However, not everyone experiences these benefits equally. In our contemporary, car-centric world, active travel—here referring to walking and cycling—is decreasing globally, and who can enjoy safe, active, and independent mobility in an urban context is often a matter of social privilege (Antón-González et al., 2026).

Many academic studies have explored the complex interplay of environment, infrastructure, and identity in shaping urban mobility decisions. At the same time, recent articles from the Urban Cycling Institute reveal the shortcomings of peer-reviewed research, both in terms of inequitable knowledge production and the failure to mobilize findings into tangible and lasting systems change.

Often published in siloed echo chambers or behind prohibitive paywalls, traditional scientific research risks merely “preaching to the choir” if it is not actually used to inform policy and practice. To help bridge the gap between academic literature and implementation, this three-part series translates and synthesizes recent research in sustainable active mobility with the goal of reaching planners, practitioners, policymakers, and communities. Within three primary themes from the literature, the series explores key barriers and opportunities for urban cycling and shares actionable takeaways to advance healthier, more liveable, and more equitable cities for the future.

Theme 1: The Built Environment

Among three emergent themes from the literature, I begin with perhaps the most obvious: the physical and material conditions of our environments. Findings within this theme centre around the question: how do the contours of the urban landscape shape how we live, move, and feel in our cities?

Let’s imagine a parent’s daily school drop-off commute. If cycling, this parent might look for narrower, residential streets, away from the noise and smog of heavy traffic arteries. By carefully selecting a route that is protected from the elements—perhaps interspersed with shady greenery, bodies of water, and urban design features—they’ll provide a safe, pleasant, and enriching travel experience for themself and their child. In the absence of such a route, however, they may opt to drive or take public transit instead.

This example illustrates how local conditions moderate mobility decisions, a relationship that has been extensively explored across urban sustainable mobility literature. By and large, the research shows that cyclists prioritize routes that balance travel efficiency, safety, comfort, and aesthetic enjoyment (Lu et al., 2025). Factors like directness, proximity, terrain, land-use mix, urban density, traffic volume, building height, and the presence of neighborhood commercial and recreational facilities all play a crucial role in enabling or deterring cycling in cities (Ding et al., 2025; Zhu et al., 2026).

Cycling as Embodied Experience

Going beyond the macro-level focus on structural accessibility and connectivity, researchers are increasingly working to understand decisions made on the micro-scale, exploring cycling as a situated experience that unfolds within individual bodies at the street level (Ding et al., 2025). Unlike those traveling in enclosed motorized transport like cars and buses, cyclists are exposed directly to the textures, frictions, and tensions of the road, and therefore are especially sensitive to the material and perceptual qualities of the urban streetscape.

Cyclists and pedestrians alike demonstrate a preference for streets that are more open, continuous, and green (Lu et al., 2025). Environmental exposures like air quality, climate, precipitation, wind, and noise pollution also directly impact the comfort and viability of cycling; in fact, studies show that cyclists will deviate from the most direct route for more favorable environmental conditions.

Bike-Positive Infrastructure

While conditions like hilliness, weather, sprawl, and compact historic urban fabrics pose distinctive challenges for urban cycling, environmental factors alone do not determine cycling viability. (Ding et al., 2025). Rather, the research shows that, above all other factors, travel choices are determined by the infrastructure that is available to us (Antón-González et al., 2026).

Returning to our example of the parents’ school commute, we can see how layering additional built environment elements like dedicated cycling lanes separated from vehicle traffic, well-maintained surfaces, clearly marked intersections and crossings, large radius curves, interspersed benches for rest, and secure bike parking might help encourage cycling over other modes—by increasing the ease and comfort of the journey.

Further, recent research from Prado et al. (2026) used mobile ethnographic methods—where participants video-record their journey and later talk through their experiences while watching the videos—to investigate how cycling infrastructure is experienced in motion. Specifically, they looked at the impact of continuity or a sense of “flow” in encouraging or deterring cycling. While cycling infrastructure may be technically available, a cyclist’s experience of inconsistency or obstructions fragments the sense of continuity and diminishes the ease and enjoyment of the ride. Examples of obstructions include excessively narrow lanes, physical barriers, inadequate or unclear signage, or a lack of cycling facilities.

Infrastructure provision must go beyond simply connecting A to B, providing robust, interconnected infrastructure networks rather than isolated interventions.

Towards More Hospitable Urban Ecosystems

The research makes clear that the material conditions of our environments play a crucial role in fostering urban cycling cultures. Infrastructure directly shapes travel behavior, and the availability of smooth, pleasant, green, and well-connected cycling networks matters more than route directness or efficiency.

Recent articles have illustrated how cities from Davis, California to Bologna, Italy are working to transform once car-dominated streetscapes into thriving urban ecologies teeming with two-wheeled life: by building protected cycle lanes and bike parking infrastructure, implementing creative civil-society bike sharing systems, expanding public transit networks, and integrating intentional urban design, among other interventions.

Yet cycling is not merely a matter of infrastructure provision, and policies that only take into consideration built factors may fall short of achieving their most ambitious sustainability targets—or meeting the needs of their communities. The success of infrastructural interventions is inherently context-specific and must be grounded in the understanding that mobility is shaped as much by social structures as it is by material ones.

The remaining articles in this series will explore how social perceptions and demographic identity factors play into both access and experience in the context of urban sustainable and active mobility. Stay tuned!

This article was written by Ingrid Sant and is the first installment in a three-part series exploring barriers and opportunities for urban cycling as represented in contemporary academic literature. The next article will investigate the role of social perceptions in cycling practice. Sign up to our newsletter to receive the remaining articles in your inbox.

Subscribe now

Read next:

References

Antón-González, L., Villarrasa-Sapiña, I., González, L.-M., & Devís-Devís, J. (2026). Urban cycling: A non-linear analysis of transport amenities and socio-demographic and health variables. Journal of Transport Geography, 131, 104559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2026.104559

Ding, H., Wang, C., & Gath-Morad, M. (2025). How built environment shapes cycling experience: A multi-scale review in historical urban contexts. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2509.15657

Glaser, M. (2025, November 3). How Prioritizing the Car Has Shaped What Knowledge Matters and Whose Knowledge Counts (Substack). Urban Cycling Institute. https://urbancyclinginstitute.substack.com/p/how-prioritizing-the-car-has-shaped

Grasso, M. (2026, March 24). Bologna: The Italian City Rewriting Urban Planning (Substack). Urban Cycling Institute. https://urbancyclinginstitute.substack.com/p/bologna-the-italian-city-rewriting

Leeuwen, N. van. (2025, May 7). Cycling as Public Health: How Pedal Power Can Transform Our Cities and Our Lives (Substack). Urban Cycling Institute. https://urbancyclinginstitute.substack.com/p/cycling-and-public-health

Lu, C., Piatkowski, D., Östh, J., Kourtit, K., & Nijkamp, P. (2025). Modeling the impact of street-level built environment on cyclists’ route choice using street view images and GPS data. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science, 23998083251405122. https://doi.org/10.1177/23998083251405122

Power, D. (2026, March 12). Is It Time to Rethink Evidence-Based Cycling Policy? (Substack). Urban Cycling Institute. https://urbancyclinginstitute.substack.com/p/is-it-time-to-rethink-evidence-based

Prado, G., Strömberg, H., & Wallgren, P. (2026). Impact of cycling infrastructure on cyclists experience and sense of flow in two cities. Discover Cities, 3(1), 46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44327-026-00218-y

Raclet, L. (2025, January 29). Davis, The American Amsterdam: A Pioneering Cycling Town In Northern California (Substack). Urban Cycling Institute. https://urbancyclinginstitute.substack.com/p/davis-the-american-amsterdam-a-pioneering

Zhang, R. (2025, December 19). Comparative Research in Mobility: Reject Copy-Paste Design, Embrace the Peace and Joy of the Ride (Substack). Urban Cycling Institute. https://urbancyclinginstitute.substack.com/p/comparative-research-in-mobility

Zhu, Y., Qin, X., Wu, R., & Zhen, F. (2026). How is commute mode choice related to 2D and 3D land use mix? A case study of central Suqian City. Transportmetrica B: Transport Dynamics, 14(1), 2622498. https://doi.org/10.1080/21680566.2026.2622498

But, more than being great for Amsterdammers and visitors who like to cycle, this city is truly valuable for those who want to understand more about cycling culture, policy, and infrastructure. In fact, the city is the perfect place to study and test theories and ideas around active mobility: it features a variety of landscapes, spaces and stories, making it an ideal environment to understand what makes urban spaces great for all.

Having realized that, we decided to create a new one-week summer course that transforms Amsterdam into a true living lab. Here are a few reasons why:

1. Everyone Cycles Here

In Amsterdam, everyone cycles. Children, students, older adults, parents. Those living in the city center and those in the farthest neighborhoods outside the Ring. With 38% of trips being made by bicycle (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2021), cycling is everywhere, and common across genders, income levels, family sizes, and ethnicities. Of course, inequities still exist and need to be addressed (we have talked about this topic in a previous Substack post), but the image of the urban cyclist as a distinct personality, very well-defined in other cities, is far from the only one you will see in Amsterdam.

For researchers, planners, and students, this means that talking to a few cyclists in the city allows them to get a lot of different perspectives: a parent might be able to tell you about the safest routes to their children’s school, while a young adult could share their experience finding the right place to leave their bike when going for a night out.

2. It Is Always a Process, Even in Amsterdam

Though Amsterdam is known for its world-class cycling infrastructure, not all is perfect, and it has not always been this way. There are still many streets, intersections and even whole neighborhoods that have sub-par infrastructure. But the city is constantly improving, and has been since the 1970s when their approach to urban mobility shifted.

Besides the cost and time it takes to design and build infrastructure and policy, changing people’s habits and instilling a cycling culture also takes a long time. More than 50 years after the Nieuwmarkt riots, cars still take too much space and present a risk for the safety of pedestrians and cyclists in the city. However, the progress in these past 50 years is undeniable, and it has happened despite pushback, despite bureaucracy, and despite technical challenges.

So, more than an example of a perfectly designed city, Amsterdam can teach civil servants and decision makers about the processes that have taken it from a car-centric city in the 1970s to this pleasant, cycling-friendly city that it is today.

3. From Density to Greenery in a Short Bike Ride

As far as cities go, Amsterdam is not too large, in terms of surface area: the city itself is just under 250 km² (Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek, 2023). This is one fifth of New York City or a ninth of Tokyo. While it is part of a larger polycentric region, the Randstad, Amsterdam itself is surrounded by rural areas. Also within city limits there are several large parks, as well as low and medium-density neighborhoods, besides the dense city center and business districts.

For someone who is exploring the city by bicycle and trying to learn from its experience with cycling, this means that they can very easily test out cycling in a multitude of scenarios: cycling in the countryside, to shopping centers in the outskirts, to industrial parks and beaches, and from one park to another. If the city is too small, one can easily cycle to a small town nearby or to the next big city. And if going even farther, cycling to the train station (or even the airport!) is easy and seamless.

When using the city as a living lab, it is very convenient to be able to access a multitude of urban forms and use cases for the bicycle in the same day.

Bonus: When Amsterdam’s Lessons End, Ours Begin

Of course, not everything can be seen in Amsterdam. Known for being a very flat country, most of the Netherlands cannot really offer an exemplary experience for cycling in rugged terrain. Residents of warmer or colder countries will likely find the weather in the Netherlands “too mild”, and therefore not as challenging for cyclists as their home climate. While the Dutch rain and wind are no joke, it is true that other cities might face other challenges that Amsterdammers cannot say they have encountered very often.

For this reason, our course Unraveling the Cycling City: Actionable Steps Towards Better Mobility Futures aims to bring together researchers, practitioners, and decision makers from around the world. By doing so, not only will these participants test their knowledge in this living lab, but they will also be able to contrast and compare their different experiences in the city and at home with those of their peers. In the end, they will be able to build knowledge collectively and find answers to their questions, even if those answers do not come from Amsterdam itself.

Our course Unraveling the Cycling City: Actionable Steps Towards Better Mobility Futures will take place in Amsterdam between 8 and 12 June 2026. Registrations close on 19 April, so act fast! For more information and to register, visit our website:

More info

Discounts are available for groups of 2–4 people. For more information about this option, write to pedro@urbancyclinginstitute.org.

Read next:

References

Gemeente Amsterdam. (2021). Monitor Autoluw. Gemeente Amsterdam. https://openresearch.amsterdam/image/2021/3/23/monitor_autoluw_indicatoren_2019.pdf

Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. (2023). Kerncijfers wijken en buurten 2023. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/maatwerk/2025/38/kerncijfers-wijken-en-buurten-2023

In this newsletter:
Last call for abstract submissions for CRBAM 2026 in Ghent
Become a sponsor of CRBAM
Our team member Michela was invited to a podcast!
Happening this week: what have we been up to in Barcelona?
Other courses coming up in 2026
Our new summer course, Unraveling the Cycling City
Transformar la ciudad: la movilidad al servicio de las personas
Progettare la città ciclabile 2026, in Italian
Last chance to sign up for the Inclusive Mobility Training, in Dutch

CRBAM 2026 — Abstract Submission Deadline 29/03

This is your last chance to submit an abstract to the coolest cycling conference! We have extended the deadline to 29th March 2026, 11:59 CET. Click the button below to submit your work today!

Submit abstract

Your submission can range from an idea, a research project, published or unpublished paper, any work in progress, and more! We invite researchers from all backgrounds because CRB is about having an energizing dialogue that integrates ideas beyond disciplines and academic rules!

Further, you can sponsor a part of CRB and in-return leverage the gathering of experts and pioneers in mobility to help your work.

Sponsoring CRB presents you an opportunity to:

• Validate and improve your research question

• Gain ideas to help design an intervention

• Test your project’s scope

• And get feedback and insights to strengthen the work!

Please write to shefali@urbancyclinginstitute.org to receive the sponsorship prospectus and explore how we can help you help us!

To learn more, visit the website of the conference.

Michela Was on a Podcast

Michela Grasso, from Urban Cycling Institute’s team, was invited to Bike Talk Podcast to discuss the history of the bicycle through the resistance movements of World War 2.

The episode references her article “Resistance, Solidarity and Bicycles” from our Substack, which you can read below:

The entire podcast episode, titled “26/10 Ride Across America: Guns, Dogs, Trucks, and Nice People”, is available on Bike Talk’s website.

Glimpses From Barcelona

This is an exciting week for Urban Cycling Institute and our partner, ZICLA! Together, we are running our intensive course, “Redesigning Streets for All: Tools to Empower Action” in Barcelona!

Some questions we are unravelling are:

• How can we transition to sustainable mobility, and who is ready to lead the change?

• How can tactical urbanism and quick-build cycling solutions accelerate transition?

• How can data and cycling metrics help shape (inclusive) policy?

• How and why should we integrate gender and age in designing streets?

We cannot wait to share with you all the learnings and experiences from the course, so stay tuned!

If you want to truly immerse yourself in a city and learn from your peers and experts in a collaborative and fun way, then join our courses (now in Spanish and Italian too)! For more information, keep reading this newsletter!

Other Courses Coming Up in 2026

Unraveling the Cycling City: Actionable Steps Towards Better Mobility Futures

From 8th to 12th June, our new course “Unraveling the Cycling City: Actionable Steps Towards Better Mobility Futures” will be taking place in Amsterdam. This course uses the city as a living lab to bring students, researchers, professionals, and government officials together and let them experience the city with a critical eye. With a focus on the theory, systems, and structure behind the cycling city, participants will get to contrast and compare experiences, and build knowledge together.

The preliminary program is out! For more information, check out the course page on our website!

Transformar la ciudad: la movilidad al servicio de las personas

Del 9 al 11 de septiembre, nuestro nuevo programa formativo, “Transformar la ciudad: la movilidad al servicio de las personas”, te ofrece una inmersión táctica en el contexto holandés: un contexto que ha sostenido un proceso de transformación muy complejo en las últimas décadas y que te brinda la oportunidad de analizar críticamente sus aciertos y errores.

A través de keynotes de expertos y observaciones directas sobre el terreno, recopilarás datos e ideas que, en nuestras sesiones de reflexión, conectarás con tu propio contexto para volver a tu ciudad con una visión más nítida sobre qué hacer.

No existe una oportunidad como esta en nuestro propio idioma en ningún otro lugar de Europa, así que esperamos conocerte pronto.

Para obtener más información y registrarte, consulta la página del curso.

