Does segregation help the experienced cyclist?

User avatar
Wanlock Dod
Posts: 506
Joined: 28 Sep 2016, 5:48pm

Re: Does segregation help the experienced cyclist?

Postby Wanlock Dod » 8 Aug 2019, 8:29am

Cugel wrote:There are many factors involved as contributory causes of increased cycling in London. One is the large cost of travel by other means. Another is that it's a lot faster than other modes of travel.

I don’t think that any of the other relevant factors have undergone much of an abrupt change in recent years which could be correlated with the changes in the levels of cycling, but I look forward to being corrected.

Cugel wrote:Does the provision of cycling infrastructure, such as it is, also contribute as a cause to the increase? Perhaps - but how do you detect the degree of causation contributed by all the many factors involved?...

Is there any evidence to suggest that not providing infrastructure would have resulted in a similar or greater increase in levels of cycling? Can you provide any contemporary examples of places which have significantly facilitated cycling without providing segregated infrastructure?

Approaches towards addressing, and quantifying, both of these kinds of questions have been the bread and butter of science and statistics for decades, although such analyses are limited by the quality of the data available. This is usually overcome by a weight of evidence analysis to ensure the reliability and uncertainties associated with any conclusions drawn. Will you be presenting any evidence up to the scale?

Cugel wrote:London is a special case because it has the tradition, means, population, importance and other factors that mean large amounts of dosh will be spent on "London Things" that will never be spent elsewhere....

I have heard many times of examples which are special cases, where the relationships derived elsewhere wouldn’t apply. Can you provide any evidence that London doesn’t fit well with what we find when we compare it against other towns and cities. Despite all of the things that are special and different about London can you really show that it can’t be treated as part of a larger population of towns and cities worldwide, at least as far as correlation between factors like traffic, cycling, and population density?

Is it really even relevant what current cyclists of Little Britain think about what would be required to encourage and enable most people in the country to ride bikes rather than take their cars for journeys of between about 0.5 and 5 km? Is there any reason why we shouldn’t just ask them, after all they are the ones that would have to do something differently if things were to change?

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 14156
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Does segregation help the experienced cyclist?

Postby mjr » 8 Aug 2019, 6:18pm

Wanlock Dod wrote:
Cugel wrote:There are many factors involved as contributory causes of increased cycling in London. One is the large cost of travel by other means. Another is that it's a lot faster than other modes of travel.

I don’t think that any of the other relevant factors have undergone much of an abrupt change in recent years which could be correlated with the changes in the levels of cycling, but I look forward to being corrected.

It is important to recognise that the launch of the London Cycle Hire in 2010 gave numbers a boost too, but there was already some mediocre infrastructure by that point (the Seven Stations Link, most of the Bloomsbury and Covent Garden contraflows and modal filters, possibly others) and I don't think it would have worked so well without it. the hire bikes may have been simply releasing demand that had been blocked by train company cycle bans.

I think there have been other steps up most times a new wave of infrastructure comes into use, although limited to the areas improved and ripples therefrom, of course.

I would love to know where has boosted cycling without infrastructure (or major disruption), if only the anti-infrastructuralists would say...
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4078
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: Does segregation help the experienced cyclist?

Postby bovlomov » 8 Aug 2019, 10:25pm

mjr wrote:I think there have been other steps up most times a new wave of infrastructure comes into use, although limited to the areas improved and ripples therefrom, of course.

I would love to know where has boosted cycling without infrastructure (or major disruption), if only the anti-infrastructuralists would say...

From here at the top of London I have regular routes and rush-hour alternatives to the City, the West End and Paddington. There is very little in the way of cycling infrastructure whichever way I choose. A bit more, closer to the centre, but not a lot. It is my impression that there are fewer cyclists in this direction than elsewhere in the capital, but that might be as much to do with the hills as with the facilities. The hills towards Hampstead and Highgate probably do discourage the casual rider, regardless of segregation.

User avatar
Wanlock Dod
Posts: 506
Joined: 28 Sep 2016, 5:48pm

Re: Does segregation help the experienced cyclist?

Postby Wanlock Dod » 10 Aug 2019, 9:16pm

Meanwhile, according to Transport for London (TfL), 2018 saw the highest growth in kilometers cycled since monitoring began, increasing almost 5% from the previous year.

