Cyclists' deaths & statistics

[briantrumpet]

Reading the thread here about another cyclist killed this weekend, I was at once struck by the sad inevitability of the statistics: four killed so far this year is roughly in line with what would be expected going on previous years' figures. But it also prompted me to look at the figures for Holland, so often held up as a model place for cycling. In 2010, Britain, with a population of 63 million, had 111 cycling fatalities (out of total of 1,850 road deaths); Holland, with a population of 17 million, had 162 cycling fatalities (out of a total of 640 road deaths).

In other words, in Holland, 25% of road deaths in 2010 were cyclists; in Britain, only 5% were cyclists. These are quite astounding statistics (unless my reading of them is horribly wrong), and does suggest that perhaps British drivers and traffic systems aren't as terrible as we sometimes make out.

That said, we mustn't be complacent. And though we know that we will never reduce the figure to zero (after all, this is a world where 150 people are killed a year by falling coconuts: accidents WILL happen), it doesn't absolve our society of the quest to reduce the dangers as far as we can.

 

[Sara_H]

Maybe you should work out the number of deaths per mile cycled or per cycle journeys in each country, Maybe it'll look a bit different .

 

[MrJamie]

You should always wear a helmet if you're walking or cycling under a coconut tree.

 

[RedRider]

More choke to death on Edam cheese in the Netherlands (probably) than in Britain. Dangerous things those Dutch cheeseboards.

 

[briantrumpet]

Maybe you should work out the number of deaths per mile cycled or per cycle journeys in each country, Maybe it'll look a bit different .

OK - that's a fair point - see figures from 2002 here, and it's clear that on average far more miles are covered by Dutch cyclists. Perhaps a better comparison would be with France, where in 2002 a similar average mileage was covered by French cyclists as British ones, but there were about 50% more cyclists' deaths in 2009 than in Britain (see here[url="http://), again in a country held up as one that treats cyclists well. (Though I'll concede it's a smaller percentage of the c.4,000 road deaths in France per year"]), again in a country held up as one that treats cyclists well. (Though I'll concede it's a smaller percentage of the c.4,000 road deaths in France per year.)[/url]

 

[shouldbeinbed]

Or possibly France has lots of people making short local hops by bicycle and the UK has a far smaller number travelling greater distances.

Edit and just noticed you're mixing your years. I don't know what point you're trying to prove but you need to be handing over consistent data to back up whatever your conclusion will be.

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

OK - that's a fair point - see figures from 2002 here, and it's clear that on average far more miles are covered by Dutch cyclists. Perhaps a better comparison would be with France, where in 2002 a similar average mileage was covered by French cyclists as British ones, but there were about 50% more cyclists' deaths in 2009 than in Britain (see here), again in a country held up as one that treats cyclists well. (Though I'll concede it's a smaller percentage of the c.4,000 road deaths in France per year.)

I think it was around 2002 when RTI deaths in France were roughly double that of the UK. Road behaviour in France has improved markedly since then.

 

[briantrumpet]

It's OK, I know I'm mixing my years (I'm not a government department with audited figures to hand), and not trying to prove anything, but trying to make two general observations, with some woolly statistical back-up (and I'm happy to have audited and up-to-date statistics thrown back at me, if anyone is so inclined):

1) We can expect roughly two cyclists' deaths a week in the UK.

2) This figure (sad as it may be) is not a terrible one in comparison with our neighbours, who have a perceived much better reputation for their treatment of cyclists.

In other words, Britain is not a shockingly bad place to cycle, overall.

There, I hope that's woolly enough, given my slack statistics.

 

[albion]

",but trying to make two general observations"

You are really finding incomparable figures to suit an argument.

 

[briantrumpet]

",but trying to make two general observations"

You are really finding incomparable figures to suit an argument.

From one source quoted: in 2009 there were 162 cyclists' deaths in France, 104 in Britain. Statistics from IRTAD (the OECD's International Road Traffic and Accident Database).

I'm not looking for an argument - perhaps it would have been better if I just made an assertion that "Britain isn't a bad place to cycle" without any figures whatsoever (though it might have been less interesting). And as mentioned, I'd be really happy if someone's got the time, resources & patience to collate 100% watertight figures to prove me wrong. Sorry if I've offended the statisticians.

 

[Boris Bajic]

I like chalk for writing on blackboards and I like cheese with pickle.

Chalk is superior to cheese.

I have the data.

 

[Drago]

You should always wear a helmet if you're walking or cycling under a coconut tree.

Or sat in the loo.

 

[RedRider]

Britain is not a shockingly bad place to cycle, overall.

Definitely!

 

[briantrumpet]

I like chalk for writing on blackboards and I like cheese with pickle.

Chalk is superior to cheese.

I have the data.

Can you cite your sauces, please?

 

[HLaB]

I prefer not to think about it but you need to consider the 'exposure' of cyclists in Holland compared to the 'exposure' of cyclists in the UK, typically fatalities per mile/km travelled.