Amsterdam ti aspetta. Sei pronto a ripensare la città?

Dal 6 al 10 luglio 2026, torna la masterclass Planning the Cycling City, cinque giorni immersi nel cuore della capitale mondiale della bicicletta.

Organizzata da Decisio e Urban Cycling Institute, la masterclass è molto più di una settimana di formazione: è un’esperienza trasformativa pensata per amministratori pubblici, ricercatori, architetti e funzionari. Tra lezioni con esperti di fama internazionale, escursioni sul campo e workshop pratici, esploreremo Amsterdam in tutti i suoi aspetti, dalla progettazione concreta delle infrastrutture ciclabili al significato più profondo del ciclismo come pratica urbana e umana.

Tornerai a casa con nuovi strumenti, nuove visioni e una rete di professionisti con cui costruire il futuro della mobilità attiva in Italia.

I posti sono limitati — scopri di più qui!

Training Inclusieve Mobiliteit — Laatste kans om je aan te melden!

Op 16 april 2026 organiseert het Urban Cycling Institute een verdiepende training over inclusieve mobiliteit voor Nederlandse gemeenten! De dag staat in het teken van concrete handvatten voor het creëren van een rechtvaardige openbare ruimte voor iedereen. De training is speciaal toegespitst op ambtenaren en biedt ruimte voor praktijkvoorbeelden, een stadsexcursie en uitwisseling met collega’s uit het hele land. De aanmelding is inmiddels geopend, dus wees er snel bij (maximaal 15 deelnemers)!

Heb je interesse? Vind alle informatie op onze website of neem contact op met michela@urbancyclinginstitute.org!

Thank you for reading this month’s newsletter! If you’d like to be an active part of the change, please consider supporting our work to share knowledge and research on building active, healthy, and just cities by becoming a paid member.

Become a paid member

Stay tuned for our next issue in April!

Team Urban Cycling Institute 🚲 💙

Andrea is a born-and-bred Bolognese, and he has seen the city he loves and grew up in change immensely over the years, also thanks to his continuous efforts to improve wellbeing. As an activist in anti-traffic and anti-smog local committees, he began demanding change in the city 20 years ago, and has worked his way up to become a public administrator and on to being head of one of the most ambitious mobility projects Italy has seen.

I had already talked to Andrea a year ago to discuss the implementation and the success of the first year of the 30 km/h speed limit in Bologna. Now, as I am writing in February, after being in place for two years, the much debated speed limit has been lifted: the appeal of a taxi driver before the Regional Administrative Court was successful, and due to a technical legal issue, the court temporarily annulled the regulation.

This article examines the case of Bologna in its uniqueness: a city in a deeply car-centric country rewriting what it means to prioritise liveability for its citizens, by heavily investing in sustainable and active mobility.

Bologna, Building a Tramway to Increase Cycling

I routinely come to Bologna every few years, and every time I am faced with a different view. Yes, the porticoes remain, and so do the colourful characters inhabiting the streets of the oldest university town in the world, but street design is ever changing.

As I walk through the centre in February 2026, I see the gigantic construction work which has been taking place since 2024 to build 23 km of tramway lines, which should be completed in the summer of 2026.

“I must say, the citizens are not happy about the construction sites,” Andrea tells me. “Of course, they are a nuisance; the noise, the traffic diversions, it is a lot to take in. But in the areas where the tramway has already been completed, the difference is striking. The best example comes from Canale Riva Reno: the requalification of an entire street through which we uncovered an old city canal by removing parking spots. The canal is now in a pedestrian area, and people are strolling around there continuously. And the tram will pass close by, creating a harmonious environment.”

Andrea strongly believes in the power of a strong public transportation network in promoting cycling and active mobility, and sees it as a key factor in the decrease of traffic and pollution.

Indeed, the requalification of Via Riva Reno is a beautiful example of the changes occurring in Bologna and their impact, but many remain doubtful about the drastic changes. “People are always sceptical at the beginning,” explains Andrea. “But they need to touch and feel the changes this tramway will bring, exactly like in the case of Città 30. At the beginning, many people could not see the benefits, and now we have residents calling us to implement it more strictly on their road, with traffic calming measures.“

Cycling on the Rise

Bicycle racks across the city rarely seem to have a free space. Rusty bikes pile up alongside the white-and-orange shared e-bikes in a kind of organised chaos typical of student towns. Meanwhile, cycle lanes continue to expand, and cycling traffic has steadily increased in recent years.

The history of Bologna and the bicycle runs deep. With its flat landscape and relatively mild climate, moving by bicycle has always been a favourable option. And while ridership had steadily increased since 2012, it surged in 2022, with a political leadership putting citizens and their well-being at the centre of their policies.

Bologna is home to a widespread bike-sharing system, RideMovi, used by thousands of people and recording growing numbers year after year. The day with the most bike-share rides in 2025? The 20th of June, with 20,216 rides across the city, coinciding with a concert by beloved Bolognese singer Cesare Cremonini. Paradoxically, the tramway construction works are slowing down buses and public transport, which has led to an increase in cycling: in 2022, an average of 15,592 people a month were using the bike-sharing service; in 2025, the average figure rose to 44,356.

The bike-sharing fleet now comprises 3,500 e-bikes. “In 2016, we made the choice not to entrust our bike-sharing system to just any company,” Andrea explains. “We decided to invest public money, regulate the service through a competitive tender, and offer proper standards of public service. This paid off immensely. The service is used continuously, and with capped tariffs, it remains affordable.”

The Results of Bologna Città 30

In the two years of Bologna Città 30, impressive results have been achieved. Comparing the biennium 2024–2025 with the preceding one, we can count:

• 17 fewer victims of road violence (a decrease of 43.6%)

• 350 fewer people injured, and 700 fewer accidents

• A saving in social costs of almost 66 million euros.

It is worth noting that in 2025 there were 12 fatalities on the streets of Bologna. However, 9 of those occurred on roads with a 50 km/h limit, which invites reflection on the role speed plays in road violence.

According to the latest ISTAT report on road accidents, Bologna also stood out positively compared to other Italian cities: while accidents increased by 4.3% elsewhere between 2023 and 2024, Bologna recorded a decrease of 9.8%. The same pattern holds for injuries: +3.9% in other cities, -10.7% in Bologna.

And beyond safety, mobility itself has deeply changed. In 2025, car trips decreased by 9%, while bike trips increased by 19%.

Trying to Change Mobility Laws Across the Country

More than a quarter of daily journeys in Italy are already made on foot or by bike. Yet pedestrians and cyclists remain among the most exposed and least protected users of the country’s roads. A new legislative proposal, presented to the press in February by MP Valentina Ghio and developed with the contribution of Andrea Colombo and FIAB (Italy’s Federation for Environment and Cycling) seeks to radically change the status quo.

The bill proposes a new hierarchy of road responsibility, a dedicated national fund, and even a levy on car advertising. At its heart is a change which would affect both the Highway Code and the Civil Code. Under the new framework, road users would be divided into the “stronger user” and users of “active mobility”, meaning cyclists and pedestrians. In the event of a collision, the driver of the heavier vehicle would be presumed, unless proven otherwise, to bear greater responsibility for the incident.

It is a principle already familiar in several Northern European countries, including the Netherlands, and one that Andrea Colombo, who helped draft the bill, has long supported: “I decided to support the deposit of this bill in the Chamber to oppose the new auto-centric Italian traffic code” In a previous Substack article, I have pointed out the problems and contradictions of this new traffic code. “We are working to build a new horizon, and to put the basis to build more Città 30 across the country,” he adds.

What the Future Holds for Bologna

Despite the temporary set-back of the lifting of the 30km/h speed limit, Andrea continues to hold an optimistic view:

“I am very positive about the future, trends are going in the right direction: traffic is decreasing, bike ownership and use are increasing, and last year the number of subscriptions to public transport reached an all-time high. If we can fully restore and realize Città 30, complete and launch the tram service, and improve the cycling and pedestrian infrastructure, it will be a monumental change for mobility and public space in the city. I don’t see any other choice but to go forward in this direction.”

Bologna is a special city, which one cannot easily forget. Its strong identity, rooted in student and workers’ movements, and on the principle of welcoming everyone and leaving no one behind, is unique and deserves praise. Bologna’s mobility revolution, despite being often disregarded by Italian politicians, is moving the country forward and showing everyone that another future, one where the citizen is at the center, is not just possible, but achievable.

Italian Masterclass Alert!

Sono aperte le iscrizioni per la seconda edizione della Masterclass, “Progettare la citta’ ciclabile” ad Amsterdam 2026! (In italiano!) Un team di esperti terrà delle lezioni specifiche sulla ciclabilità urbana, sullo spazio pubblico e sulla pianificazione urbana. Oltre alle lezioni in aula, non mancheranno visite sul campo per conoscere le buone pratiche olandesi e workshop in cui ci sarà la possibilità di “mettersi alla prova” con progetti pratici. Trovi tutte le informazioni qui!

Read next:

Our goal with the Annual Meeting is that participants leave with new research questions, experiment ideas, or policy advice that they have developed collaboratively. We also strive to challenge assumptions about mobility and combine knowledge across disciplinary boundaries in order to produce something bigger. As such, this article will highlight three tangible impacts from past editions of CRBAM.

Last year’s workshop “How to use Moral Foundations Theory to frame pro-cycling arguments to appeal to a diverse audience", by researchers Jérôme Laviolette and Lexi Kinman, went from being a conference favorite to producing international impact. This skills development session, which was voted “Best Workshop” by the participants, showed how developing pro-cycling messages that align with different moral values can bring together people with different moral and political views to build support for active mobility. Since then, their work has been used to inform the National Communication Guideline for the Bicycle in a European country.

Also in 2025, workshop sessions and a fishbowl discussion on topics related to road safety led to a report featuring key recommendations for future policy and policy-oriented research. By putting researchers, policymakers, and practitioners in the same room, these sessions created a space for people with different views and backgrounds to collaborate on developing practical solutions to address traffic violence. From the solutions found and the discussions that participants had around these topics, Urban Cycling Institute produced a report that explains why current measures are ineffective and how researchers and policymakers can rethink traffic safety and actually reduce traffic violence significantly.

Finally, an academic article published recently in the Journal of Active Travel Studies was written from the outcome of a collaborative session at CRBAM 2023. Born from a reflection that started back in 2019, the author Samuel Nello-Deakin elaborated this collaborative session with the goal of discussing policy-related priorities for cycling research. In this paper, the author reflects on that discussion and settles on three key topics that cycling researchers should prioritize for the next decade: bicycle parking, backcasting, and the connection between academic research and policy processes. Ultimately, the author argues that if future research on active mobility has to be prioritized, this should happen by examining the effectiveness of past research and its translation into concrete impacts.

These are only a few examples of the concrete impact that past editions of CRBAM has had in active mobility research and policy. To hear more about the impact and experience of the conference, watch our short video interview with some of last year’s participants and organizers below:

The tenth edition of CRBAM will take place in Ghent, Belgium, from 16th to 18th September 2026. This year’s theme is Place, People, Politics and the Reimagination of Space. Abstract submissions are open and the deadline has been extended to 29th March 2026, 11:59 CEST. If you are interested in sharing research insights, exploring a research question, or testing a project idea, visit our website for more information and submission guidelines by clicking the button below.

Submit abstract

Would you like to join CRBAM 2026, but are unsure if you can cover the costs involved with your participation? If your abstract is accepted, you will be able to apply for the CRBAM scholarship! More details on this opportunity will be shared soon.

Read more about past editions of CRBAM here:

While policy driven research questions seek to streamline the process of making data and evidence relevant for policy, unfortunately some research is carried out, written about, and never to be seen again. The ‘sitting on a shelf-isation’ of research projects – meaning that research projects often get dropped after they are written up due to a multitude of reasons including lack of funding, poor recommendations or researchers taking a different direction – is something that is not unique to one field of research1. One potential exacerbating factor for the presence of research projects sitting dusty on shelves is the variation in the types of (and degree to which) evidence which is valued, translated and incorporated into policy amongst those who sign the dotted line on policy documents2.

The Origins of Evidence-Based Policy

The notion of evidence-based policy has been around for decades, but its origins come from evidence-based practice in healthcare and medicine. The use of evidence to inform practice in medicine began to take root when doctors sought to reduce the delivery of certain practices which over time were found to be ineffective3. As a result, overall quality of healthcare and medicine – and, therefore, life expectancy and quality of life4 – have improved exponentially over the past number of decades, largely due to the improvement in the quality and quantity of evidence available to healthcare practitioners.

Unlike research carried out in fields such as cycling and active mobility, studies from healthcare and medicine are conducted in tightly controlled laboratory environments, often with randomised controlled trial designs. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), often cited as the “gold-standard for evidence”, sit at the top of the “hierarchy of evidence”5. RCTs randomise study populations into groups (one will receive the intervention/drug, others will not) to determine the impact of an intervention on a range of outcomes. These study designs are set up in such a way that researchers are able to account for or remove all other influencing or contextual factors to determine the true effects of an intervention. While these types of studies are highly useful and necessary, they are often very hard to replicate for cycling researchers who conduct research in the “real-world”, often not in white laboratory coats6. As a result, the mobility policy recommendations that can be made based on the translation of RCT evidence into the real world can be, at best, questionable.

Given its origins in medicine and healthcare, it has been argued that there may be ‘methods privilege’ at play when incorporating certain evidence types into policy for public health7. We know in the case of obesity policy, many initial policy responses relied on RCT evidence from dietary and exercise studies, which ultimately failed to change population-level behaviour due to the systemic nature of obesity8. In the case of walking and cycling, the types of evidence which must be considered when making decisions related to global or national policy can vary, is complex, and is often harder to interpret for policymakers9. Many of the studies showcasing the (multilayered) benefits of cycling use various methodologies, multiple contexts, and varying population groups. They also come from fields of study ranging from climate science to health economics to transport. Mobility policy decisions are often required to be made fast and policy teams have to act quickly, and as a result a degree of nuance can often be lost when interpreting evidence.

Evidence and Cycling Policy

It is widely agreed that the promotion and development of population levels of cycling and walking through policy is crucial for public and planetary health10. When we take stock of the current evidence base in support of cycling and the role of the bicycle in addressing complex societal challenges, the evidence is undeniable for the health, climate, traffic and economic benefits11^,12. How this plays out in practice and translated from data to policy actions designed to reap the societal rewards of more people cycling more often is the tricky part. While context is not so important in RCTs (the research design is structured to remove contextual factors), it arguably is the most important thing when talking about evidence informed policy for cycling. Simply copying the map or design of a bike lane in Copenhagen and pasting it in Dublin, or rehashing road safety communication from one neighbourhood in Madrid to another, may fail before it even begins.

The design of effective and context-sensitive cycling policy that actually takes root requires an acknowledgement that cycling policy and effective governance is nuanced, and driven by sensory, social, and experiential learning processes. Similar to the call for academics to come down from their Ivory Towers to increase the real-world applicability of research13, it could be argued that policymakers may find that firsthand experience with cycling could significantly inform and improve their policy development. While individual, isolated experiences are not enough to guide entire policies, policymakers may make better decisions related to impactful cycling policy which is contextually relevant when they have lived experience in doing the behaviour themselves. We can see the legacy of some cycling policies spearheaded by global government officials who ride bikes themselves, from former Prime Minister of Netherlands Mark Rutte’s tax incentives to the transformation of the City of Paris by bicycle advocate Anne Hidalgo.

Given the rising political and social significance of cycling to the global agenda14, cycling policies are becoming more commonplace, with 2 in 3 countries found to have some form of active travel policy in place15. Moreover, government officials and policymakers working on cycling are increasingly seeking knowledge from other contexts in many ways, including experiential study visits. These study visits are where government officials and policymakers visit cities and towns with more developed cycling cultures to draw learnings by experiencing, living, and being in it16. This process of experiential learning allows policymakers a valuable opportunity to generate their own evidence, their own idea of what will or will not work, and how it might translate into policy actions for their contexts. Cities in Europe are often the hosts to delegations of key officials from cities in the United States who travel to inform their cycling policies through doing, seeing and feeling what a cycling city is.

Towards a New Version of Evidence-Based Cycling Policy

This proactive method, through which governments are informing the contents of their cycling policies, raises interesting questions about the nature of evidence and evidence-based policy as it applies to cycling. Given the indisputable nature of the evidence pertaining to the benefits of cycling, it is not surprising that policymakers are looking outside of evidence briefs and systematic reviews to inform how cycling policies actually work in their contexts. The learnings, connections, and ‘ah-ha!’ moments that can come from doing the behaviour themselves in a context which encourages it can oftentimes be more influential than the executive summary of a report or list of policy implications in a research paper.