The article seems to be referring to the increase between 2017 and 2018. There are those that would say that with every additional safe, segregated, cycling route the available provision becomes closer towards being a functional network that is able to support a greater range of journeys for a larger portion of the population.

mjr wrote:I would love to know where has boosted cycling without infrastructure (or major disruption), if only the anti-infrastructuralists would say...

Perhaps some people just don’t believe in it enough, and if they were simply able to stop talking it down and wish for it a bit harder we could all be benefiting from the great cycling Nirvana.

User avatar
The utility cyclist
Posts: 2517
Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 12:28pm
Location: The first garden city

Re: Does segregation help the experienced cyclist?

Postby The utility cyclist » 10 Aug 2019, 10:30pm

Wanlock Dod wrote:
The utility cyclist wrote:... however we've seen ZERO increase going down the segregated cycle lane route...

Somebody is spouting utter nonsense. Englandshire has seen an appreciable reduction in levels of cycling in recent years (and there doesn’t seem to be any evidence that things are any less bad in other parts of the UK), but the one place that has invested in decent quality segregated infrastructure is London, and they seem to be the only place where there has been a considerable increase in levels of cycling.

Why Has Bicycle Use Fallen In England But Risen In London?

Given that London accounts for about 15% of the population of Englandshire the decline in the rest of the country must have been rather greater than the headline figure of about an 8% drop for the country as a whole would suggest.

instead of your aggressive language actually avail yourself of the facts.

I've not said at any point just London have I, also in London the hundreds of thousands of vehicles reduced is primarily due to the emissions charging https://www.citymetric.com/transport/lo ... ge-it-3751. So the fact hundreds of thousands of motor vehicles have been taken out of London due to the emissions charging has not changed matters at all? Cycling has increased DESPITE the garbage infra in London, there's a few miles that are adequate, most of it is dog dirt and inferior to what I showed in the photo previously.

However, as I was not referring to London in isolation, has there been an increase in overall cycling across the country yes or no, I'll give you a clue, the answer is no as I said.
Is London the only place where we have segregated infra, yes or no, again I'll give you another clue, the answer is no.
And as above there are other factors as to why London has seen increases in cycling, nothing to do with the infra, it was also increasing BEFORE the infra and continues despite the garbage that is provided.
Whatever your take on it, NOT segregating people on bikes and stealing away a massively wide section of the road as per my pic is a far better solution.

User avatar
Wanlock Dod
Posts: 506
Joined: 28 Sep 2016, 5:48pm

Re: Does segregation help the experienced cyclist?

Postby Wanlock Dod » 11 Aug 2019, 7:48am

I’m not actually making any claims though, I have only reported what others are saying.
London’s cycling czar, Will Norman, said: “London is bucking the national trend because we’re delivering the high-quality routes that make such a big difference making cyclists feel safe.”

I’m not sure what your point is about the congestion charge, or how a step change over 15 years ago is making such a difference to levels of cycling now.

I’m sure that I am not the only one who is looking forward to hearing about all of the examples of places where levels of cycling have been increased considerably without investing in high quality segregated infrastructure, and I am beginning to think that might be because there aren’t any.

User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 2785
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Does segregation help the experienced cyclist?

Postby Cugel » 11 Aug 2019, 9:24am

Wanlock Dod wrote:I’m not actually making any claims though, I have only reported what others are saying.
London’s cycling czar, Will Norman, said: “London is bucking the national trend because we’re delivering the high-quality routes that make such a big difference making cyclists feel safe.”

I’m not sure what your point is about the congestion charge, or how a step change over 15 years ago is making such a difference to levels of cycling now.

I’m sure that I am not the only one who is looking forward to hearing about all of the examples of places where levels of cycling have been increased considerably without investing in high quality segregated infrastructure, and I am beginning to think that might be because there aren’t any.


I'll just mention again that the complexity of the subject (cycling infrastructure <> amount of cycling) is so complex that simple conclusions such as "more infrastructure has & will increased cycling levels" are highly suspect. There are too many factors involved for such a simple cause & effect relationship to be computed.

