Cycling City Survey Results

[Amanda P]

Too dangerous - 43%
Too much traffic - 38%
I'm too old - 36%
Health reasons - 21 %
Weather puts me off - 22%

They are excuses, though.

I'm (semi-humourously) attempting to draw a distinction between valid reasons, and excuses.

When someone gives a reason for something, you can argue the point, and you may change that person's mind.

When you get an excuse, it's the other way around: they have already decided what they are or aren't going to do, and the excuse is a post-hoc justification for it. You can argue with someone who makes an excuse until you're blue in the face, but you are unlikely to change their mind.

Clearly those "reasons" are excuses. If they were valid reasons, no-one would cycle. We are living proof that they are, in fact, excuses, since many of us are old, or have health problems, get wet regularly and so on, but we cycle nevertheless.

Perhaps I can be more helpful by suggesting that the excuses aren't going to go away any time soon. We can't change the weather, we can't easily reduce traffic, or make it less dangerous.

What we can do is try to alter people's perception of these things. The reality is, of course, that we cope with the traffic (and anyway, there'd be less of it if some of those drivers were riding bikes); we don't mind the weather, and so on.

I think one of the best ways to alter these perceptions is to simply keep on visibly riding a bike. Every time a driver seems someone riding a bike, that driver is a tiny bit less likely to percieve cycling as something only cranks, hoody-wearing louts, sandal-wearing tree-huggers or lycra-clad enthusiasts do.

 

[Danny]

Don't want to get into a major semantic debate on the difference between an excuse and a reason, but I still think many people feel they have perfectly valid reasons for not cycling - even if we view them as excuses - and there are things we can do to address them.

For example I know a number of people who like cycling, but are genuinely terrified of going out in heavy traffic, and as the survey indicates there are many more people in this situation. The Council is actually trying to address this by organising cycle training for adults so people can build up the confidence to cycle on the roads.

Similarly many very unfit people find the prospect of cycling even a few miles totally daunting. In response the local Sustrans group has been organising beginners rides that just cover a couple of miles at a leisurely pace to get people going.

 

[MacB]

Danny, wouldn't some effort be better directed at re-education people on the realities of cycling. I know schemes exist for schools etc but maybe expanding on those. Lots of schools run Mums and Dads days, maybe they could do some in a cycling orientated manner. A good impetus for cycling is a young child nagging you.

 

[Danny]

Danny, wouldn't some effort be better directed at re-education people on the realities of cycling. I know schemes exist for schools etc but maybe expanding on those. Lots of schools run Mums and Dads days, maybe they could do some in a cycling orientated manner. A good impetus for cycling is a young child nagging you.

It depends on what you mean by "re-educating". I don't think adults views on cycling are going to be changed by quoting statistics at them, but they will be changed by some of the practical measures I described in the previous post.

York also has a big programme of cycle education in both primary and secondary schools - indeed some PE slots at my son's school are now taken up with long cycle rides.

 

[summerdays]

York also has a big programme of cycle education in both primary and secondary schools - indeed some PE slots at my son's school are now taken up with long cycle rides.

I like that idea .... is it just in his school or across the area?

 

[Danny]

I believe it is across the whole city.

 

[theclaud]

Absolutely. These sort of surveys are very dubious and usually based on the flawed assumption that everyone makes informed and objective decisions about every journey they make, when in fact travel is largely determined by habit. The reasons a non-cyclists gives for not cycling, especially when given a list of prompts to chose from, are likely to have little to do with the real reason why they don't cycle. So even if you believe what they tell you, and spend lots of money on the things they've said they want, they probably still wont' cycle!

Quite right Jonesy. I've just come back from a meeting with the council (with my local cycling campaign group hat on), and we were discussing the feedback from one of these surveys. Badly designed doesn't even begin to describe it, but even worse was their inability to make sense of the very limited information it did provide. Example - a large group of schoolchildren were asked what might stop them from cycling. One of the options offered was "too expensive". 0% plumped for that option. When asked what would get them cycling more, about 60% of the same sample apparently went for "cheaper bikes". No-one at the council seemed to find that odd.

 

[Danny]

One of the options offered was "too expensive". 0% plumped for that option. When asked what would get them cycling more, about 60% of the same sample apparently went for "cheaper bikes". No-one at the council seemed to find that odd.

I obviously haven't seen the detail of your local survery, but in principle this is not at all odd. Many surveys ask the same question from a number of different angles because researchers know that this is likely to produce different answers. It is only by comparing the different answers that you actually get a balanced picture of what people think.