Taking a nuanced view of how evidence is defined and of the nature of evidence-based policy can open up many possibilities to inform the agendas of policymaking meetings around the world, beyond the painting of a bike lane here, or temporary street closures there. Evidence can be drawn (and should continue to be drawn) from academic papers and rigorous research. But evidence can also be an experience. Evidence can also be seeing, smelling, feeling how it works in cities and communities who have developed cycling cultures. Evidence to inform cycling policy can be drawn from one nugget of information that a government official pulled from a presentation on how another cycling city governs and funds its infrastructure projects.

We are already well equipped with troves of data presenting the arguments for why we should have more cycling. We now could benefit from turning our attention to how we frame “evidence-based” cycling policy to a more holistic, nuanced definition of what evidence means.

As a research community interested in making our planet safer, happier, cleaner and healthier, it is vital that we strive to reduce the amount of research waste and minimise the number of cycling policies which go unrealised due to a rigid definition of evidence or “copy and paste” approaches.

The important part, then, will be how policymakers re-contextualise and translate this evidence when they are back in their communities.

If you conduct research, elaborate policy, or study people’s experiences of active mobility, please consider joining the Cycling Research Board Annual Meeting in Ghent this upcoming September! For more information, check out the website of the conference. Abstract submissions are closing soon!

Has your experience cycling in a new city or context taught you anything valuable about cycling policy? Share it with us in the comments!

Leave a comment

Read next:

Finding the Right Language

Inclusive mobility asks for a broader and more structural engagement of citizens in local policy, especially vulnerable, marginalized and disadvantaged community members. However, local governments are struggling in finding the right language and appropriate ways to reach out to those communities. For example, in the Dutch city of Amersfoort (population 163,298), until recently, inclusion was primarily thought of as an issue concerning residents with visual or physical disabilities. We now know that many more residents are vulnerable for various other reasons and are also at risk of exclusion due to reduced mobility. Limited digital skills, financial difficulties, language barriers, fears, and experiences with discrimination and stigmatization all play a role. With a series of five videos, we are, both literally and figuratively, showing the obstacles Amersfoort residents face, how they feel, and why it is so important to continually address these issues.

Insights From Research, Policy and Practice

In the series, various people express their concerns and share their experiences: people with reduced mobility due to fear and physical disabilities, mobility experts, civil servants, a bicycle mechanic and people advocating for cyclists and pedestrians. They think out loud about the future and the solutions that are needed to prevent people from being socially isolated because they cannot keep up with traffic anymore. Independence proves to be an important value and so is a general understanding of how things work and where you can find help or assistance. Led by their stories, we learn about problems with overcrowded cycle paths, technology, shared spaces, parking issues, walkability and changing behaviour.

The Camera as a Research Tool

The use of video greatly enriches the knowledge in research papers about inclusivity and justice as well as policy documents talking about the desired situations and future plans. Video opens up the possibility to actually see the city through the lens of various citizens. An anxious cyclist who not only talks about fear but also shows a matching facial expression gives a much stronger impression. And so does a senior citizen wearing a helmet and using rearview mirrors, who, on top of that, can hardly get on the bike and rides very slowly and cautiously. The same applies for the pride we see in the eyes of an immigrant mother who has just learnt to ride a bicycle: it shows total freedom. It is exactly these kinds of emotions that make you want to dig deeper into the matter.

However, it is not always easy to capture the right situations and the feeling that comes with it. The camera can be a great research tool, but, as a researcher, you need to come prepared. How do you find the right balance between the stories that activists, policymakers, ordinary citizens, and technical experts will tell you? Where do you find places that reflect challenges for inclusivity or places that are great examples of inclusion? And how do you remain critical and be informative at the same time? Answering all of those questions required a lot of preparation meetings, exploration of the city, and reading about all the existing initiatives that are related to active mobility. Even though we had the luxury of being able to make five episodes and interview twelve people in total, we sensed that it would be no effort at all to find another dozen citizens and professionals that were willing to talk about their experiences, frustrations and dreams. It shows that there are many stories to tell about inclusive mobility, that the topic can be approached from many angles, and, in order to make it understandable, you need to unravel the personal stories.

What Did These Videos Reveal?

The videos show that there is still a large gap between policy and practice. They expose ideas that look good on paper, but sometimes have unwanted (side) effects for people who experience mobility constraints. In addition, they show that it is not only the (local) government that can create the desired change, but it is also about people’s habits and behaviour. Furthermore, the videos show that inclusion is so much more than just being able to get from A to B—it is about feelings, experiences, embodiment, and being noticed and recognized. The message is clear: there is a lot of work to be done, concerning both the small everyday things and the long term policies at different scales. As Meredith Glaser states: “Working on inclusive mobility is an ongoing process that does not end.”

The video series was originally published in Dutch on Nieuwsplein33 and made possible by Gemeente Amersfoort, Nieuwsplein33 and the Urban Cycling Institute. Special thanks to Dylan Power for reviewing the English subtitles.

The next videos in the series will be shared on our social media in the coming weeks. Keep an eye on our LinkedIn page to watch them when they come out!

The Urban Cycling Institute offers a full day training on inclusive mobility. This training will be held in Amsterdam and is meant for Dutch civil servants working on the topics of mobility, inclusion and public space who want to get familiar with the topic and learn how to implement this in local policy. All details can be found on our website.

Read next:

References

Oliveira Soares, B. & M. Glaser (2025), Beyond infrastructure: Unpacking the complexity of exclusion and implications for just mobility transitions. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2025.104202

Van Marissing, E. (2024), “Making the city truly inclusive is about big gestures” https://urbancyclinginstitute.org/big-gestures-for-a-truly-inclusive-city/

Van Marissing, E. & M. Glaser (2024), Advancing inclusion and equity in active transport in Dutch cities. https://urbancyclinginstitute.org/advancing-inclusion-and-equity-in-active-transport-in-dutch-cities/

In this newsletter:
New Urban Cycling Institute courses in multiple languages
Transformar la ciudad: la movilidad al servicio de las personas, for Spanish speakers
Progettare la città ciclabile 2026, for Italian speakers
Unraveling the Cycling City: Actionable Steps Towards Better Mobility Futures
Inclusive Mobility training for Dutch municipalities
Collaboration with the Finnish Cycling Embassy
Bike tours in Ghent
Sustainable Transport Research Centre launched in Calabar, Nigeria
We are partnering with the Leaders in Logistics Summit
Last days to apply for the EBN Architecture and Arts Grant
We visited the Basque Country

Transformar la ciudad: la movilidad al servicio de las personas

Nuevo Curso en Español en Países Bajos (9 al 11 de septiembre 2026)

Si trabajas en movilidad o urbanismo, sabes que uno de los retos urbanos más urgentes —transformar cómo la gente se mueve— no se trata solo de un desafío técnico.

Se trata de un cambio sistémico, que requiere criterio para tomar decisiones que impactan y una comprensión profunda de cómo interactúan el diseño del sistema, la voluntad política y la experiencia de quienes se mueven por tu ciudad.

Nuestro nuevo programa formativo, “Transformar la ciudad: la movilidad al servicio de las personas”, te ofrece una inmersión táctica en el contexto holandés: un contexto que ha sostenido un proceso de transformación muy complejo en las últimas décadas y que te brinda la oportunidad de analizar críticamente sus aciertos y errores.

A través de keynotes de expertos y observaciones directas sobre el terreno, recopilarás datos e ideas que, en nuestras sesiones de reflexión, conectarás con tu propio contexto para volver a tu ciudad con una visión más nítida sobre qué hacer.

No existe una oportunidad como esta en nuestro propio idioma en ningún otro lugar de Europa, así que esperamos conocerte pronto.

📍 Ámsterdam, Países Bajos
🌎 En Español
📆 9–11 de septiembre 2026

Para obtener más información y registrarte, consulta la página del curso.

Progettare la città ciclabile 2026

Dal 6 al 10 luglio 2026, Urban Cycling Institute accoglierà un gruppo eterogeneo di ricercatori, architetti e funzionari per la seconda edizione italiana della celebre masterclass Planning the Cycling City.

Organizzato da Decisio e Urban Cycling Institute, il programma combina lezioni da parte di esperti, escursioni e attività pratiche, affrontando una vasta gamma di temi: da approfondimenti concreti sulla realizzazione di piste ciclabili a riflessioni sul ciclismo urbano come atto sociale e umano. I partecipanti trascorreranno un’intensa settimana ad Amsterdam, immersi nella capitale mondiale della ciclabilità.

La masterclass è pensata per stimolare il pensiero creativo e critico, dando ai partecipanti gli strumenti per plasmare il futuro della mobilità ciclistica urbana in Italia. Il programma completo sarà presto disponibile: continua a seguirci sul nostro sito per tutti gli aggiornamenti!

📍 Amsterdam, Paesi Bassi
🌎 In Italiano
📆 6-10 Luglio 2026

Conosci qualcuno che potrebbe essere interessato? Clicca qui per maggiori informazioni. Ti aspettiamo!

Unraveling the Cycling City: Actionable Steps Towards Better Mobility Futures

New course from the Urban Cycling Institute! From 8th to 12th June, we will be hosting our new course “Unraveling the Cycling City: Actionable Steps Towards Better Mobility Futures” in Amsterdam. This course uses Amsterdam as a living lab to bring students, researchers, professionals, and government officials together and let them experience the city with a critical eye. With a focus on the theory, systems, and structure behind the cycling city, participants will get to contrast and compare experiences, and build knowledge together.

For more information, check out the course page on our website!

📍 Amsterdam, the Netherlands
📆 8–12 June 2026

Save the Date: Training Inclusieve Mobiliteit

Op 16 april 2026 organiseert het Urban Cycling Institute een verdiepende training over inclusieve mobiliteit voor Nederlandse gemeenten! De dag staat in het teken van concrete handvatten voor het creëren van een rechtvaardige openbare ruimte voor iedereen. De training is speciaal toegespitst op ambtenaren en biedt ruimte voor praktijkvoorbeelden, een stadsexcursie en uitwisseling met collega’s uit het hele land. De aanmelding is inmiddels geopend, dus wees er snel bij (maximaal 15 deelnemers)!

Heb je interesse? Neem dan contact op met michela@urbancyclinginstitute.org, binnenkort vind je meer informatie op onze website!

Master Class: Cycling Urbanism in Helsinki!

We’re excited to share that we’re collaborating with the Finnish Cycling Embassy on the upcoming Cycling Urbanism Master Class! This three-day program brings together experts, city officials, designers and advocates to explore how cycling can be integrated into successful urban mobility systems. During the master class, we will deliver a workshop running across all three days, tying theory to practice and exploring how cycling can help create more equitable cities.

Read about it here! Do you have questions? Send them to anthony@finnishcyclingembassy.org

Bike Tours in Ghent

Have you ever heard of the Ghent circulation plan? This plan divided the city center into sectors, and nothing changed for pedestrians and cyclists who could still roam freely, drivers could no longer cross from one sector to another.

Just before implementation on 3 April 2017, drivers and the media expected chaos, but that never materialized. Instead, the number of cars in the city center plummeted, and Ghent took a giant step towards becoming a cycling city.

Stories like these help understand why Ghent has been on the rise when it comes to active mobility. This is why we are now offering bicycle tours in Ghent! By participating, you can ride through the area where the circulation plan applies and understand how it works, why it survived, and why it changed daily life overnight.

Tours begin in March and are available for booking now on our website, book yours today!

Sustainable Transport Research Centre, University of Calabar

Prof. Inah Okon, Professor of Urban and Regional Development at University of Calabar, Nigeria, has recently launched Sustainable Transport Research Centre at the University. Prof. Okon, previously a CRB Scholarship Recipient and a Visiting Scholar at Urban Cycling Institute, will conduct research and capacity building activities for professionals, students and governments in Nigeria and other African countries to promote and develop sustainable transportation and cycling. We look forward to collaborating with Inah and his team going forward!

Leaders in Logistics Summit

As cities tackle congestion and sustainability targets, cargo bikes and cycle logistics are emerging as powerful solutions for last-mile delivery.

Could the bicycle be the low-carbon, agile solution that reshapes urban freight?

We’re proud to partner with the Leaders in Logistics Summit 2026—the 1 event for e-commerce logistics leaders.

Join us in Brussel, 17-18 March 2026 to explore how!

This is a gathering for operations professionals who are serious about solving real supply chain problems innovatively and sustainably. Expect exclusive case studies, showcases, and networking with senior leaders.

The focus?

• The Future of E-commerce Logistics

• Sustainable Returns

• Digital Transformation & Resilience

🎁 We’ve secured 20% off for our subscribers with code: URBAN20
🔗 Grab your spot here!

EBN Architecture and Arts Grant

📢 Calling all young architects, artists, and placemakers! 📢

The Association EBN invites applications for The Emma Burke Newman Architecture and Arts Grant, 2026. They are looking for young adults (17-35) residing in the EEA, UK, or US to bring community-shaping projects to life.

There is a special interest in projects that explore architecture, placemaking, and cycling/road safety, honouring the memory of Emma, who was tragically killed by a truck driver while cycling to university in Glasgow in 2023

But all artistic and cross-cultural proposals are welcome.Please apply even if you don’t tick all the boxes!

This grant is about continuing Emma’s legacy of compassion, creativity, and intercultural exchange. It offers young people the chance to pursue life-changing artistic, educational, and cross-cultural experiences.

Please apply and share this far and wide! Click here for more information.

Last days to apply! Deadline: February 28, 2026. The project must be completed and presented by June 30, 2027.

Urban Cycling Institute visits Basque Country

The Urban Cycling Institute recently joined the Bike Summit in Bilbao at the invitation of the city, which has undergone a remarkable transformation. Once known primarily as an industrial hub, Bilbao has reinvented itself over the past decades, emerging as one of Europe’s most vibrant examples of urban livability and tourism. Now, the city is taking bold new steps: reclaiming public space for its residents and rapidly expanding its cycling network, which continues to grow as part of a broader vision for sustainable mobility.

At the Summit, we were honored to be on stage and share insights alongside leaders from some of Europe’s most progressive cycling cities: Rémi Dubois of Paris, Niels Hoe of Copenhagen, and Manuel Calvo of Seville, each bringing unique perspectives on urban cycling. Our presentation highlighted two key themes: the human experience of people who rely on cycling as their main mode of transport, and the compelling economic and policy arguments for investing in cycling infrastructure. The Dutch model, where cycling is a consolidated policy due to its unmatched efficiency in using urban space, served as a powerful case in point.

Bilbao’s journey mirrors that of many cities worldwide—making steady, meaningful progress toward returning public space to the people. While the process of re-socializing these areas is ongoing, the city’s commitment to this vision is undeniable.

Thank you for reading this month’s newsletter! If you’d like to be an active part of the change, please consider supporting our work to share knowledge and research on building active, healthy, and just cities by becoming a paid member.

Become a paid member

Stay tuned for our next issue in March!

Team Urban Cycling Institute 🚲 💙

Read next:

This article draws on a new report developed from expert-led workshops at the Cycling Research Board Annual Meeting, which were supported by Association EBN. These sessions brought together researchers, policymakers, and practitioners to move beyond diagnosis and focus on solutions. Rather than presenting abstract recommendations, the discussions centred on practical policy tools: better use of data, meaningful public engagement, and rapid interventions that can save lives.

The following sections highlight some of the reasons why current measures are ineffective in stopping traffic violence and propose three policy measures discussed during the sponsored sessions to reshape traffic safety. For a comprehensive overview of the discussions and findings, the full report is available on our website.

Why Is Traffic Violence Still So Prevalent?

Across the workshops, participants reached a shared conclusion: traffic safety must be treated as a systemic public policy challenge, and not merely a technical issue. This requires recognising road violence as a public health problem, examining how planning standards reinforce car dominance, and understanding why certain groups, such as women, children, and older adults, are more vulnerable when walking or cycling, as the data clearly shows.

Many public policies and government plans formally adopt concepts such as Vision Zero and public health, as research into the rationale behind traffic safety measures indicates. Yet, in practice, the measures implemented are either insufficient or not fully grounded in these principles, which regard every death as preventable. Conference discussions repeatedly returned to the values that guide public action. A key theme in one session was how motonormativity drives most road planning decisions and, in doing so, entrenches car-centric values in society.

