Updated: That Cycling Revolution

A couple of years ago, when I had some time to waste flicking through the four decade history of stalled and deliberately ineffective “pro-cycling” transport policies, I created one of my simplest but most enduringly popular posts: a graph of That Cycling Revolution we keep hearing about.

The concept was simple (and crudely implemented) but I think must have made the point strikingly: taking quotes celebrating a “bike boom”, a renaissance of cycling, a grand new policy, or, most absurdly of all, a golden age of cycling and overlaying them on a graph of cycling’s great decline and stagnation in this country.

But of course, we were in the midst of a cycling revolution at the very time! The Olympics were coming! We were going to ride the wave! Sadly, at the time, the Department for Transport traffic survey data that was used as the basis of the graph only reached as far as 2010, when we were merely in the midst of a cycling revolution. So how did 2012′s cycling revolution work out? Last year’s numbers are in and it’s time to look at an updated picture.

(This time, to avoid faffing with crudely adding the annotations in PS, I’ve found the Google Docs annotations functionality, which unfortunately is very limited in the control it gives you over display style (and doesn’t give quite the right feel to the different types of data that crude PS labels gave), so click to embiggen and get the quotes…)

bikeboom

(Edited to add, thanks to @johnstevensonx, here’s a fancier one you can hover over to get the quotes.)

Oh what a change.

As ever, I’ll repeat Dave Horton’s warning here:

there are two clear and present problems which bedevil UK cycling advocacy: one is the requirement to trumpet any and all gains, however minor or potentially imaginary, in order for us to legitimate and reproduce ourselves as advocates; the other is a rush to interpret any sign of growth in cycling as both ‘good’ and a clear sign that investments in cycling are paying dividends, when a wider and more critical analysis might concur with neither.

And as before there are caveats to consider, besides the (pretty much irrelevant to the final results) fact that I adjusted GB distances to UK population change. The two in particular that occurred to me being:

Firstly, the annual traffic estimates are based on manual traffic counts for a (large) sample of roads. They don’t include off-road routes like railway paths, which have been slowly appearing over the past three decades. Unfortunately I doubt there are anywhere near enough such routes to make any relevant difference to the national numbers. Of course, in a few places they might make a difference to the local numbers, which brings us to…

Secondly, they are national numbers, and I’m sure people will still want to argue that cycling in their city is booming. In London, for example, there genuinely has been growth in the numbers of people on bikes in inner and central London over the past couple of decades. But at the same time, cycling in outer London plummeted, stabilising only in recent years.

A caveat to the caveat, though. When the CTC put together a map showing changes in cycling commuter share between the 2001 and 2011 census, people were keen to find meaning in the numbers. Why was there an apparent bike boom over here? Why did cycling rates crash over there? But in most of the country, all that the map really showed is the same thing that the DfT’s distance estimates show: that cycling hit rock bottom long ago and the tiny numbers continue to fluctuate — mostly by fractions of mode share percentage points — randomly.

If you did the stats properly, perhaps you could pin a robust narrative to the data — small but significant rural declines to small but significant inner urban gains seems to be one of the more attractive hypotheses*. But you couldn’t make the stories of the cycling revolution – or the policies that were supposedly to make one come about – stick.

(For the data and info on sources, see the Google Doc.)

* but equally you can find evidence that suggests the exact opposite and evidence that recently there’s no nationwide urban/rural trend at all; none of the evidence is all that good, and all it really says is that rates are fluctuating at low levels.

About these ads

6 responses to “Updated: That Cycling Revolution

  1. “Dead Cat” bounce in the mid seventies for teh oil crisis and then basically flat lining ever since…

  2. TBH I couldn’t care less about mass cycling, I just care about having decent infrastructure to cycle on.

    If the vast majority of people want to live sedentary lives and go to an early grave, good luck to them.

    Sure I may wrap myself in the guise of a mass cycling advocate and state “build it & they will come” to councillors, highways & cycling officers but really I’m saying “build it & I’ll stop pestering you, as I’ll have somewhere nice & safe to ride”.

  3. Well you can put me in the cares-about-mass-cycling camp. Which is why you’ll find me scoffing at talk of cycling being helped by cycle-sport boom off the back of Hoy & Wiggo- even tho I really enjoy TdF, I just don’t think it has anything to do with whether ten year olds cycle to school. Double cyclesport and what’s that, expressed as a mode-share change? 1% to 1.5%? Not what the nation’s children or the NHS need from us right now.

  4. “TBH I couldn’t care less about mass cycling, I just care about having decent infrastructure to cycle on”.

    And there lies the problem of the ‘avid cyclist’. It is only when the bicycle has been presented as a credible transport option to the non-cycling public that politicians will feel ‘obliged’ to take the necessary first steps. The use of highly ‘aspirational’ marketing strategies are needed to help lift the public perception of cycling beyond its current ‘outlier status’.

  5. “The use of highly ‘aspirational’ marketing strategies are needed to help lift the public perception of cycling beyond its current ‘outlier status’”

    Good luck with that.

  6. Pingback: Will the Tour de France be good for cycling in the UK? Part Two | Road Danger Reduction Forum

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s