Most Urban Streets are Still Inhospitable Places for Cyclists

Dave Horton, August 2011

Dr. Dave Horton is a research associate at Lancaster University's Environment Centre. He is one of the academic members of an EPSRC funded research project by Lancaster, Leeds and Oxford Brookes universities into trying to understand why people make the travel decision they do in relation to cycling and walking. Details of the project, which is due to produce its final report next month, can be found here: LEC - Society and Environment

Dr. Horton presented initial findings from the project at the Cycling Communities Conference hosted by Leicester City Council in June. These were reported in Local Transport Today (LTT 573 17 June-30 June) and partially challenged in a letter to LTT last month from David Dansky, head of training and development at Cycle Training UK (LTT 574 1 July - 14 July). The reply replicated below appeared in the subsequent edition (LTT 565 15 July-28 July). In it Dr. Horton expands on the findings and adds some personal comments.

It's great to see David Dansky challenge the preliminary findings from the Understanding Walking and Cycling research project in which I am involved (final findings will be announced in September) (Letters LTT 01 July).

I have enormous respect for those who, like David, are working hard to get more people cycling. The very many and varied efforts to get England cycling are all important and are all contributing to the changes that most of us ultimately want to see for the sake of urban conviviality and planetary sustainability.

However, our research makes clear that measures to change people's behaviour (whether in the form of cycle training or through initiatives such as personalised travel planning) will have only a limited effect whilst the generally atrocious conditions for cycling across urban England remain. Many of the people we have spoken to are positive about cycling, will ride when they consider conditions to be conducive and are willing to entertain the idea of making more trips by bike.

But certainly if the four cities - Lancaster, Leeds, Leicester and Worcester - across which our research took place are anything to go by, such fine sentiments are generally not translating to actual urban utility cycling journeys because most of the 'city out there' is still remarkably inhospitable to the bicycle.

I agree with David that London is doing better than elsewhere and that the kinds of initiatives that he outlines (such as cycle training and Transport for London's other promotional efforts) are having an impact. And I also agree that getting more people cycling requires an holistic approach. But, as he notes, the rest of the country is, in key respects (including demographically and in levels of car ownership) rather unlike London.

I would add, also, a word about our ambitions; when I am happy for my ten-year-old son and eight-year-old daughter to cycle independently around Lancaster (a city that has benefitted from six years of funding under Cycling England's Cycling Demonstration Town project), then I will personally feel we are on course in building a culture of mass cycling. But although both my children are competent cyclists, I feel a long way from that now. And my question to David would be: 'Would I be wise to let them ride in London?'

Finally, to be clear, the research is not saying segregation is all that's required to get people cycling. It is saying, though, that the installation of high quality and continuous segregated facilities for cycling on major arterial routes in cities is a vital part of the package.

Dave Horton
Lancaster University