Other topics included the limited inclusion of citizen perspectives, despite their potential to enrich analysis, such as by incorporating perceptions of safety into public interventions, and the lack of open, standardised data, which hampers effective evaluation. Participants consistently called for a broader policy lens that integrates objective risk, perceived safety, and community knowledge. As such, here are some of the key public policy measures developed from those sessions.

Where Risk Is Highest: Using Data to Target Action

Across all the sessions referenced in the report, the importance of data was consistently emphasised. Data not only indicate where and when interventions are needed, but also help assess their quality and track how policies evolve over time through before-and-after comparisons. While “data” is a broad term, several specific types were highlighted as particularly useful. These include crash frequency data to identify high-risk locations for crashes and injury data to pinpoint areas where crashes cause more severe injuries. In these cases, before-and-after datasets can be used to determine whether interventions have genuinely improved safety at specific locations, by tracking not only the number of crashes but also the severity of resulting injuries.

This type of data is usually collected at the European level through the CARE system. Although its use was discussed, there was no strong emphasis on prioritising its further development. By contrast, other types of data were highlighted as valuable additions for improving crash analysis.

For example, information on whether an accident site includes segregated cycling infrastructure was considered important, as dedicated lanes can reduce cyclists’ exposure to motor vehicles and lower collision risk. Detailed data on intersections was also emphasised, including junction type, priority rules, and right-of-way clarity, given that intersections are known hotspots for cyclist-vehicle conflicts. By collecting data on the site characteristics, planners will have a much better understanding of the exact solutions that work and address critical issues more effectively.

Characteristics of the surrounding environment were likewise seen as relevant. Elements such as buildings, trees, or open spaces can affect visibility and manoeuvrability, influencing crash risk. The time of day was highlighted for its dual role in determining lighting conditions and traffic volumes.

While these data describe the objective circumstances at the moment of collision, subjective and individual factors can also influence crash risk. Relevant aspects include cyclists’ skills and the familiarity of both drivers and cyclists with a given route or road, as these can provide valuable insights. Route familiarity also shapes perceived safety, a subjective concept discussed during the session. Participants noted that integrating these perceptions into crash analysis could help improve high-risk collision points by clarifying how cyclists and pedestrians experience them. Researchers could then assess whether increased feelings of safety are followed by fewer collisions or less severe injuries, thereby strengthening evidence that an intervention is working as intended. Or, if perceived safety improves without corresponding reductions in crashes, this would indicate that further adjustments are needed.

Feeling Unsafe Is a Policy Failure Too

Another key recommendation that emerged during one of the sessions was the integration of perceived safety into the data used to shape public traffic safety policies, with particular attention to vulnerable groups such as older adults and children. At present, most road safety research relies on objective safety indicators and rarely captures the user’s perspective. As a result, perceived road safety has been largely overlooked by researchers and policymakers, despite the fact that objective and subjective safety do not always align. This disconnect, and the lack of integrated analysis combining both dimensions, was identified as a significant research gap.

Perceived safety is strongly shaped by cultural context and individual experience, which makes it difficult to measure and standardise and helps explain why it has received limited attention. Recognising the strong influence of individual experience, participants highlighted the positive value of intentionally involving more vulnerable groups (such as the elderly, people with disabilities, and children), whose experiences of the street may differ significantly from those of the general population. This intentional inclusion in policy design was seen as a strength of the approach, as environments that feel safe for these groups are more likely to feel safe for everyone.

Policies should aim not only to improve objective safety but also to ensure that people feel safe. Because perceived safety is rarely integrated into road safety analysis, it is not clear whether measures that objectively improve safety also help people feel safer. Moreover, when individuals perceive a high level of safety, they may become less attentive, which can increase the number of accidents and make actual road safety outcomes less favourable than perceived (subjective) safety. Therefore, it is recommended that both types of analysis be integrated to understand how safety can be improved objectively and subjectively at the same time.

The aim is to make walking and cycling safer, and to ensure that everyone who walks and cycles feels safe doing so. This should not end at the policy design stage but, as previously mentioned, can also be used to evaluate the outcomes of measures by analysing before-and-after perceived safety data and adjusting interventions accordingly.

Breaking the Cycle of Inaction After Traffic Fatalities

Across much of today’s society, traffic fatalities are treated as tragic but routine events. When a fatal crash occurs, the response is usually limited to emergency services and short-term disruption, after which the street is quickly returned to its previous state. Where investigations do occur, they tend to focus on liability or individual behaviour, largely for insurance purposes, rather than on the broader systemic factors that shape risk. This rapid return to “normal” removes both the physical and symbolic evidence of the fatality, reinforcing social acceptance and policy inaction in the face of preventable deaths. This response reflects motonormativity: a car-centred mindset in which deaths on the road are implicitly tolerated as the cost of individual car mobility. Crucially, the absence of a visible or immediate response is not neutral; doing nothing is itself a policy choice, one that signals acceptance of existing conditions.

In response to this problem, one of the sessions examined temporary traffic-calming interventions as a rapid-response policy tool following fatal crashes. Discussed by participants as a way to draw attention to the issue, this approach aims to act quickly rather than wait years for comprehensive redesigns or “perfect” solutions. Streets where fatalities occur would be rapidly transformed for a short period, such as two weeks, using temporary measures like cones, bollards, reduced speed limits, and clear signage marking the location as a fatal crash site. The objective is not to deliver a final design, but to reduce risk, slow traffic, and make systemic failures visible to both the public and decision-makers.

By prioritising action over inertia, this approach reframes traffic fatalities as indicators of systemic failure rather than isolated incidents. Temporary interventions create space for reflection, data collection, and community engagement, enabling cities to evaluate conditions before and after the changes. In doing so, initiatives such as Emergency Streets offer a pragmatic policy response that acknowledges uncertainty, challenges the status quo, and shows that meaningful action does not require perfection, only the willingness to act.

What Else Can Be Done?

In this article, we have highlighted only three key reflections that were translated into actions during the sessions. The full report, however, provides an in-depth analysis of all the ideas shared and discussed. Rather than offering abstract recommendations, the sessions described in the report show how interactive, multidisciplinary discussions among experts can generate concrete, actionable policy proposals. By bringing together researchers, practitioners, advocates, and policymakers in a setting designed for active participation, these conversations moved beyond diagnosis to explore how data, lived experience, and experimentation can be translated into real-world interventions.

This exchange was made possible by the session format used at the Cycling Research Board Annual Meeting and by the support of the session sponsor, Association EBN. Crucially, this format allowed ideas to be tested, questioned, and collectively strengthened. Whether discussing the integration of perceived safety into road safety policy, the use of temporary traffic calming as an emergency response to fatalities, or the need to rethink car-centric standards, participants were not only sharing knowledge but also co-producing solutions. This process highlights the value of collaborative spaces where evidence, experience, and urgency intersect.

The report captures these discussions in detail, distilling the key insights, debates, and policy recommendations that emerged. For everyone committed to creating safer, more inclusive streets for people walking and cycling, this report offers both bold reflection and practical guidance for change. Readers are invited to download the full report, explore the ideas it presents, and imagine how these approaches could spark new possibilities in their own research, policy, or advocacy work.

This article was written in the context of the sponsorship by Association EBN of two sessions within Cycling Research Board Annual Meeting 2025, which took place in Amsterdam last September. For the more details on the findings of these sessions, check out the full report!

CRBAM 2026 will be hosted in Ghent on 16-18 September. For more information about this year’s CRBAM, to submit an abstract or to discuss sponsorship possibilities, please take a look at the website of the conference.

Read next:

References

European Commission. (2024). Annual statistical report on road safety in the EU 2024. European Road Safety Observatory, Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport. https://road-safety.transport.ec.europa.eu/document/download/b30e9840-4c22-4056-9dab-0231a98e7356_en

About the Summit Foundation

The Summit Foundation is headquartered in Washington, DC, with the mission of promoting the health and well-being of both people and the natural environment. One of their core programs, Sustainable Cities, addresses two major challenges: transportation and the decarbonization of the built environment. Within transportation, the foundation emphasizes electrification, public transit, active mobility, and urban planning strategies that reduce sprawl. When it comes to the built environment, the focus is on achieving decarbonization while prioritizing social and racial equity and minimizing displacement, especially in multi-unit residential areas. The study trip to Paris served to advance these agendas by seeking inspiration from Paris’s latest urban transformation.

Learning from Paris: delegates’ key questions

The delegates were most curious to learn how Paris balances ambitious climate and mobility goals with critical considerations like social equity, fragmented governance, and public response. One central question arose: What lessons can US cities draw, and how might they integrate these solutions effectively? More specifically, their main topics of interest were:

• The use of “carrots and sticks” in Paris, such as reducing car use through low-emission zones, parking charges, and pedestrianization while simultaneously investing in transit, cycling, and pedestrian infrastructure.

• How the combination of social housing, density, and transit-oriented development supports equitable access, local economies, and climate resilience without causing displacement

• How storytelling, public engagement, and tools like referendums help secure legitimacy for bold, transformative policies.

Ten key learnings

Over four days, participants engaged with policymakers, planners, advocates, and researchers, while experiencing the city by foot, bicycle, and public transport. Ultimately, the trip was meant to provide participants with what was later described as the “permission to think bigger”: a lived demonstration that transformative urban change is not only aspirational, but achievable. As with all study visits, we ended with a collective reflection session, where participants combined their observations into shared learning outcomes. Once back home, they are encouraged to use these insights to share and disseminate the learning among their colleagues. Here are the ten key points which emerged from the discussions:

1. Transformative change is achievable with political will and a clear vision
   Paris’s transformation underscored a simple but powerful truth: meaningful change requires leadership willing to articulate a bold vision and stand by it. Decisions such as closing major roadways along the Seine illustrated how political courage, combined with long-term ambition, can reshape a city, even in the face of initial resistance.

2. Re-greening cities supports public health and sustainable mobility

   

   Participants understood that the city’s re-greening efforts were not just climate interventions, but part of a comprehensive public health strategy. From tree-lined streets to urban forests and schoolyard transformations, greening was experienced as a foundation for well-being, active travel, and everyday comfort. At the same time, the group noted the need to re-center equity and ensure that marginalized communities benefit fully from these investments.

3. Reframing narratives and storytelling are powerful tools
   Policy alone does not deliver transformation - stories do. Paris has successfully reframed urban change around health, joy, and quality of life, rather than sacrifice or restriction. Participants reflected on how compelling narratives can build trust, legitimacy, and public support for bold measures, particularly when they connect to shared values and experiences. An example is the case of thes School Streets, which prioritize the safety and well-being of children while promoting active, healthy mobility.

4. There are practical opportunities to accelerate project delivery
   The tour highlighted how moments of disruption, such as the COVID-19 pandemic or the 2024 Olympics, can act as catalysts for change. Small, simple interventions, pilot projects, and tactical measures were key to building momentum and achieving more systemic transformation.

5. School streets and child-oriented design are smart strategies

   

   School Streets emerged as one of the most universally supported interventions. Participants noted how child-focused design resonates across political and social lines, building strong voter support while improving safety, health, and daily mobility. Designing for children, they concluded, often results in better cities for everyone.

6. The human experience of mobility and public space matters

   Experiencing Paris’s streets firsthand revealed the importance of sound, pace, proximity, and diversity in shaping urban life. Participants spoke of quieter streets, spontaneous interactions, and the visible presence of cyclists of all ages and abilities. These sensory experiences reinforced the idea that data alone cannot capture what makes places truly livable.

7. Networks and peer learning accelerate understanding
   Learning did not happen only in meeting rooms. Cycling together, walking streets, and reflecting as a group fostered trust, dialogue, and collective sense-making. Participants emphasized how peer exchange and shared experience helped translate abstract policy ideas into concrete, imaginable possibilities for their own contexts.

8. Acting during windows of opportunity matters
   Paris’s experience illustrated the importance of readiness. Allowing residents to experience improvements before formalizing policies, rapidly iterating based on feedback, and seizing political or cultural moments were all identified as critical strategies for accelerating change.

9. Coordinating stakeholders, power structures, and interests is essential

   

   Participants gained insight into the complexity of governance at the metropolitan scale. Coordinating municipalities, aligning regional authorities, and working alongside advocacy groups were seen as prerequisites for sustained progress. Transformation, they noted, depends as much on relationships and alignment as it does on technical solutions.

10. Removing parking unlocks space for community life
    Finally, the removal of on-street parking stood out as a powerful lever for change. Freed space was repurposed for bike lanes, green areas, and social uses, fundamentally altering how streets function. Participants reflected on how limiting car dominance can unlock safer, more vibrant, and more inclusive public space.

The power of embodied learning

The discussions and reflections of the delegates, once again, confirmed the power of study visits: as Benjamin Franklin once said, “Tell me and I forget, teach me and I may remember, involve me and I learn”. Seeing transformation firsthand and experiencing it at street level helped participants understand and internalize lessons in ways that reports and presentations alone rarely achieve. Taken together, the ten lessons support a central takeaway: cities can change quickly and profoundly when vision, political leadership, design, and storytelling align.

Is your city looking to learn from international examples and strengthen its capacity for sustainable transitions? Join our Transition Readiness Program and be part of a transformative exchange! To learn more about it and plan your own visit with us, please reach out to Ana Castán!

Would you like to read more about our study visits and what we learn from them? Then subscribe to our Substack!

Subscribe now

Read next:

Child development, family practices, street design and social norms intertwine into what we call “children’s independent cycling” (David, Glaser, & Witlox, 2025). Children’s independent cycling is not only about reaching a destination, but about choosing where to go, when to go and with whom; a concrete expression of growing agency (Zwerts et al., 2010). Autonomous cycling is thus the outcome of a dynamic system that involves making independent choices, fostering skills and garnering access to a larger world. Our results show that this autonomy is not given, but designed.

The Adult-Only Trap

A central issue is that transport environments are designed from an adult, car-centred perspective. Street design prioritises motor traffic and assumes adult height, vision and cognitive processing. Children, however, are smaller, less visible and need more time to interpret complex traffic situations (Barton et al., 2012; Twisk et al., 2018). Streets that work for confident adults (“commuters”) therefore often exclude children by design.

The “Mobility License”

Children’s autonomy develops in close relationship with their parents. Decisions about independent mobility emerge through ongoing negotiation and a gradual expansion of freedom or “mobility licence”, shaped by children’s growing skills and by parents’ perceptions of traffic safety and community trust (Riazi et al., 2021). When traffic is heavy or streets feel unsafe, parents are more likely to restrict independence, while low speeds, low traffic volumes and separation from motor traffic increase perceived safety and support for independent cycling (Ducheyne et al., 2012; Ghekiere et al., 2015; Hook & David, 2025).

These permissions are socially patterned and result in gender inequity: older children and boys are typically granted independence earlier, reflecting gendered expectations about risk and competence (Ghekiere et al., 2016; Riazi et al., 2021). Children know public space is designed and regulated by adults, with little room for their own perspectives (Cele & Ekman Ladru, 2015; Skelton, 2017), and they even internalise traffic danger as part of everyday life (Thomsen, 2004).

Moving the Needle

What does this mean for planners and policymakers?

1. Design for children’s bodies and minds. Plan for proximity.
   Use lower speeds, protected infrastructure, short crossings and simple layouts. Independent cycling is more common in dense urban contexts, where destinations are closer and more activities are within easy reach (Fults et al., 2013).

2. Invest in residential streets as learning and play spaces.
   Independent cycling grows out of everyday experiences close to home, with friends. Children see cycling as a source of enjoyment, freedom and autonomy, and as an important part of peer culture (Shaw et al., 2015; Wales et al., 2021; Weir, 2023; Költő et al., 2021). Low-traffic and play streets allow children to practise autonomy and socialise independently while parents build trust.

3. Change how cycling children are imagined.
   Treat children as legitimate road users and citizens. Visibility and participation in planning help shift expectations. Children are often framed as vulnerable and in need of protection, reinforcing expectations that “good parenting” means keeping them away from the street. At the same time, Silonsaari et al. (2024) show that for some parents, actively supporting children’s autonomy is central to what it means to be a “good parent”. Such narratives do not merely reflect current practices; they shape what kinds of mobility futures become imaginable and legitimate.

Ultimately, children’s cycling independence is not just a matter of skills or parental trust, but a collective design choice about what – and who – our cities are for.