May I just mention The Three Body Problem and the impossibility of predicting what multiple intersecting dynamic factors will produce as outcomes. This unpredictability works the other way - we cannot differentiate all the causes and effects of extant situations when the number of factors involved is large. Even three factors make it hard to impossible to discern cause-effect relationships. There are dozens of factors at work when considering human traffic behaviours and phenomena in a wider society - that also includes the metaphysical factors of human psychology and communications.

Cugel

User avatar
Wanlock Dod
Posts: 506
Joined: 28 Sep 2016, 5:48pm

Re: Does segregation help the experienced cyclist?

Postby Wanlock Dod » 11 Aug 2019, 10:54am

It is one thing to highlight the uncertainty, but that is quite different from providing any evidence that the assertion might not be true. This seems to have been the main approach of climate change deniers for the last couple of decades.

I put forward the correlation that cities which have invested in high quality segregated infrastructure generally tend to be those which have higher levels of cycling, although there must be some exceptions. I believe that the overall correlation stands regardless of any uncertainties associated with definitively identifying the provision of high quality segregated infrastructure as the sole contributor.

I put forward Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Groningen, and Utrecht as a small selection of cities with high levels of high quality segregated infrastructure and high levels of cycling. Similarly, I put forward Aberdeen and Glasgow as cities with limited levels of high quality segregated infrastructure and rather lower levels of cycling. I’m still looking forward to hearing about some examples of places which have achieved high levels of cycling without segregated infrastructure.

As a brief aside I will just mention that almost two thirds of the population of Little Britain consider it to be too dangerous to cycle on the roads. How can ignoring the opinions of most people ever lead to higher levels of cycling?

User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 2785
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Does segregation help the experienced cyclist?

Postby Cugel » 11 Aug 2019, 12:56pm

Wanlock Dod wrote:It is one thing to highlight the uncertainty, but that is quite different from providing any evidence that the assertion might not be true. This seems to have been the main approach of climate change deniers for the last couple of decades.

I put forward the correlation that cities which have invested in high quality segregated infrastructure generally tend to be those which have higher levels of cycling, although there must be some exceptions. I believe that the overall correlation stands regardless of any uncertainties associated with definitively identifying the provision of high quality segregated infrastructure as the sole contributor.

I put forward Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Groningen, and Utrecht as a small selection of cities with high levels of high quality segregated infrastructure and high levels of cycling. Similarly, I put forward Aberdeen and Glasgow as cities with limited levels of high quality segregated infrastructure and rather lower levels of cycling. I’m still looking forward to hearing about some examples of places which have achieved high levels of cycling without segregated infrastructure.

As a brief aside I will just mention that almost two thirds of the population of Little Britain consider it to be too dangerous to cycle on the roads. How can ignoring the opinions of most people ever lead to higher levels of cycling?


Climate change can be reduced to a simple relationship: more CO2 in the atmosphere causes greater absorption of solar energy and a more energetic climate. Yet even the best models can't predict the detailed effects; or attribute various energetic weather events to the exact level of CO2 increase. Cycling infrastructure relationships to levels of cycling can't be so-simplified as there is no single factor with such an overarching effect as CO2 has on atmospheric heating.

There was (and still is a remnant of) cycling infrastructure besides various roads, usually in the form a quite wide cycle path. These fell mostly into disuse and the causes were probably many, including the advent of the car (as a preference, not a dangerous inhibitor to cycling). This means that their provision did not cause more cycling, since cycling greatly decreased in Britain from the late 40s and early 50s. Many other factors were involved in that besides the level of cycling infrastructure.

The high levels of cycling in those places you mention may occur, in part, on the basis of cycling infrastructure provision; but the causes of greater cycling there are likely to include many other factors, not least cultural-psychological factors.

People considering it dangerous to cycle on the roads ..... there are numerous ways to address that besides providing other paths to cycle down, not least: much better policing of motorists; information and rhetoric to underline how safe cycling on the roads actually is compared to many other everyday activities.

