game given out to primary school children in the Netherlands as part of the school traffic education.

Traffic education is part of the curriculum here (it doesn't come out of cycle funding) and covers all sorts of things about walking, cycling and driving. There is quite a bit of emphasis on cycling because of course that is how most children get to school each day. Most of the cards are about cycling.

The set is called "unhealthy excuses" and deals with various excuses that children might make to get a lift to school instead of cycling. Each excuse is untrue. Clockwise from the top left:

1. The car is much quicker (by design in this country, cycling within town is generally quicker than driving).
2. My bag is much too heavy
3. It's too far ("Dad, do you know how far that walk is ? It's 50000 centimetres!")
4. It's raining ("I just can't wear this rain jacket").

None of these excuses are good enough for Dutch school children, and I don't really think they are very good excuses for adults either...

It is perhaps of interest that there is no excuse in the set of cycling being "too dangerous". A feeling of danger is the main reason for people not cycling elsewhere, but generally people feel safe here.

There are quite a few posts about school travel on this blog, including one showing children arriving by bike at a primary school when the temperature is -2 C.