Joyce David is a PhD researcher at Ghent University (Chair of Cycling, Department of Geography). Her work focuses on children’s mobility, independent cycling and child-friendly urban environments. She studies how street design, social norms and everyday experiences shape children’s autonomy in public space. The ideas discussed here build on a recent publication in Transport Reviews, “Pedaling towards autonomy: a multidisciplinary exploration on children’s independent cycling mobility”.

If you would like to read more insights from recent research on cycling, urban mobility, and inclusive urban spaces, consider subscribing to our Substack:

Subscribe now

Read next:

References

Barton, B., Ulrich, T., & Lyday, B. (2012). The roles of gender, age and cognitive development in children’s pedestrian route selection. Child: Care, Health and Development, 38(2), 280–286. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.2010.01202.x

David, J., Glaser, M., & Witlox, F. (2025). Pedaling towards autonomy: a multidisciplinary exploration of children’s independent cycling mobility. Transport Reviews. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2025.2602185.

Ducheyne, F., De Bourdeaudhuij, I., Spittaels, H., & Cardon, G. (2012). Individual, social and physical environmental correlates of ’never’ and ’always’ cycling to school among 10 to 12 year old children living within a 3.0 km distance from school. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 9(1), 142. https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-9-142.

Fults, K. K., Fransen, K., & Boussauw, K. (2025). An exploration into the levels of automobile usage and independent mobility for children in Belgium. Children’s Geographies, 23(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2024.2431719

Ghekiere, A., Van Cauwenberg, J., Carver, A., Mertens, L., de Geus, B., Clarys, P., Cardon, G., De Bourdeaudhuij, I., & Deforche, B. (2016). Psychosocial factors associated with children’s cycling for transport: A cross-sectional moderation study. Preventive Medicine, 86, 141–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.03.001

Ghekiere, A., Van Cauwenberg, J., Mertens, L., Clarys, P., de Geus, B., Cardon, G., Nasar, J., Salmin, J., De Bourdeaudhuij, I., & Deforche, B. (2015). Assessing cycling-friendly environments for children: Are micro-environmental factors equally important across different street settings?. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 12(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-015-0216-2

Hook, H., & David, J. (2025). Designing ideal streetscapes with youth: Exploring transport values through participatory urban planning in Flanders. Journal of Urban Mobility, 8, 100157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urbmob.2025.100157

Költő, A., Gavin, A., Walsh, S., & Molcho, M. (2021). Physical activity, active travel and sport participation among children and adolescents in Ireland: Findings from the HBSC 2018 study. Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) Ireland, Department of Health & HSE.

Riazi, N. A., Brussoni, M., Vertinsky, P., & Faulkner, G. (2021). “Well, you feel more responsible when you’re unsupervised”: Exploring family perspectives on children’s independent mobility. Children, 8(3), 225. https://doi.org/10.3390/children8030225

Shaw, B., Bicket, M., Elliott, B., Fagan-Watson, B., Mocca, E., & Hillman, M. (2015). Children’s independent mobility: An international comparison and recommendations for action. Policy Studies Institute.

Silonsaari, J., Simula, S., & te Brömmelstroet, M. (2024). From intensive car-parenting to enabling childhood velonomy? Explaining parents’ representations of children’s leisure mobilities. Mobilities, 19(1), 116–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2023.2200 146

Skelton, T. (2017). Research on youth transitions: Some critical interventions. In M. Cieslik & G. Pollock (Eds.), Young people in risk society: The restructuring of youth identities and transitions in late modernity (pp. 100–116). Routledge.

Thomsen, T. U. (2004). Children—automobility’s immobilized others? Transport Reviews, 24(5), 515– 532. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144164042000181680

Twisk, D., Wesseling, S., Vlakveld, W., Vissers, J., Hukker, N., & Slinger, W. (2018). Higher-order cycling skills among 11- to 13-year-old cyclists and relationships with cycling experience, risky behavior, crashes and self-assessed skill. Journal of Safety Research, 67, 137–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2018.10.003

Wales, M., Mårtensson, F., & Boldemann, C. (2021). ‘You can be outside a lot’: Independent mobility and agency among children in a suburban community in Sweden. Children’s Geographies, 19(2), 184–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2020.1773401

Weir, H. (2023). Children’s autonomous mobility and their well-being. Wellbeing, Space and Society, 4, 100134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wss.2023.100134

Zwerts, E., Allaert, G., Janssens, D., Wets, G., & Witlox, F. (2010). How children view their travel behaviour: A case study from Flanders (Belgium). Journal of Transport Geography, 18(6), 702–710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2009.10.002

This article discusses the findings of a dissertation completed as part of the MSc Transport and City Planning programme at University College London (UCL). The research compared lived experiences of cyclists in London and Amsterdam to understand how practices, perceptions, and barriers differ by gender across the two cities, to understand why cycling participation for women is so much lower in London than in Amsterdam. Through a combination of surveys, interviews, and observations from visiting both cities, it became clear that the story goes far beyond infrastructure: the way cycling is practiced and perceived also shapes who feel included, and who is left out.

The overarching question addressed by this research was “why do gender patterns vary in everyday cycling between London and Amsterdam?”. This primary question was investigated through three subsidiary research questions, looking into the differences of cycling practice, perceptions of cycling, and barriers to cycling in each city and gender.

How does the practice of cycling vary by gender and city?

The first research question explored how the practice of cycling itself varied by gender and city. Walking around the city observing cyclists, it became clear that cheap and sturdy commuter bikes dominate, with riders wearing casual, everyday clothes. It became clear that bikes are everyday tools. Whether going to school, shopping, or meeting friends, cycling is almost always the most convenient option. As one interviewee explained: “I wouldn’t say I’m a cyclist. I use my bike for everything, but I’m just getting from A to B.”

In London, the picture is different. Road bikes, helmets, and Lycra dominate the cycling scene, and cycling is often tied to sport, fitness, or a political identity. One London respondent admitted: “When I hear the word cyclist, the image in my mind immediately thinks of road cyclists with the most expensive bikes with full Lycra and helmets.” This framing makes cycling feel like something you have to commit to, rather than something inclusive that anyone can casually do. Further, this perception of cycling as a sport or something exclusive can be off-putting, with 49% of Londoners still feeling like cycling isn’t “for people like me” (TfL, 2016) despite investments.

These differences in types of bicycles and cycling gear are highlighted by the graphs below.

The widespread use of helmets in London contributes to the perception that cycling is a fast and risky activity—a theme explored in another recent article by the Urban Cycling Institute. This association between cycling and danger can discourage people from cycling, especially women, who research suggests tend to be more risk averse (Aldred et al., 2016). In contrast, in Amsterdam, the prevalence of casual clothing, step-through commuter bikes, and the general absence of helmets portrays cycling as a calm and everyday activity. This relaxed, accessible image helps to make cycling more attractive and inclusive for women.

It was also evident that the type of journeys made by bicycle vary significantly between the two cities. Cyclists in London, especially male cyclists, tend to make longer journeys, but cycle less frequently than Amsterdam cyclists, who make frequent shorter trips daily. Both men and women in Amsterdam reported cycling 5-6 days a week, whereas London cyclists reported cycling 1-4 days a week. This is likely due to the size and density of each city, with London commuters having longer distances to cover.

Commuting was reported as the primary reason to cycle in both cities and across genders. However, London cyclists are more likely to cite fitness and leisure as key motivators, particularly among men, with cycling being more closely associated with recreation or fitness. This reflects a notable gender gap in participation and trip diversity, suggesting that cycling in London remains somewhat specialised rather than mainstream, often perceived as a sport or leisure activity rather than a practical mode of transport. This perception may contribute to the lower rates of cycling among women, as recreational cycling environments often cater more to male preferences and confidence levels. Conversely, Amsterdam cyclists, especially women, reported cycling for practical purposes such as running errands, school runs, and social activities. This indicates a broader integration of cycling into daily life, with the activity normalised as a convenient and equitable form of mobility for a diverse range of trips and users. The Dutch context demonstrates how supportive infrastructure and positive cycling culture can help close gender gaps and promote cycling as an inclusive, utilitarian mode of transport, rather than primarily a leisure pursuit.

How do perceptions of cycling vary by gender and city?

The second research question explored how perceptions of cycling vary by gender and city, with the intention to explore whether different perceptions of cycling lead to different levels of participation. When asked what words came to mind when they thought of cycling in their city, Amsterdam residents used words like easy, quick, and convenient, as seen in Figure 4. In London, despite several positive words appearing, such as freedom, fun and efficient, the most commonly mentioned words were dangerous, scary, and traffic, as highlighted in Figure 3.

This fear is particularly gendered. Women in London reported feeling more vulnerable in traffic, more likely to avoid night cycling, and more likely to be patronised by drivers. One participant captured the atmosphere bluntly: “Sometimes I feel like I’m cycling on borrowed time. If I haven’t had an incident for a while, I wonder when it’s coming next.” In Amsterdam, by contrast, women said they felt safe and comfortable cycling. One put it simply: “I’m so grateful to be able to cycle without being afraid.”

This overarching perception of cycling as a dangerous activity in London means that many people are deterred from cycling, whereas cycling in Amsterdam is a normalised, everyday activity. This reinforces research by Heinen et al. (2010) and Pucher and Buehler (2012) which highlight that attitudes significantly influence cycling adoption and that positive social norms are linked to higher cycling rates. Therefore, a more positive perception of cycling in Amsterdam means that more people are willing to cycle. In London, instead, people think about how cycling looks or reflects on them as a person, ultimately dissuading them from cycling.

How do barriers to cycling vary by gender and city?

The third research question examined how barriers to cycling differ between London and Amsterdam. Safety concerns came up as the number one barrier in London. But the issue isn’t only physical infrastructure. Cultural norms and expectations matter. In London, cycling is still seen by many as a masculine activity. Stereotypes of the “middle-aged man in Lycra” remain strong, and women who cycle often feel that they are resisting expectations about how they should navigate the city. For some, that resistance feels empowering; for others, it feels alienating. When residents of Amsterdam were asked whether they had a stereotype of a cyclist, apart from ‘fatbike’ users, no stereotypes were raised. This shows that in London, cycling is much more associated with identity, whereas in Amsterdam, anyone can be a cyclist.

Practical barriers also differ. In Amsterdam, theft and tourist behaviour were mentioned, but these were seen as inconveniences rather than deterrents. Affordable commuter bikes are easy to replace, and cycle paths are universally accessible. In London, fear of bike theft actively discourages cycling, especially since expensive road bikes are more common.

What can London learn from Amsterdam?

The contrast between the two cities suggests that infrastructure, while necessary, is not enough. London’s new cycle superhighways have helped boost cycling, but participation remains skewed toward men. For women, the decision to cycle is shaped not just by whether there is a bike lane, but by how safe, normal, and welcoming it feels to use.

Amsterdam shows that when cycling becomes ordinary: integrated into daily life, socially accepted, and practically convenient, women will cycle as much as, or even more than, men. London’s challenge is to move beyond building infrastructure and address the cultural narratives around cycling.

Cycling in London is growing. But until it is perceived as safe, normal, and accessible to everyone, the gender gap will persist. To achieve true equality, the city must do more than invest in bicycle parking; it must invest in culture. That means designing infrastructure for everyday trips, challenging stereotypes, and making cycling feel like something everyone can do in their everyday clothes, on an everyday bike. If London is serious about being a world leader in cycling, it needs to learn this lesson: a real cycling revolution is not about speed, sport, or status. It’s about making cycling an ordinary, everyday activity.

This article was written by Seren Rayment, based on the research conducted in the context of her Master’s dissertation. If you are interested in reading the full dissertation, please contact the author via LinkedIn or email. Interested in writing or sponsoring an article? Write us an email with your pitch!

For more research-informed insights on urban mobility, considering subscribing to our Susbtack!

Subscribe now

Read next:

References

Aldred, R., Woodcock, J., Goodman, A., 2016. Does More Cycling Mean More Diversity in Cycling? Transport Reviews, 36, pp. 28–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2015.1014451

Goel, R., Goodman, A., Aldred, R., Nakamura, R., Tatah, L., Garcia, L.M.T., Zapata-Diomedi, B., de Sa, T.H., Tiwari, G., de Nazelle, A., Tainio, M., Buehler, R., Götschi, T., Woodcock, J., 2022. Cycling behaviour in 17 countries across 6 continents: levels of cycling, who cycles, for what purpose, and how far? Transport Reviews, 42, pp. 58–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2021.1915898

Heinen, E., van Wee, B. and Maat, K. (2011) ‘The role of attitudes toward characteristics of bicycle commuting on the choice to cycle to work’, Transportation Research Part D, 16(2), pp. 102–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2010.08.010

Pucher, J. and Buehler, R. (eds.), 2012. City Cycling. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Shah, R., 2025. Record cycling in London backed by partnerships. Cities Today, 23 May. Available at: https://cities-today.com/london-reports-record-growth-in-cycling/ (Accessed: 13 August 2025)

Transport for London, 2016. Attitudes towards cycling: September 2016 report. London: Transport for London.

Urban Cycling Institute (2024). The relationship between helmet laws, perceptions, and cycling rates. Urban Cycling Institute. Retrieved from https://urbancyclinginstitute.substack.com/p/the-relationship-between-helmet-laws

The transition readiness program switching into high gear

Another year, another study tour as part of our already well-established Urban Cycling Institute program - the Transition Readiness Study, a series of study visits, which can be understood as a “common practice in which local actors travel elsewhere to see innovation and meet with those in the exporting locality who implemented it” (Glaser et al., 2022:8).

In June 2025, in collaboration with the McKnight Foundation (USA), we organized a study tour to Paris for a delegation of around twenty U.S. leaders and key funders from the Midwest. The majority of participants had never been to Paris, or Europe, so this was an exciting opportunity for them to experience firsthand a city that has become a global reference for the 15-minute city, and that now looks and feels dramatically different from a decade ago.

The visit sparked rich discussions, through which participants identified concrete policies and strategies for Midwest cities and states to explore and adopt in their own climate action plans, transitions to 100% clean energy, and transportation decarbonization efforts, while keeping equity at the centre of urban development.

Building a program strategically

Our priority when organizing a study tour is to ensure that the content and program meets the learning objective of the group. To achieve this, we conducted interviews with participants, a few weeks ahead of the trip. Our conversations exposed recurrent challenges dealt with by participants in their home context. The siloed approach to transportation planning, the general staffing shortages that kept transport departments in “triage mode”, a lack of strategic thinking in project development, minimal integration of multimodal transportation, balancing urban and rural transportation needs, were recurrent topics.

Visiting for policy learning

A better understanding of what facilitates learning through policy transfer is key to triggering sustainable urban transitions. Study visits provide effective ways to facilitate learning, transfer, or policy implementation. To best support policy transfer and policy learning opportunities, study trips are designed around the following goals (Glaser et al., 2022):

• Connect: Study visits provide an opportunity to build trusted networks among participants. By fostering meaningful relationships among Midwest officials, experts, and funders, the tour enabled dialogue, collaboration, and the formation of peer networks that can spread ideas and spark future collaborations.

• Learn: The core of a study visit is the experiential learning it provides. By observing Paris’s innovative approaches to energy, transportation, and carbon reduction firsthand, participants could engage directly with implemented solutions, ask questions, and reflect on applicability to their own contexts.

• Activate: Finally, study visits create a space to translate observation into action to equip participants to turn their learning into action once back home.

Three days, no time to waste

Sunday kicked off with a 101-level introduction to Paris, covering governance, infrastructure, and transportation basics, led by a Senior Research Fellow and Professor of Urban Studies at Gustave Eiffel University.

Monday centred on Paris, a living example of the 15-minute city, combining policy insight with lived urban experience. We took a guided walking tour in the 14th arrondissement (district) in company of the Deputy Mayor of Paris responsible for greening and public spaces. There, we unexpectedly ran into the district Mayor, commuting on her bike. The busy intersections filled with cyclists of all ages prompted the group to ironically ask “Is this not Amsterdam?” The walk was followed by a panel discussion at the City Hall.

In her talk, the Director of the Paris Urbanism Agency (APUR) walked the group through Paris’s urban transition toward a people-centred, climate-resilient city, structured around three main themes:

• Linking transport and urban development, notably through the Grand Paris Express and transit-oriented projects.

• Reclaiming public space for people, from the pedestrianization of the banks of the river Seine, to cycling infrastructure, school streets, and everyday uses of streets and squares.

