The British Medical Journal carries an interesting paper about what works in promoting cycling. It is 'open access' http://www.bmj.com/content/341/bmj.c5293.full
The associated editorial is not free but I'd be pleased to email a PDF to anyone who requests. (pwward1@gmail.com)
BMJ paper about Promoting Cycling
Re: BMJ paper about Promoting Cycling
Cost was the primary motivator in me getting on my bike. Simply couldn't afford to keep a second car just to sit it in a car-park at work (and work was rather close for a good while).
Now that I'm on the bike I wouldn't go back, I look at jobs which are within bike or bike+train distance, and not at others.
My default mode of transport has changed but it wasn't advertising, or tree hugging it was simple economics.
Of course I now (or will in a week or so) have a cycle with a value greater than that of many cars, and carry insurance (thanks CTC) - but running costs are very much lower than a car.
So we need a massive, punitive "second car" license
Now that I'm on the bike I wouldn't go back, I look at jobs which are within bike or bike+train distance, and not at others.
My default mode of transport has changed but it wasn't advertising, or tree hugging it was simple economics.
Of course I now (or will in a week or so) have a cycle with a value greater than that of many cars, and carry insurance (thanks CTC) - but running costs are very much lower than a car.
So we need a massive, punitive "second car" license
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
Re: BMJ paper about Promoting Cycling
I'm afraid my eyes glaze over quite soon reading those papers, but the general message I got was:
- Infrastructure can be effective, but other 'marketing' type approaches are just as good.
I would guess decent infrastructure is very expensive (i.e. paint is cheap, but junction redesign just costs too much), so other approaches look more cost-effective.
- Infrastructure can be effective, but other 'marketing' type approaches are just as good.
I would guess decent infrastructure is very expensive (i.e. paint is cheap, but junction redesign just costs too much), so other approaches look more cost-effective.
Re: BMJ paper about Promoting Cycling
Following the links, a number of previous BMJ papers have said the same thing: interventions cause only a few percentage points of modal shift. These interventions are quite small-scale; I can't find any mention of equiping a city with segregation, for example.
Re: BMJ paper about Promoting Cycling
I can't find any mention of equiping a city with segregation, for example.
Well there was one in Delft, Netherlands. (Wilmink A, Hartman J. Evaluation of the Delft bicycle network plan: final summary report. Ministry of Transport and Public Works, Netherlands, 1987.). In this fairly unique case the city of Delft, which had on-road cycle facilities was equipped at great expense over a few years with a segregated cycle network. This was audited by the govt.
As the BMJ paper reports:
"The proportion of household trips made by bicycle rose from 40% to 43% in the intervention area over a three year period and from 38% to 39% in a control area of the city."
The bicycle already had a high modal share in Delft and it went up a bit, but there is no control group mentioned. One might suggest it was a very poor result for the millions of Guilders invested. Other Dutch cities may have seen similar rises. One can't extrapolate these results to the UK as no-where has cycle use anywhere approaching 40%.
Well there was one in Delft, Netherlands. (Wilmink A, Hartman J. Evaluation of the Delft bicycle network plan: final summary report. Ministry of Transport and Public Works, Netherlands, 1987.). In this fairly unique case the city of Delft, which had on-road cycle facilities was equipped at great expense over a few years with a segregated cycle network. This was audited by the govt.
As the BMJ paper reports:
"The proportion of household trips made by bicycle rose from 40% to 43% in the intervention area over a three year period and from 38% to 39% in a control area of the city."
The bicycle already had a high modal share in Delft and it went up a bit, but there is no control group mentioned. One might suggest it was a very poor result for the millions of Guilders invested. Other Dutch cities may have seen similar rises. One can't extrapolate these results to the UK as no-where has cycle use anywhere approaching 40%.