Don't forget also that means to encourage cycling (other than dedicated cycling infrastructure provision) such as making roads actually and psychologically safer for cyclists may have many other beneficial effects on non-cyclists: less RTAs; perhaps less pollution & CO2; etc.. Cycling infrastructure won't address any of those other numerous ills except in a minor or peripheral way. If they did and the roads became bereft of much car traffic, the roads would be once more suitable for cycling by even the most scaredy-cat would-be cyclists! What a paradox, eh? :-)

*****
I feel you're still missing my central point, though: complex interacting systems are inherently unpredictable, with causes and effects being applied having many unforeseen consequences .... even the opposite consequence to the central effect one was trying to achieve. That's not to say that experimentation to find causative factors resulting in a desired and stable state can't be found. But such experiments can be very costly and there's no guarantee they'll work. Far better to revert to already tried and tested causes, such as far better road policing and financial nudges to make cars far less attractive as a means of transport than a bike or walking.

Cugel

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 14156
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Does segregation help the experienced cyclist?

Postby mjr » 11 Aug 2019, 1:42pm

Cugel wrote:[
I feel you're still missing my central point, though: complex interacting systems are inherently unpredictable, with causes and effects being applied having many unforeseen consequences .... even the opposite consequence to the central effect one was trying to achieve. That's not to say that experimentation to find causative factors resulting in a desired and stable state can't be found. But such experiments can be very costly and there's no guarantee they'll work. Far better to revert to already tried and tested causes, such as far better road policing and financial nudges to make cars far less attractive as a means of transport than a bike or walking.

Tried and tested! Where have these been tested without cycling infrastructure and succeeded? Despite the complaint about others missing central points (and I am not sure anyone misses that there are many factors and building won't fix it alone), you seem to have missed that central point.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

reohn2
Posts: 36704
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Does segregation help the experienced cyclist?

Postby reohn2 » 11 Aug 2019, 2:53pm

Wanlock Dod wrote:......I put forward Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Groningen, and Utrecht as a small selection of cities with high levels of high quality segregated infrastructure and high levels of cycling. Similarly, I put forward Aberdeen and Glasgow as cities with limited levels of high quality segregated infrastructure and rather lower levels of cycling.

Quite!
And where there's very little or no quality infrastructure there's very low levels of cycling.The reason is a simple one,fear of motors,coupled with high motor use because of that fear chicken/egg.
Build the quality infrastructure,restrict car use,and cycling numbers will rise overnight IMHO.
I’m still looking forward to hearing about some examples of places which have achieved high levels of cycling without segregated infrastructure

You may be in for a long wait :wink:

As a brief aside I will just mention that almost two thirds of the population of Little Britain consider it to be too dangerous to cycle on the roads. How can ignoring the opinions of most people ever lead to higher levels of cycling?

Right again!
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.

User avatar
Wanlock Dod
Posts: 506
Joined: 28 Sep 2016, 5:48pm

Re: Does segregation help the experienced cyclist?

Postby Wanlock Dod » 11 Aug 2019, 5:18pm

Cugel wrote:People considering it dangerous to cycle on the roads ..... there are numerous ways to address that besides providing other paths to cycle down, not least: much better policing of motorists; information and rhetoric to underline how safe cycling on the roads actually is compared to many other everyday activities.

We are still waiting for some examples to support your assertions though, with a very strong preference for ones from the last quarter of a century. Whilst you might have a model so far you have not provided any empirical evidence to suggest that it would be successful in the modern world. It is all good and well to have an idea, but if money is to be spent, and if people need to change their lifestyles, it seems likely that only tried and tested approaches will actually make it as far as implementation.

Please bear in mind that, as far as I can tell, people don’t think that you are wrong but rather question how palatable your proposed approach might be to contemporary society in Little Britain.

User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 2785
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Does segregation help the experienced cyclist?

Postby Cugel » 12 Aug 2019, 9:29am

Wanlock Dod wrote:
Cugel wrote:People considering it dangerous to cycle on the roads ..... there are numerous ways to address that besides providing other paths to cycle down, not least: much better policing of motorists; information and rhetoric to underline how safe cycling on the roads actually is compared to many other everyday activities.

We are still waiting for some examples to support your assertions though, with a very strong preference for ones from the last quarter of a century. Whilst you might have a model so far you have not provided any empirical evidence to suggest that it would be successful in the modern world. It is all good and well to have an idea, but if money is to be spent, and if people need to change their lifestyles, it seems likely that only tried and tested approaches will actually make it as far as implementation.

Please bear in mind that, as far as I can tell, people don’t think that you are wrong but rather question how palatable your proposed approach might be to contemporary society in Little Britain.