• Massive greening of the city, including tree planting, urban forests, schoolyard transformations, and the creation of cool oases to mitigate heatwaves.

The President of the Paris Green Group, whose work and activism bridges social justice and urban issues, also shared some inspiring words:

The afternoon was an exploration of the new eco-district of Clichy-Batignolles, in the company of Carlos Moreno, pioneer of the 15 minute city concept. The future-proof linear park is surrounded by mixed housing and designed around a few key principles: proximity, diversity, density, and accessibility. “There is nothing to gain in terms of world recognition. What you gain is seeing people on the street, connected to their community”, the group was told.

Tuesday’s theme was cycling infrastructure and the making of “streets for people”. The Head of the Cycling Mission at the City of Paris took the group on a bicycle tour, allowing them to experience the city at street level. When asked about her three key motivations for supporting urban cycling, she listed - “air pollution, street-level efficiency, and freedom of movement and accessibility”. In the afternoon, another panel talk brought together the Director of a regional cycling advocacy federation - the Collectif Vélo Île-de-France - and a former Deputy Chief of Staff to the Mayor of Paris, to showcase the crucial link between governance and cycling advocacy in achieving the cyclable city we know today. Together with the city, cycling advocacy groups leveraged moments of crisis (or “windows of opportunity”), such as the Olympic Games, to advance new infrastructure and behaviors.

On Wednesday, we zoomed out from local action to regional and multimodal transport systems, guided by the Director of Île-de-France Mobilités, the public transport authority for the Île-de-France region. This culminated with a visit of the Gare du Nord bicycle parking by the Bicycle Policy Project Manager.

Experiencing transformation: lessons beyond policy

On Wednesday afternoon, as a closure of the trip, and in line with our study tour traditions, the delegation gathered for a reflection session using playful exercises - most notably the sailboat exercise, which invites participants to imagine the transition as a complex journey. Ultimately, a clear consensus emerged: political will, design innovation, and public engagement are the essential ingredients for successful urban transformation.

Participants also noted the importance of storytelling and political leadership as critical drivers of change. Greening initiatives, for instance, were framed not merely as aesthetic or carbon-reduction efforts, but as a way to reclaim space for people, especially children, and, in doing so, to mobilize citizen support for programs such as “School Streets”.

In spite of this, delegates observed a relative absence of grassroots participation compared to U.S. expectations, highlighting that even a transformative city like Paris may lack citizen engagement, which the civil servants we encountered had noted too. Another participant noted that transformations in Paris tend to be focused on able-bodied users, but what stood out was their broader, more holistic approach to health, emphasizing connection, joy, and vibrancy. Unlike in the U.S., planners in Paris do not feel compelled to gather extensive quantitative data, prioritizing experience and liveliness over formal metrics.

Finally, the discussions extended beyond policy and infrastructure. Delegates were particularly receptive to the experiential value of these changes. They noted the city’s vibrant soundscape, the hum of conversation, laughter, and children playing in streets largely free from traffic noise, and subtle differences such as the reduced use of smartphones, which contributed to a richer street life.

“The opportunity to stop at any given moment and the freedom to navigate the narrowest of streets challenges a cyclist to interact with their spatial surroundings at an explorative level” (te Brömmelstroet et al., 2017).

This feeling was shared enthusiastically by the group. Many participants reflected on the joy and sense of connectedness the cycling tour provided. Experiencing this together with peers, many of whom had not known each other before the trip, strengthened connections and reinforced learning.

Finally, and most importantly, what makes meaningful change possible during a study visit is the opportunity to pause and reflect amid an intense concentration of experiences. As tradition goes, visits conclude with a group reflection moment, the sailboat exercise allows participants to combine firsthand observations with practical actions to drive urban transformation.

3, 2, 1, action!

Upon their return to the U.S., a quick check-in with several participants once again confirmed the success of the study visit: the experience and learning stayed with participants and prompted immediate action.

On a professional level, several participants immediately translated their experience into tools for institutional learning. One participant extended his stay in Europe to visit additional cities, traveling straight to Amsterdam to deepen his understanding of urban innovation. A senior planner and a city official each compiled slideshows with photos, anecdotes, and data from Paris, sharing them across departments, including public works, planning, and parks, to spark cross-agency discussion. Similarly, a transportation official condensed his experience into a 15-minute presentation for his executive team, emphasizing that while contexts differ, the challenges Paris has addressed are familiar and solvable in U.S. cities. In a more hands-on shift, the Deputy Governor for Infrastructure, Public Safety, Environment, and Energy began rethinking bike lane design, paying closer attention to width, two-way traffic, and safety features inspired by Paris’s bold interventions. Other planners began actively exploring how comparable approaches could be adapted locally, using the study visit as a reference point for reimagining street design, safety, and community use. In Minneapolis, one senior planner leveraged the trip to build new connections with a local public school champion, exploring how lessons from Paris could help expand school streets and active mobility programs at home.

Equally powerful were the more personal, but not less impactful, changes. One city planner shared that she finally purchased the e-bike she had been considering for two years, deepening her personal connection to urban mobility. The Acting President of the Chicago Transit Authority bought a bike and began riding with her children, experiencing firsthand how Paris reshaped her understanding of cycling and family mobility. Finally, she could ride with her kids rather than running behind them on foot. She’ll always remember her daughter’s first reaction when she said “Mum, I feel like Paris really saved you”.

Are you and your team feeling inspired by these testimonies? Do you want to learn from global urban leaders and build your capacity to enable sustainable transitions? Then you may want to consider taking part in our Transition Readiness Program (TRP)! Please reach out to Ana Castán for more details!

Read next:

References

Glaser, M., Bertolini, L., te Brömmelstroet, M., Blake, O., & Ellingson, C. (2022). Learning through policy transfer? Reviewing a decade of scholarship for the field of transport. Transport Reviews, 42(5), 626–644. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2021.2003472

te Brömmelstroet, M., Nikolaeva, A., Glaser, M., Nicolaisen, M. S., & Chan, C. (2017). Travelling together alone and alone together: Mobility and potential exposure to diversity. Applied Mobilities, 2(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/23800127.2017.1283122

In this newsletter:
Last chance to sign up for our course in Barcelona
Share your favorite street transformation for the upcoming book “Streetlife”
CRBAM 2026 call for abstracts open
Save the date for Progettare la città ciclabile
Other upcoming dates and events in 2026

Redesigning Streets for All: Tools to Empower Action

Last 5 slots remaining - Grab them now!

Our brand new course is filling up fast and we are calling for the last round of enrollment! Over five days, expect to gain hands-on skills in quick-build street redesign, witness regional cycling networks, and build leadership strategies that turn plans into reality.

Experience Barcelona’s dynamic cycling culture firsthand. This curated program combines expert sessions, site visits, superblocks exploration, and collaborative workshops, all proudly sponsored by ZICLA.

Ready to move from theory to action? Then hurry and join an immersive launchpad for city changemakers.

Fees: €995

Pay Today and Enroll

Spots are filled first come, first served. Know more on the course page on our website.

📌 Enroll by 2 February, 2026

👉 Email ana@urbancyclinginstitute.org for any questions

📍 Barcelona | 📅 23–27 March, 2026

Share Your Favorite Street Transformation

We’re collaborating with urbanist and author Alison Sant on her forthcoming book, Streetlife, which explores how streets and cities around the world are being reimagined as places for people.

We’re currently collecting inspiring examples of street transformations, with a particular focus on the Global South and Asia. We’re interested in stories that show how streets and public spaces have been reshaped to support community life, safe and efficient mobility, and bold, people-centered visions for cities.

This could include:

• Car-free or low-traffic streets

• Highway removals or major street redesigns

• Neighbourhood-led or grassroots transformations

• Local leadership redefining the role of streets

• Public spaces turned into places for everyday life

We’d love to hear about the cities or streets that inspire you most. Your contribution will help shape a diverse collection of places, practices, and voices featured in the book.

📚 Bonus: To thank you for taking part, we’re giving away three copies of Streetlife, which will be randomly awarded among survey respondents.

👉 Take just a few minutes to share your favourite city or street transformation by completing our short survey.

For more on Alison Sant’s research and work on Streetlife, follow her on LinkedIn.

CRBAM 2026 — Call for Abstracts Open

We have recently opened our call for abstracts for this year’s Cycling Research Board Annual Meeting! The 10th CRBAM will happen in Ghent on 16–18 September.

CRBAM is a highly creative and multidisciplinary conference that invites brilliant minds from diverse backgrounds; whether you’re in urban planning, tech innovation, social sciences, design, policy, health, or beyond!

This year’s theme, “Place, People, Politics and the Reimagination of Space”, invites you to question the status quo and cross disciplinary lines, using the bicycle as a lens.

For more information on the conference and to submit an abstract, click on the button below:

Go to CRBAM website

⏳ Keep in mind: the deadline for abstract submissions is on 22 March 11:59 CET

And for participants’ impressions on last year’s CRBAM, check out our LinkedIn post!

Progettare la città ciclabile — Save the Date!

This year’s edition of Progettare la città ciclabile, our one-week leadership program in Italian, is confirmed! It will take place in Amsterdam on 6–10 July. If you or your organization might be interested, keep an eye out — registrations will open soon!

ℹ️ For more information, check out the course page on our website.

What Else Are We Up to This Year?

This upcoming March, we will be in Bonaire to conduct research on site, in the context of our project on physical activity on the island. We will also be starting our bike tours in Ghent that same month, which you can already book on our website. In April, we will host the course Engaging Communities for Changing Streets, in partnership with Strategic Cities.

We also have a lot of content planned for Substack for the next few months, including articles on our study visits in Switzerland and in Paris, research insights on the mobility of children and women, and other content that we are very excited for you to read soon!

Thank you for reading this month’s newsletter! If you’d like to be an active part of the change, please consider supporting our work to share knowledge and research on building active, healthy, and just cities by becoming a paid member.

Become a paid member

Stay tuned for our next issue in February!

Team Urban Cycling Institute 🚲 💙

Read next:

Streets worldwide are under pressure from congestion and climate goals, and there is an urgent demand for sustainable mobility, yet budgets are tighter than ever, with a plethora of challenges at every level. So how do we accelerate this transition?

We at Urban Cycling Institute have created a curated course sponsored by ZICLA to address this issue

This isn’t just another course; it’s a hands-on leadership immersion for experienced mobility professionals.

🚧 Witness real-life examples of quick-build street redesign

🚲 Explore regional cycling networks for city-wide impact through Barcelona’s unique superblocks.

🛠️ Gain tactical skills in governance & leadership to drive projects forward

Our City of Study?

🌴 Barcelona ☀️

Barcelona transformed from having almost no cycling infrastructure into a connected cycling city in just two decades. How did they do it? Join and learn directly from the experts who made it happen, through site visits, bike rides, and real-world case studies.

⏳ Hurry! Only 10 spots remain!

Course Fee is €995 (includes materials, bike hire, lunch & site visits. Does not include travel, accommodation and insurance)

Pay Now & Secure Your Spot

Rolling admissions apply. Secure your place before the final deadline

Still Curious? You can watch the webinar recording with the course leaders to know more!

That is why we decided to visit Bern this past September: because of its political commitment to cycling and the resulting improvements to its cycling landscape. During this visit, we had the opportunity to explore, together with a delegation from Bentonville and City Thread, which factors can influence and promote cycling transitions through the lens of three cities: Zürich, Bern, and Freiburg im Breisgau. In this three-part series, I trace how cycling transitions unfold through different, but interconnected, drivers identified in mobilities and sustainability transitions literature: civic activism, governance arrangements, and spatial reconfiguration. Each article focuses on one of these drivers while showing how they interact in practice.

We began the series with Zürich, where activist organisations have played a central role in pushing cycling onto the political agenda and securing key milestones. That experience highlighted how activism can create windows of opportunity and initiate change. However, without a sufficient level of political will, activism alone may struggle to scale up.

This article turns to Bern to explore what happens when institutional commitment becomes a driving force of the cycling transition. It examines how sustained political support, coordinated governance, and long-term planning have helped align the city’s socio-technical system, contributing to a steady and significant increase in cycling’s modal share over the past decade.

Why is political commitment key for cycling transitions?

Cycling transitions rarely succeed solely through infrastructure changes, as these only address the material aspect of the practice. Instead, they depend on sustained institutional commitment that allows cycling to move from isolated projects to a stable, citywide mobility system, by operating projects beyond the infrastructure and continuously over time. Political commitment plays a central role in this process, not only by signalling priorities but by enabling difficult decisions, coordinating governance, and maintaining long-term support. Without this institutional backing, cycling policies often remain fragmented, short-lived, and probably less successful.

One of the most visible ways political commitment shapes cycling transitions is by enabling controversial but effective measures. Reallocating road space from cars to bicycles, reducing speed limits, or restricting motorised traffic are among the most impactful interventions for improving cycling safety and uptake, yet they are also highly contested. Strong political backing provides the legitimacy needed to push such measures through opposition and backlash, which will most likely occur when taking space from cars. It is also important to have committed institutions that understand that mobility transitions take time and require sustained engagement. If decision-makers prioritise quick wins, changes in mobility habits may not materialise as rapidly as some politicians expect, since mobility transitions can take years and require comprehensive policy packages that address all relevant aspects.

The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated how political agendas can be true game changers: cycling was elevated as a political priority, and cities rapidly implemented pop-up cycleways, protected lanes, and car-restrictive policies. In many cases, these temporary interventions later became permanent, illustrating how political will can transform moments of disruption into lasting pathways for transition (Nikitas et al., 2021). The cases in which it did not last also show how strongly outcomes depend on political commitment: authorities were able to prioritise it for a certain period, but later decided it was no longer a priority, demonstrating that everything ultimately depends on the political agenda.

Beyond enabling decisive action, cycling transitions require long-term, coherent support. Political commitment helps embed cycling within broader policy agendas, such as climate mitigation, public health, and road safety, thereby locking in support across departments and levels of government, providing integral long-term funding and projects. This integration reduces the risk that cycling initiatives are deprioritised when political leadership changes or when competing policy demands emerge. (Monteagudo et al., 2025)

Institutional commitment is also essential for building coalitions and legitimacy, not only within government but across society, which is key to ensuring long-term transitions. Political figures, such as Ursula Wyss in the case of Bern, often play a central role in reframing cycling as a collective public good rather than a niche interest. When political leadership aligns with advocacy groups and social movements, it becomes easier to challenge the dominance of cars and ensure urban transitions (Balkmar, 2020).

At a deeper level, transitions in cycling depend on the ability of institutions to translate vision into implementation capacity. As a socio-technical system, cycling requires that infrastructure, laws, planning standards, social norms, and everyday habits align, in order for new mobility practices to stabilise. Institutional commitment supports this alignment by embedding cycling within administrative routines through dedicated funding streams, cross-departmental coordination, and technical expertise. A clear vision of cycling futures and a committed government is an essential starting point, but this vision must be converted into concrete action. For this to happen, vision and implementation must be closely connected, and sufficient resources, including qualified experts, are essential to ensure that the vision is realised.

How political commitment pushed the transition in Bern?

The case of Bern brings many of the previously discussed theoretical insights into practice, illustrating how cycling transitions can accelerate when political commitment is translated into concrete actions, stable resources, and institutional capacity. When such commitment moves beyond discourse and translates into governance structures, planning practices, and investment decisions, measurable change in everyday mobility can become real.

A central moment in this transition was the launch of the Velo-Offensive in 2014 under the administration of Ursula Wyss. This policy framework laid the groundwork for a proactive shift toward making Bern a bike-friendly city, with the explicit ambition of positioning itself as Switzerland’s cycling capital. While Bern already had a cycling culture, it was primarily recreational and confined to specific groups. The Velo-Offensive sought to move beyond this subculture and anchor cycling in the everyday mobility practices of residents across the city. (Baumgart, 2024; Helme, 2021)

At the core of the initiative was a clear quantitative and strategic objective: to increase cycling’s modal share from 10% to 20%, with the goal of reaching 30% by 2035 (Stadt Bern, n.d.). This target emerged from a practical challenge faced by the city: public transport was already operating at capacity during peak hours, making it unsustainable for future growth in travel demand to be absorbed solely by buses and trams. The city, therefore, identified cycling as a key mode to accommodate this additional demand while simultaneously advancing broader goals related to climate mitigation, public health, and urban quality of life.

