Two Cities, Different Rides: Exploring Gendered Experiences of Cycling in London and Amsterdam
Differences in Cycling and Gender Patterns Between the Two Cities
In Amsterdam, a world-leader in urban cycling, more women cycle than men, with 55% of cyclists being women (Goel, et al., 2022). Over the past decade, London has received heavy investment in cycle lanes, bike-share schemes, and the rhetoric of a “cycling revolution”, with cycling levels increasing by 70% between 2017 and 2025 (Shah, 2025). Despite these investments, women make up just 26% of cyclists (Goel, et al., 2022) and men are twice as likely to commute by bicycle as women (Aldred, 2016). This contrast raises an important question: how did Amsterdam achieve gender parity in cycling levels, while London’s “cycling revolution” is so male-dominated?
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!
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
 |
|
It is an interesting study and great write up. But really it’s important to be able to see the wood for the trees. In London, only 2% of the roads have safe cycling infrastructure. In Amsterdam that’s 120% (more safe cycling roads than car roads). So the two cities aren’t comparable at all. Culture and perception can only be considered once we have infrastructure parity.
Great article! Nice data visualizations. I cycle most days in Bozeman, MT. In the old part of town, there are almost no stop signs at intersections. Interestingly, that makes the old town feel much safer and more functional for cyclists than the suburbs to the west. The lack of stop signs reduces motorist confidence and, therefore, speed, causing every road user to travel at roughly the same speed. No bike lanes required. On another note, I find that my personal largest motivator for cycling is when parking is a PITA. To increase cycling ridership, intentionally make driving a worse experience.