Well ....

Firsty, the notion of improved and increased policing of the existing rules of the road is by definition a means to reduce the harms caused by not obeying the rules of the road, which disobedience increases when not policed. Or do you feel that the existing rules of the road (laws and otherwise) are all wrong in that respect of reducing harm? Or that more policing won't improve driver behaviour?

Secondly, one must mention that there are very few if any places where the general policing of the roads has increased within the last quarter of a century. So, from that point of view you're correct to say I haven't offered any evidence for a cause-effect relationship between increased road policing and reduction of harm (or a subsequent increase in cycling). Such evidence can't be found because there has been no such "experiment".

Thirdly, my point was that the issue under discussion is not readily amenable to simple analysis and identification of indisputable cause-effect relationships. This applies to increased road policing <> increased cycling. However, given the various surveys drawing the conclusion that "I don't cycle because it feels dangerous" we might at least assume that a reduction in danger might reduce that psychological factor preventing more people taking up cycling.

Fourthly, there are some indicator-experiments that seem to indicate that reduced traffic and more policing of drivers will increase cycling. Two examples are, respectively, the (permanent or temporary) banning of cars from city centres in places like Madrid or Paris; the various UK police initiatives & drives to reduce close-passing.

Cugel

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 14156
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Does segregation help the experienced cyclist?

Postby mjr » 12 Aug 2019, 10:03am

Cugel wrote:Firsty, the notion of improved and increased policing of the existing rules of the road is by definition a means to reduce the harms caused by not obeying the rules of the road, which disobedience increases when not policed. Or do you feel that the existing rules of the road (laws and otherwise) are all wrong in that respect of reducing harm? Or that more policing won't improve driver behaviour?

I hope you are correct but do we have evidence that disobedience decreases when policed?

On a semi-related topic, we have seen high-profile crackdowns on unroadworthy vehicles (which often seem to take place by my front gate!), but it's still estimated that over 25% of vehicles have no current MOT certificate, which suggests to me that more policing does not necessarily mean less disobedience.

Cugel wrote:Secondly, one must mention that there are very few if any places where the general policing of the roads has increased within the last quarter of a century. So, from that point of view you're correct to say I haven't offered any evidence for a cause-effect relationship between increased road policing and reduction of harm (or a subsequent increase in cycling). Such evidence can't be found because there has been no such "experiment".

So you miswrote when you referred to "tried and tested" in viewtopic.php?p=1384997#p1384997 ?

Cugel wrote:Thirdly, my point was that the issue under discussion is not readily amenable to simple analysis and identification of indisputable cause-effect relationships. This applies to increased road policing <> increased cycling. However, given the various surveys drawing the conclusion that "I don't cycle because it feels dangerous" we might at least assume that a reduction in danger might reduce that psychological factor preventing more people taking up cycling.

I think most would agree that it's not simple - which is part of why a simple fix of increased road policing alone seems unlikely to work.

Cugel wrote:Fourthly, there are some indicator-experiments that seem to indicate that reduced traffic and more policing of drivers will increase cycling. Two examples are, respectively, the (permanent or temporary) banning of cars from city centres in places like Madrid or Paris; the various UK police initiatives & drives to reduce close-passing.

Those two examples do not seem very informative about policing because Madrid and Paris have also been improving infrastructure apace; and is there any correlation between areas running Operation Close Pass and recently-reported cycling level changes? I wish it weren't so but my borough has had Operation Close Pass start but cycling levels fall :-( which I suspect is partly due to a near-total absence of cycle route projects 2013-18 while only cities and national parks were getting funding from Whitehall for new ones and other transport budgets were redirected through the unaccountable/under-accountable Local Transport Bodies.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

visionset
Posts: 16
Joined: 1 Aug 2019, 10:31am

Re: Does segregation help the experienced cyclist?

Postby visionset » 13 Aug 2019, 9:35am

Wanlock Dod wrote:Please bear in mind that, as far as I can tell, people don’t think that you are wrong but rather question how palatable your proposed approach might be to contemporary society in Little Britain.


There are a lot of very unpalatable solutions that need to be made as a matter or urgency, cycling like brexit pales into insignificance next to those. At least the right solution for cycling is directly in line with those. I hope that's not too cryptic!