One of the defining features of the Velo-Offensive was that it began with institutional change. Rather than treating cycling as a marginal or experimental policy area, Bern restructured administrative bodies and dedicated sufficient financial and human resources to the strategy, ensuring continuity beyond political cycles. This institutional commitment created the conditions for long-term implementation and coordination across departments.

During our stay in Bern, we had the opportunity to learn about the city’s cycling plan and infrastructure from four employees of the mobility department’s cycling and pedestrian division. In the previous section of this article, we outlined several reasons why institutional commitment is essential to enabling cycling transitions. These reasons were not selected arbitrarily; they emerged from the conversations we held over the course of the day we spent in Bern.

In Bern, cycling is understood not merely as a transport issue but as a cross-cutting policy instrument. The city explicitly links its cycling strategy to climate and urban development goals, particularly through the Rahmenplan Stadtklima, which sets out measures for climate adaptation and mitigation. Within this framework, cycling-related interventions are closely tied to urban planning, public space design, and environmental policy. This integrated approach reinforces the role of cycling in the broader transition toward a more resilient, liveable, and sustainable city. As outlined in the previous section, embedding cycling within other policy areas not only secures its viability but also strengthens its long-term objectives, as it is not pursued through isolated measures.

At the operational level, municipal staff emphasised that they seize every opportunity to create space for pedestrians and cyclists, sometimes a simple coat of paint is enough. While more sophisticated solutions may exist, they take longer to implement. Capitalising on these quick wins has been crucial to achieving rapid progress. This has been enabled by a well-resourced, dedicated team with a clear understanding of the framework in which these small interventions operate. This ensures that each intervention supports the long-term goal or can later be transformed into a permanent solution. Rather than merely delivering quick fixes, the team identifies and leverages windows of opportunity that move the long-term plan forward.

The head of the department also stressed the importance of team size: having a sufficiently large, qualified team allows them to work efficiently. When municipal cycling teams are too small, they quickly become overwhelmed by day-to-day problem-solving and implementing individual measures, leaving no room to identify new actions or seize emerging opportunities. In those contexts, they are missing these small opportunities, which, over time, when combined, can drive change. This again illustrates how political commitment has been translated into action in Bern, with an adequate budget and a team fully dedicated to active mobility, key elements of the city’s success.

For example, one such opportunity involved closing a street to cars and installing temporary infrastructure, as shown in the photograph below. The street, next to a school in a working-class area of the city, was quickly adopted by local children as a play space. While the intervention was temporary, it was also discussed as a potential pilot for future projects, a way to test ideas not only for the authorities but also for residents, who could experience these changes and decide whether they wanted similar projects in their neighbourhoods.

Of course, these small changes alone will not bring about an urban transition; more ambitious projects are also needed, and we had the chance to learn about some of them during our visit. Alongside the expansion of the cycling network, one of the team’s main priorities is to improve the quality of cycling infrastructure, for instance, by creating Dutch-inspired intersections that enhance cycling safety in areas shared with pedestrians, cars, and public transport. We were able to see several of these improvements during our trip. Together, these small victories and larger projects have gradually, step by step, contributed to Bern’s successful transition.

We were also able to witness firsthand how much importance Bern places on citizen participation. The Velo-Offensive, for instance, was developed through a participatory process, with citizens and other stakeholders working in groups to help define priorities and interventions. Yet participation goes even further. Bern residents can request that the city council close their streets to motor traffic, reclaiming the space for neighbourhood life.

During our visit, we cycled along some of these streets. The transformation was striking, and it was inspiring to realise that residents themselves had asked for this change. Bicycles now fill these routes, which many people use as convenient, car-free connections, while children play outside, bikes are parked along the street, and former car parks overflow with flower pots.

Scenes like these capture what cycling transitions look like when institutional commitment becomes tangible in everyday urban life. What may appear as small, local changes are in fact the outcome of long-term political decisions, administrative capacity, and a governance approach that allows citizen demands to be tested, implemented, and scaled up. This cumulative approach has delivered measurable results: Bern has increased its cycling modal share to nearly 20%, placing the city close to achieving its 2030 target and earning international recognition for its cycling policies (Copenhagenize, 2025).

Bern also offers a critical lesson for other cities seeking similar transitions. Effective cycling policy is not achieved simply by copying best-practice designs or launching high-profile initiatives. It requires sustained political commitment that consistently prioritises cycling on the agenda and ensures follow-through through leadership, stable resources, and long-term vision. While political leadership sets the direction, administrative capacity, staff, expertise, coordination, and funding are what ultimately ensure that this direction translates into durable change.

In this series, Bern marks the transition from cycling being pushed onto the agenda, as in Zürich, to being stabilised and scaled through governance. This leads to the final question taken up in the next article: once political and institutional commitment are in place, how can spatial planning and urban form lock in these gains and reshape cities around cycling for the long term?

This article was written in the context of our partnership with City Thread, and is the second in a three-part series about our study visit in Switzerland. The first article covered activism as a driver of change in Zürich.

If your organization is interested in becoming one of our partners, please take a look at our partnerships page. To receive the next two articles of this series in your inbox, click the button below to subscribe to our newsletter!

Subscribe now

Read next:

References

Balkmar, D. (2020). Cycling politics: imagining sustainable cycling futures in Sweden. Applied Mobilities, 5(3), 324–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/23800127.2020.1723385

Baumgart, M. (2024). Spatial impacts, actors’ influence and resulting conflicts of bike infrastructure implementation: A case study of Bern City (Tesis de maestría, University of Bern, Institut of Geography, Faculty of Philosophy and Natural Sciences, Political Urbanism and Sustainable Spatial Development). University of Bern. https://www.geography.unibe.ch/unibe/portal/fak_naturwis/e_geowiss/c_igeogr/content/e39592/e1608235/e1608239/pane1608241/e1745383/Baumgart.Martin_2024_ger.pdf

Copenhagenize. (2025). Bern – Copenhagenize index. https://copenhagenizeindex.eu/index.php/project/bern/

Helme, J. (2021, October 11). Has Bern’s ‘Velo Offensive’ Been Victorious? CityChangers.org – Home Base for Urban Shapers. https://citychangers.org/has-berns-velo-offensive-been-victorious/

Monteagudo, M. J., Villatoro, F., San Salvador del Valle, R., & Aranbarri, N. (2025). Use and Promotion of Bicycles for Sustainable Urban Mobility: The Case of Bizkaia. Sustainability, 17(3), 1147. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17031147

Nikitas, A., Tsigdinos, S., Karolemeas, C., Kourmpa, E., & Bakogiannis, E. (2021). Cycling in the Era of COVID-19: Lessons Learnt and Best Practice Policy Recommendations for a More Bike-Centric Future. Sustainability, 13(9), 4620. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094620

Stadt Bern. (n.d.). Ziel — Velo-Offensive. Bern.ch. Retrieved January 16, 2026, from https://www.bern.ch/velohauptstadt/velo-offensive/ziel

January

We started the year strong by welcoming five interns to our team: Marina, Pedro, Nina, Libby and Asaf.

February

In February, we were invited for two podcast interviews. Dylan Power sat down with Ushma Issar and Thomas Plochg from Rypple to talk about building active cities, while Meredith Glaser and Michela Grasso represented the Urban Cycling Institute on Bike Talk, to discuss the children’s protest in Amsterdam in 2024.

March

We launched our 2024 impact report with 85 pages, as well as our e-book Manifesto for Cycling Futures, with 50 policy actions and 9 reflective essays.

In March, we also went on a field visit to Bonaire, where the project team spent two weeks conducting research for our ongoing project.

April

April was the busiest month for our bike tours: 13 people joined one of our excursions.

May

Our four-year research project on cycling and public health on Bonaire was featured in a newspaper article (in Dutch). The article highlighted a few impressive findings, including that more than 80% of people interviewed wanted more bike lanes.

June

Meredith Glaser and Lilian Markfort represented the Urban Cycling Institute at Velo-City 2025 at two different sessions. Meredith participated on a panel on bicycles and regulation with a presentation about fat bikes, while Lilian presented research on behaviour change that the Urban Cycling Institute has conducted in the context of our project with City Thread.

We concluded Debug Your Mobility, a six-month long program with SUGG where workers from 20 different companies and organizations were challenged to try out a different approach to commuting.

We also conducted a study visit in Paris, with a group of 20 participants.

July

In the beginning of the second semester, our first academic article sharing findings from our project on Bonaire was published! The paper, published in Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, draws from preliminary data from the project to indicate future directions for researchers and policymakers on the island.

We also wrapped up the ninth edition of Planning the Cycling City, this year with 24 students. Watch the final event here!

August

In the eighth month of the year, we launched a new course: Engaging Communities for Changing Streets, now sold out with 22 participants.

September

To finish off the summer, we welcomed 98 participants at the University of Amsterdam for the ninth edition of the Cycling Research Board Annual Meeting.

This month we also took a delegation of 17 people on a study visit in Switzerland, in a partnership with Bentonville and City Thread. The delegation included 12 representatives from Bentonville, Arkansas, among city officials and community representatives. Read more about it here!

Back in Amsterdam, we hosted the fourth edition of the Spanish-language leadership program Planeando la Ciudad Segura y Saludable.

Finally, we launched our course with ZICLA, Redesigning Streets for All: Tools to Empower Action, which was a huge success having nearly 40 registrations.

October

Sena Çınar joined us as our sixth intern this year, and is conducting research on the perception of cycling by Turkish migrants in the Netherlands. If you are part of that population and would like to share your story, read this post or reach out to Sena directly!

Together with Decisio Italia, we organized the first edition of the Italian leadership program Progettare la città ciclabile, with 21 participants!

November

In November, we were on the move again! At the beginning of the month, we went back to Paris for a second study visit. Later, in Amersfoort, Erik van Marissing and Michela Grasso delivered a 4-hour workshop to the 11 participants from the municipality.

Our ongoing project in Bonaire was featured in two documents published by the World Health Organization! The project was the object of a case study, which was featured in a 170-page guide on urban health.

December

At the beginning of the month, we went to Turin in the context of our Transition Readiness Program, in partnership with Decathlon. There, we held a workshop for 26 participants on mobility and communication.

Finally, Ethan Crossman joined us as an intern. He will be bringing our tours to a second city: Ghent. Stay tuned to be informed when bookings open!

And this is only scratching the surface! Thank you for being a part of our network, sharing our work, and participating in our events. None of this could have happened without you, and we hope you will enjoy our content even more next year! A special thanks to our paid Substack members for making this newsletter possible — if you would like to join them in supporting our work, subscribe with the button below!

Become a paid member

Is there a topic in particular you would like to see us cover in 2026? Let us know in the comment section below!

Leave a comment

The list of questions I asked ultimately tried to decipher people’s perceptions of safety. I opened by asking about their cycling background (how long have you been cycling, how often do you cycle), before transitioning to their opinions on safety, and concluding with a gauge of their acceptance of motonormativity by asking their perception on responsibility in protecting the safety of cyclists. Motonormativity is a shared bias referring to people’s acceptance of driving and the presence of cars as a way of life, often viewing them more favorably than other public health hazards, such as smoking, despite both cigarettes and cars contributing to air pollution and fatalities (Walker et al., 2023).

Who are the helmeted cyclists in Amsterdam?

In Amsterdam, the few helmeted cyclists belonged to one of two categories: elderly people or tourists whom I happened to bump into on their first few days in the city. The elderly reported riding their bikes for most of their lives and at least once a week. While acknowledging that cars and subsequent traffic create the most dangerous conditions on the roads for them, they believed that wearing a helmet should remain optional. One older man said, “it is only inevitable that one day I will fall,” which is why he admitted to taking extra care to wear a helmet, but noted that he only started a few months ago.

The tourists, mostly from France, Germany, and Italy, were surprised at the unusual prevalence of bikes in the Dutch capital. A family from France mistakenly thought helmets were compulsory in Amsterdam, so they had brought their own from home. Upon their immediate observations, the most dangerous conditions for them ranged from seemingly chaotic interactions between cars, other cyclists, and pedestrians. Most of the interviewed tourists had traveled to Amsterdam with a helmet, and the importance of protective equipment was reflected in their answers, from some recommending wearing helmets to be safer, to others remarking on their importance when cycling. “It is the smart thing to do!” added a German tourist.

Why were helmets more commonly seen among Parisian cyclists?

In Paris, where the city has seen a significant push for more cycling infrastructure by mayor Anne Hidalgo in the past few years, almost every interviewee thought that other cyclists should wear helmets (Ghidotti, 2024). There was a significant variety of age, gender, and race amongst these interviewees. One woman who was from Belgium but recently moved to France said she wears a helmet in Paris because it is too dangerous, but she forsakes wearing one in Belgium. Similar to complaints in Amsterdam, they attributed the dangers on the road to the behavior of other cyclists, cars, and pedestrians. The first interview I conducted in the French capital was with a man who had been riding since he was a child in 1994, and noted how the recent increase in bidirectional cycle lanes represents an improvement for cyclists’ safety (Cycling, 2025).

When asked where the responsibility lies — who causes dangerous conditions for cyclists, and whether wearing a helmet places more of a burden on the cyclists rather than on car users — a little over half both Paris and Amsterdam interviewees attributed road unsafety to cars. However, the vast majority of respondents also stated they did not believe wearing a helmet causes an uneven distribution of responsibility. The most common justification was that they wore a helmet out of self-interest, “to protect my own well-being.” A young man in Paris compared wearing a helmet to wearing a seatbelt, a sentiment echoed by a group of Germans visiting Amsterdam. Only a few interviewees stated that responsibility is shared between drivers and cyclists.

Whose responsibility is it to make cycling safer?

Helmeted cyclists interviewed in Paris and Amsterdam view the choice of wearing a helmet as a form of pragmatic self-preservation within a motonormative context. A handful of interviewees framed their choice as one that did not have to be imposed on others – what a mandatory helmet law would imply - by agreeing on leaving people the freedom of choosing how to protect themselves, saying, “others can do whatever they want.” They are aware of the downsides of the current, car-dominated system, and adopt a protective strategy that is personal. The helmet is seen as a protective measure within their control in a world where cars cause unpredictability and potential injury.

In order to improve safety on the roads, helmeted cyclists most often suggested enforcing pre-existing rules (e.g., the speed limit) through fines and distinguishing separate lanes for e-bikes. Fatbikes1 and scooters were mentioned multiple times in the Amsterdam interviews, with one person going so far as saying they should be banned from cycle lanes.

Therefore, while it appears that cyclists see drivers as a source of danger for them, they do not go as far as questioning how compulsory helmet law places the burden solely on cyclists to wear safety equipment. Safety is seen as an individual duty rather than a collective responsibility by these interviewees, and the focus on solutions that fit this narrative shows that they only acknowledge, but do not challenge, the status quo.

This article was written by Sophia Wang and is the third and last installment in her series regarding helmet laws and cycling. The first article in this series has covered the relationship between helmet laws and cycling ridership and the second has looked into the opposition to such laws. If you are interested in research-informed deep dives on cycling policy, subscribe to our newsletter to receive our articles as soon as they are published!

Subscribe now

Do you have a strong opinion on this topic? Has your view shifted after reading this series? Share your thoughts with us in the comments!

Leave a comment

Interested in writing or sponsoring an article? Write us an email with your pitch!

Read next:

References

Cycling, Dom. (2025, May 10). Paris 24: Cycling in Paris. Dom Cycling. https://domcycling.com/2025/05/10/paris-24-cycling-in-paris/

Ghidotti, L. (2024, March 11). Transforming Paris: Cycling as a Social Movement- Urban Cycling Institute. Urban Cycling Institute. https://urbancyclinginstitute.org/transforming-paris-from-below-cycling-as-a-social-movement/

NDC Netherlands. (2023, October 17). Follow-up measurement of equipment use & baseline measurement of helmet wear by cyclists. Institute for Road Safety Research. https://swov.nl/nl/publicatie/vervolgmeting-apparatuurgebruik-0-meting-helmdracht-fietsers

Walker, I., Tapp, A., & Davis, A. (2023). Motonormativity: How social norms hide a major public health hazard. International Journal of Environment and Health, 11(1), 21-33. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJENVH.2023.135446

For this reason, the study of mobility should be, at its core, context-dependent. Whether we examine the narratives shaping our streets, such as critiques of language using or reflections on motonormativity, or governance issues such as helmet laws or conflicts among road users, meaningful insight must be grounded in local conditions.