The fact that the responses may be contradict each other is just evidence of the fact that many people manage to hold several contradictory opinions at the same time.

 

[jonesy]

Don't want to get into a major semantic debate on the difference between an excuse and a reason, but I still think many people feel they have perfectly valid reasons for not cycling - even if we view them as excuses - and there are things we can do to address them.

....

I agree. It is essential that we understand why people make the choices they do about travel if we want to influence those choices. And I'd further agree with a point you imply elsewhere, in that simply challenging the reasons for those choices, telling them they are wrong, isn't going to persuade many people to change them. And I'd also accept that well designed market research can help to give a better understanding of people's travel behaviour.

However, that doesn't mean that simply asking people what will make them change their travel choices will work, when they may not have tried or even considered the alternative that you are asking them hypothetical and/or leading questions about.

Nor is it justifiable to ask questions that could imply that things like a comprehensive off-road cycle network is even being considered, when this is clearly not a practicable or affordable option on most city centre roads. Apart from anything else, this helps foster the increasingly widely held viewpoint that off-road provision is what is really needed, with the risk that more practicable options are then considered to be inferior compromises.

If you want to know what is most likely to get more people cycling, you don't need a survey of non-cyclists, you need to look at what has worked elsewhere, and what the research and guidance says. The examples of Oxford and London, with growth in cycle use being achieved without a significant off-road network; and places like Milton Keynes and Bracknell, with comprehensive off-road networks and low levels of cycling, show that off-road provision is neither necessary nor sufficient to get more people cycling. I'd bet money that a survey in Milton Keynes would tell you that cycling in the traffic is dangerous and you need off-road paths, but they still aren't cycling!

 

[summerdays]

What what did work in Oxford and London ... I thought someone earlier in this thread was saying it was the number of students/not enough accommodation for Oxford, and hasn't the 7/7 bombings been credited with some of the rise in London?

I know the theory is that the more you get cycling the more safe it becomes, and that I have had an affect on some others encouraging them to cycle. But not enough to make a significant difference.

I happened to check my mail yesterday and found that there is now a new on-line consultation in Bristol:

Active Travel
Active Bristol is a programme of work being led by Bristol PCT working with the Bristol Partnership including Bristol City Council. It aims to support people to include more physical activity into their everyday lives through travel and leisure e.g. walking, cycling, gardening and play.

http://www.askbristol.com/theme.php?id=22

Looking at the few responses so far and bits in the local paper, people just assume you have to be fit and/or mad to cycle in Bristol.

 

[theclaud]

I obviously haven't seen the detail of your local survery, but in principle this is not at all odd. Many surveys ask the same question from a number of different angles because researchers know that this is likely to produce different answers. It is only by comparing the different answers that you actually get a balanced picture of what people think.

The fact that the responses may be contradict each other is just evidence of the fact that many people manage to hold several contradictory opinions at the same time.

Fair point, but it still means that it's difficult to interpret usefully. I got the impression from the schools answers that each school had answered individual questions by conferring in a group, so that the reasons given between schools varied immensely, but almost everyone in the same school gave the same reason. To give you a flavour of the quality of the survey, the opening question (How often do you cycle?) included the following options: 1) Daily 2) More than daily, but less than weekly. We established at the meeting that "more than daily" was understood to mean "less than daily". Orwell-tastic.

 

[MacB]

Danny, I very much like the idea of cycling being part of a school curriculum, I hadn't realised that existed. That's the sort of encouragement that seems more likely to get people on their bikes.

My youngest was really excited last night, he should get his bike permit for cycling to school today, he's 8. All last week he's had to cycle at lunchtimes, school bike, to demonstrate his proficiency. This permit really matters to him, I wish he was that focused on his school work

 

[summerdays]

They have to get a permit!!! my youngest learnt to cycle just before he started school and has cycled almost every single day since... I was involved in the Safe Routes to school team at school and we had a bike shed put in. Before no-one cycled, when we were getting it put in, the school originally wanted to only have those who had done their bikeability able to cycle to school (year 6 summer time only at that time). As it was funded by a grant we were able to make sure all could use it.

Now it has one or two bikes every single day in winter, more some days and can be completely packed out in summertime - with 20 stands, 2 bikes to each stand. And they have applied for another grant to extend the shed.

I suppose restricting bike use may make it something to aspire to?

 

[marinyork]

Trying to restrict good schemes is nosey parkerism gone mad. The teachers should be ashamed of themselves.