Similarly to the fietsstraat, it is impossible to grasp the motivations behind cycling without considering the specific socio-economic context. While developed nations increasingly focus on the health benefits of cycling for sedentary populations, in many other contexts, manual labourers may still see the car as a shelter. For them, exhaustion often stems from being over-exposed to natural elements during work hours, meaning they may dismiss the rhetoric that “cycling helps you exercise more and connect with nature.”

These contrasts show how mobility cannot be understood in a vacuum; it is always filtered through infrastructural conditions, social dynamics, political priorities and cultural imaginaries. This also raises questions: Do the widely cited benefits of cycling hold across different contexts? What lessons travel well across cities? And how far are we from a global shift toward collectively valuing active mobility? For these questions, comparative research is not just useful—it is essential.

The Necessity of Comparative Research

My recent research, The Diversity of Cycling Experiences: Affective and Sensory Dimensions in Two Cities, a forthcoming paper, uses comparison to explore how sensory and affective experiences vary across contexts.

At a time when urban mobility street design has become increasingly homogenized around efficiency, this research seeks to move beyond the entrenched planning assumption that mobility’s primary goal is cost minimization. Instead, the study emphasizes human complexity in terms of interaction with urban surroundings, aiming to re-emphasize the sensory and affective richness inherent to active mobility.

The rationale for framing this research as a comparative one is simple yet critical: cycling immerses the traveller in the surrounding environment and is inherently characterized by rich interactions. It is crucial to unpack the consistency of this diversity across contexts in all of its forms.

Setting Criteria for Choosing the Right Contexts

To find the core mechanisms driving the diversity of experience, I selected settings offering both contrast and comparability. Therefore, I chose to compare both a mature and an emerging cycling environment, spanning different cultural contexts. This became one of my key criteria for corridor selection.

To unpack how specific physical elements influence experience, I established two additional criteria to ensure rigor and comparability: A wide range of physical factors, differentiating corridors by car or bicycle dominance; comparable traffic densities, urban scales, and cycling rates (a macro-level control).

Four Corridors in Amsterdam and Shanghai

Following these criteria, I selected Amsterdam and Shanghai as my case studies. Amsterdam represents a mature cycling culture; Shanghai reflects a rapidly growing cycling awareness post-COVID. Both exhibit high cycling rates yet offer radically different urban and cultural backdrops.

Four corridors in the two cities are selected (Figure 1): A in Shanghai and C in Amsterdam shared similar levels of bicycle dominance, while B in Shanghai and D in Amsterdam exhibited similar levels of car dominance. All corridors contained comparable infrastructural, traffic, and environmental factors.

How to Capture Experience in Empirical Research

In my review of methods for studying cycling experience (Figure 3) (see my previous Substack post here), I identified a central challenge: retrospective surveys and interviews dominate, yet often suffer from memory bias and difficulty capturing fleeting, on-the-move sensations. Meanwhile, mobile methods offer real-time accuracy but risk disrupting the natural flow of cycling through researcher involvement.

To navigate these trade-offs, my study employed a hybrid method, balancing contextual immediacy with interpretive depth:

1. Mobile video recording:
   A lightweight split-unit camera captured natural gaze shifts and subtle cues while minimizing intrusion (Figure 4).

2. Video-assisted retrospective interviews:
   Immediately after cycling, participants reviewed their footage, using it as a memory anchor to recall the “what, where, and why” of sensory and affective responses.

3. Experience mapping:
   I plotted participants’ reports of sensory interpretations (visual, auditory, olfactory, kinaesthetic) and affective states (emotions, mood, satisfaction) onto corridor maps, revealing clusters and patterns in how experiences differed (see example Figure 5).

The goal in mobility planning is no longer merely getting people from A to B efficiently, but ensuring the journey itself is joyful, equitable, and contributes positively to human well-being. My comparative study, enabled by these innovative hybrid methods, validates that across contexts, the stressors from car traffic overwhelm all the senses, where environmental perception significantly diminishes. It also reveals context-specific differences: sensory–affective contrasts across time and space sustain engagement and positive arousal, yet the required levels of stimulation differ—low-stimulation settings may feel safe and peaceful in one context but less engaging or even boring in another.

To truly realize the potential of cycling to foster healthy and just urban environments, planners must reject the homogeneous “copy-and-paste” blueprint and instead embrace the beautiful, patterned complexity of human experience—designing not just for efficiency, but for the peace and joy of the ride.

Read next:

References

Mahajan, R. (2025, November 21). Divide and Conquer: How Car-Centric Cities Turn Allies Into Adversaries. Urban Cycling Institute. https://urbancyclinginstitute.substack.com/p/divide-and-conquer-how-car-centric

Walker, I., & te Brömmelstroet, M. (2025). Why do cars get a free ride? The social-ecological roots of motonormativity. Global Environmental Change, 91, 102980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.102980

Wang, S. (2025, November 28). How Do Helmet Laws Impact Cycling Ridership? Urban Cycling Institute. https://urbancyclinginstitute.substack.com/p/the-relationship-between-helmet-laws

Zhang, R., te Brömmelstroet, M., Nikolaeva, A., & Liu, G. (2024). Cycling subjective experience: A conceptual framework and methods review. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 101, 142–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2023.12.021

What’s important to note, however, is that the force behind this campaign is pro-automobile, and that it places the responsibility on the individual rather than on the government (Chutel and Kropmen, 2025). During his time in office, infrastructure minister Barry Madlener has both increased the speed limit for cars on freeways and praised electric cars (Dutch News, 2025). The same report about road deaths cited in the previous paragraph shows that more than 40% of cyclist fatalities were in a collision with a car (Dutch Central Bureau for Statistics, 2025). Given that the car has been a proponent of many deadly cases, Dutch cyclist union Fietsersbond argues that the government should focus on reducing car speeds and sizes instead (Chutel and Kropmen, 2025). Similarly, voices such as the Urban Cycling Institute’s very own Marco te Brömmelstroet have encouraged a nuanced perspective on this campaign, saying that the helmet initiative is “well-intended but ill-informed and therefore potentially morally problematic” (Chutel and Kropmen, 2025).

Brömmelstroet is not alone in this regard. In the United Kingdom, where helmets are voluntary despite the recommendations of the British Medical Association, cycling groups such as Cycling UK have staunchly opposed any movements towards mandating helmets. Cycling UK believes that helmet laws and promotional campaigns are detrimental to public health (Cycling UK, 2023). According to Australian statistician Piet de Jong, “Even with very optimistic assumptions as to the efficacy of helmets, relatively minor reductions in cycling on account of a helmet law are sufficient to cancel out, in population average terms, all head injury health benefits,” emphasizing the all-encompassing importance in ridership levels increasing lifespans (de Jong, 2012).

Helmet Effectiveness

In order to be effective, helmets must be worn correctly and have the right fit, which is not always the case. As mentioned in the previous article in this series, a 2022 study identified 4 conditions for helmets to offer maximum efficiency, which were only met by 4% of respondents (Lee et al., 2022). The literature surrounding the protection that helmets provide generally agrees on their ability to shield from traumatic brain injury and facial injuries, but disagrees on the level of protection for other kinds of injuries, such as the neck. For example, helmets may contribute to the rotational movement of one’s head after impact, increasing the severity of a neck injury (Cycling UK, 2023).

Furthermore, a 2018 study in two Czech regions found that 37% of cyclist fatalities could have survived if they had been wearing helmets, mainly in low-energy crashes (falls from a bike, or bumping into an obstacle) (Bíl et al., 2018). While that is certainly a significant number, it leaves a majority of accidents where a helmet would have been useless, usually in high-energy crashes where motor vehicles or trains were involved, hence the insistence of helmet law opponents in limiting car speeds instead. The contradictions within the literature can be attributed to the weakness of case-control studies, failing to account for wider trends in head injuries, helmet design issues, drivers’ behavior, and risk compensation. The last two will be covered in the upcoming sections.

Dehumanization of Cyclists

Cyclists are already perceived by drivers as nuisances, especially in areas where cycling is not commonplace. A recent study in Australia, where helmets are mandatory, illustrates the contrasting perceptions and subsequent behavior that drivers exhibit when cyclists wear safety attire (Limb and Collyer, 2023). The hypothesis was that the obscuring of facial features and hair by helmets would have drivers perceive cyclists as more animal-like. However, people wearing caps appeared to be more human than those wearing helmets. Therefore, it is the presence of safety attire, rather than the covering of the face by the helmet itself, that contributes to this dehumanization, as cyclists without helmets but wearing safety vests appeared the least human out of all types tested (Limb and Collyer, 2023).

The attire attributes the cyclist as a member of a group that is already “othered,” rather than a human being. The more obvious the group membership is, the more likely the group’s reputation is assigned to the individual. For cyclists, the unfortunate reality is that they are usually viewed by drivers as an unwelcome addition to roads (the exception perhaps being places with already high cycling numbers), with drivers expressing frustrations in sharing the space (Rissel et al., 2002).

The more a driver dehumanizes a cyclist, the more likely they are to display aggressive behaviors, like cutting a cyclist off. A landmark study in 2007 illustrates that drivers may pass closer to cyclists wearing helmets, falsely believing in their heightened experience level or risk compensation (the chances of an injury from a collision may be lowered due to the helmet) (Walker, 2007). As mentioned in the first article of this series, Seattle experienced an increase in all bicycle-related trauma following the passing of a helmet law in 2003, so helmets may have contributed to the perceived invulnerability of cyclists (Kett et al., 2016). Walker adds nuance to his 2007 findings in a 2014 paper investigating whether it was the perceived experience level of the cyclist that made drivers less cautious by making participants wear different high visibility vests or sporting gear (Walker et al., 2014).

The conclusion was that while drivers were sensitive to the clothing of a cyclist (leaving the most room for cyclists wearing “police” vests), their behavior did not differentiate between the levels of experience portrayed (Walker et al., 2014). However, a small proportion of overtaking car drivers passed within 50 cm of the cyclist regardless of their attire, so there is little that riders can do to prevent the nearest misses, further shifting the solution from the bicyclists themselves and towards systemic issues.

Risk Compensation

Risk compensation is the theory that people adjust their behavior in response to their perception of risk, studied first in the context of motor vehicles and then in cyclists (Kang et al., 2021). In the context of bicycling, scholars speculate that helmeted cyclists are less cautious (e.g., riding at higher speeds, acting more recklessly) since they feel more protected. This notion is supported by a 2021 Berkeley study finding a 15.6% increase in the amount of risky overtaking behaviors (Kang et al., 2021). However, a major limitation of this study is the small sample size, and less than a third of the participants were female. On the other hand, a 2018 Finnish paper has pointed out that helmet wearing does not lead to risk compensation, since those who wear helmets are already risk-averse (Radun et al., 2018). This contradiction may be due to the differences in categorizing risky behavior or a lack of baseline data (Radun et al., 2018).

The potential for risk compensation in response to mandatory helmet laws could outweigh the benefits from such a policy. Instead, reducing any perceived risk for both drivers and cyclists by introducing traffic calming measures (e.g. speed humps, modal filters, etc.) can mitigate unintended compensation effects and reduce the number of serious injuries.

Preventing injuries or preventing crashes altogether?

To sum up, the three main reasons for opposing helmet laws is the lack of helmet effectiveness in face of serious vehicle collisions, dehumanization of cyclists through their safety attire, and risky behaviors that may be motivated by the wearing of a helmet. According to the opponents of such laws, wearing a helmet is akin to putting a bandaid on a bullet hole – protecting against minor crashes that do not involve cars. They argue it should remain a personal choice, considering the specific route (whether the cyclist would have to share space with cars), speeds taken, length of commute, etc. Overtaking cyclists at various distances based on their appearance does occur from drivers, and what the cyclist was wearing (safety attire, sporting gear, a helmet) all contributed to their perceived level of experience and thus, closer passing proximity. Finally, risk compensation suggests that helmet wearing may lead to cyclists feeling more untouchable on the road, which is not the case. In any case, it is clear that helmet laws, if enacted, should be accompanied with thorough research regarding the city’s specific constituent behaviors and other traffic calming measures.

Opponents of helmet laws believe that blanket legislation does not properly address the problem. If a municipality is considering instating regulations to address traffic injuries, cyclists should be the last target audience, and drivers speeding through neighborhoods should be addressed first. Once again, preventative measures such as building cycling-friendly infrastructure, prevent collisions from happening in the first place, which helmets cannot do.

This article was written by Sophia Wang and is the second installment in a three-part series regarding helmet laws and cycling. The first article in this series has covered the relationship between helmet laws and cycling ridership. The next article will reveal insights about helmet utilization from interviews with cyclists in Amsterdam and Paris. Sign up to our newsletter to receive the next article in your inbox!

Subscribe now

Read next:

Edit (17/12/2025): A previous version of this article misrepresented the findings in Bíl et al., 2018, referenced in the fifth paragraph of the present text. The text has been updated to reflect the findings correctly: “the study found that 37% of cyclist fatalities could [not ‘would’] have survived if they had been wearing helmets. (…) it leaves a majority of accidents where a helmet would [not ‘could’] have been useless.”

References

Bíl, M., Dobiáš, M., Andrášik, R., Bílová, M., & Hejna, P. (2018). Cycling Fatalities: When a helmet is useless and when it might save your life. Safety Science, 105, 71–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2018.02.005

Chutel, L., & Kropman, R. (2025, April 17). The Dutch Love Their Bicycles. Helmets? Not So Much. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/17/world/europe/bicycles-helmets-dutch.html

Cycle Helmets. Cycling UK. (2023, October). https://www.cyclinguk.org/briefing/cycle-helmets

de Jong P. (2012). The health impact of mandatory bicycle helmet laws. Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 32(5), 782–790. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01785.x

DutchNews. (2025, April 14). Motorists can speed up to 130kph on three bits of motorway. DutchNews.nl. https://www.dutchnews.nl/2025/04/motorists-can-speed-up-to-130kph-on-three-bits-of-motorway/

Dutch Central Bureau of Statistics. (2025, April 17). 42 percent fewer traffic deaths in 25 years. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2025/16/42-procent-minder-verkeersdoden-in-25-jaar

Kang, L., Vij, A., Hubbard, A., & Shaw, D. (2021). The unintended impact of helmet use on bicyclists’ risk-taking behaviors. Journal of Safety Research, 79, 135–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2021.08.014

Kett, P., Rivara, F., Gomez, A., Kirk, A., & Yantsides, C. (2016). The Effect of an All-Ages Bicycle Helmet Law on Bicycle-Related Trauma. Journal of Community Health, 41(6), 1160–1166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-016-0197-3

Lois K. Lee, Michael R. Flaherty, Ashley M. Blanchard, Maneesha Agarwal, THE COUNCIL ON INJURY, VIOLENCE, AND POISON PREVENTION; Helmet Use in Preventing Head Injuries in Bicycling, Snow Sports, and Other Recreational Activities and Sports. Pediatrics August 2022; 150 (3): e2022058878. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2022-058878

Limb, M., & Collyer, S. (2023). The effect of safety attire on perceptions of cyclist dehumanisation. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 95, 494–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2023.05.008

McCarthy, N. (2015, February 24). The More Cyclists In A Country, The Fewer Fatal Crashes. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2015/02/24/the-more-cyclists-in-a-country-the-fewer-fatal-crashes-report-infographic/

Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management. (2025, April 16). Fietshelm. https://www.komveiligthuis.nl/fietshelm

NDC Netherlands. (2023, October 17). Follow-up measurement of equipment use & baseline measurement of helmet wear by cyclists. Institute for Road Safety Research . https://swov.nl/nl/publicatie/vervolgmeting-apparatuurgebruik-0-meting-helmdracht-fietsers

Radun, I., Radun, J., Esmaeilikia, M., & Lajunen, T. (2018, October). Risk compensation and bicycle helmets: A false conclusion and uncritical citations. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 58, 548-555. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369847818301128?via%3Dihub#section-cited-by

Rissel Chris , Campbell Fiona , Ashley Bruce Jackson Lisa (2002) Driver Road Rule Knowledge and Attitudes towards Cyclists. Australian Journal of Primary Health 8, 66-69. https://doi.org/10.1071/PY02029

Walker, I. (2007). Drivers overtaking bicyclists: Objective Data on the effects of riding position, helmet use, vehicle type and apparent gender. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 39(2), 417–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2006.08.010

Walker, I., Garrard, I., & Jowitt, F. (2014). The influence of a bicycle commuter’s appearance on drivers’ overtaking proximities: An on-road test of bicyclist stereotypes, high-visibility clothing and safety aids in the United Kingdom. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 64, 69–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2013.11.007