22 ms·

Why is cycling so popular in the Netherlands?

164 points by Libertatea 13y ago

rumcajz 13y ago
It surprised me that Slovakia is among 10 most cyclist friendly countries. There's almost no infrastructure like bike lanes or bike stands and the country itself is mostly mountainous. Strange.
barry-cotter 13y ago
1. Because they're very serious about making it easy and convenient. 2. Because the Netherlands are very, very flat and densely populated. 3. Because cycling is completely normal
- yoran 13y ago
  4. Because it's often faster for short distances In the city I used to live (Eindhoven), I often had the situation that trips were shorter by bicycle than by car. This happened especially when I had to move around the city center, where they have many one-way streets (one-way for cars only) and many red lights (you don't always have to respect those when on the bicycle). It sucks though when it's around between 1 and 5 degrees Celsius and it's raining...
  - megablast 13y ago
    > Because it's often faster for short distances Every city I have lived in this has been true, cities in the UK, Europe, US and Australia, lots of distance are a lot faster, when you don't have to worry about finding your car, getting through traffic, and then finding a park.
- loceng 13y ago
  In part this has to do with good city design.
- ptgloden 13y ago
  On points 1 and 3 especially, I highly recommend Bike Snob NYC's new book "Bike Snob Abroad." [1] He writes about the viability and acceptability of everyday cycling in New York City (his home), and then does the same while travelling to London and Amsterdam. One of his observations is that infrastructure isn't everything-- cycling is still a "special" thing to do in Portland, the Bay Area, or New York City, after all. Rather, in a place like the Netherlands, cycling is just a normal thing to do that doesn't require specialized, expensive gear, lycra, or even (gasp) helmets. I don't think there's a simple way to get to that point anywhere in America. His hunch, one I agree with, is that people in this country have to make things The Biggest and The Fastest and The Best, which is why we are at the forefront of bike technology & craftsmanship but are so pisspoor when it comes to cycling as a safe, simple means of transportation. [1] http://www.chroniclebooks.com/titles/a-bike-snob-abroad.html http://www.chroniclebooks.com/titles/a-bike-snob-abroad.html
  - Anderkent 13y ago
    I'd be interested to see the fatality rates for riders without a helmet. The article seems to suggest that it's fine to do because cars are careful around cyclists - but that misses the point completely. The helmet is not there to save you from a car crash. It's there to save you when you get distracted and miss a pot hole or hit something. Perhaps my perception is skewed because I've had two friends be saved from a serious head injury only thanks to their helmets. One rode into a parked car (she doesn't remember how it happened due to amnesia), riding at relaxed speed, and was unconscious for a couple days. It seems really weird to take that risk just to avoid a slight discomfort.
    - apendleton 13y ago
      It's a very hard thing to measure, mostly because double-blind studies are unethical, and well-controlled case-control studies are generally difficult. An 85% reduction in head injuries is often cited, but it's based on a study from the mid-'80s that, it turns out, had some pretty substantial methodological flaws, so it's generally agreed that that number overstates helmets' efficacy pretty considerably. More recent studies put the number somewhere around a 20% reduction in head injuries for adults in the US, accompanied by a slight increase in the rate of torsional injuries to the neck because of the larger circumference of a helmeted vs. unhelmeted head. In general, though, helmet use is not an especially good predictor of the outcome of a bike accident; it's much less well correlated with likelihood of death than, say, the cyclists's speed at the time of the accident.
radicalbyte 13y ago
1. Because car tax is between 300 and 1800 euros a year, with a few exceptions (some "green" cars are exempt). 2. Because new (and imported 2nd hand) cars have an extra sales tax applied, which can be up to 40% of the price. Coming from the UK, the price of driving was the biggest culture shock.
- weego 13y ago
  It definitely also helps that a lot of cycle route paths are actually well considered and planned out giving a decent network of coverage for making journeys, rather than being a badly indicated part at the side of the road as in the UK so you are either still at the mercy of traffic for safety or end up (as I suffer from) having to use the roads and being screwed by one way systems making it no easier while being more dangerous than by car.
- rmc 13y ago
  Ireland also has a high car tax (of about the same rate as you mention for NL), but has similar driving/cycling culture as the UK.
  - dcc1 13y ago
    Having cycled for years here, I would rather pay for a car than continue to put my life at risk, neither are many Irish towns as flat as Netherlands
- silvestrov 13y ago
  In Denmark (which is tied for 1st place with Netherlands) the car tax is 180% Cycling is popular in Denmark for pretty much the same reasons. There are seperate bike paths everywhere.
- tty 13y ago
  >1. Because car tax is between 300 and 1800 euros a year, with a few exceptions (some "green" cars are exempt). It's worth noting that the use of motor vehicles in Netherlands isn't _low_, Netherlands is still a _heavily_ motorized country. Also, the tax that you've mentioned is even higher in some post-communist countries of Central/Eastern Europe.
fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
Because its weather isn't oppressively hot like the Gulf Coast? (I bike to/from work, and live on the Gulf Coast. Fortunately it is only a couple hundred meters.)
- bsmith 13y ago
  Second. I live in Houston, and my commute is 3.5 miles each way. If the sun is up and you're outside, you are sweating. Doesn't matter how slow of a jaunt it is. For those not familiar with summer near the Gulf, the high the past week has been consistently 95-100 F, with relative humidity ranging from 40% to 90%.
  - angersock 13y ago
    Thirding the Houston biking club (we should grab beers sometime!). The nice thing about moving here is that everything is flat, the roads are fun if you have a mountain bike, and you know that everyone else outside (walking, biking, or driving) is as sweaty and gross as you are. It's the great equalizer.
    - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
      Good idea. But I'm a little further down the coast from y'all.
      - angersock 13y ago
        Well if you're ever in town... :D
loceng 13y ago
It's the synergy of all pieces that exist. Their population is healthier (in part because of cycling, and quality food, and good healthcare, education, etc), so cycling is a fun and useful activity. They have the city planning designs for cycling lanes that are safe, make you feel safe. And yeah, other incentives and de-incentives applied to driving.
ArikBe 13y ago
I've lived in Amsterdam since 1997 – since I was 6, so I'd like to voice my opinion as I do not completely agree with everything that has been written in the article. > If you chain your bike in the wrong place you could find that it is removed and impounded, and that you will have to hand over 25 euros to get it back. Unless it says that you can't lock up your bike in the area, you pretty much can. I have never heard or experienced anyone's bike being impounded for chaining it up to a pole or post that is not officially "a designated area to chain your bike." > In that kind of relationship it is longevity that counts - so the older, the better. It's not uncommon to hear a bike coming up behind you with the mudguard rattling against the wheel. If anything, having a tatty, battered old bike affords more status as it attests to a long and lasting love. Wrong. Cheap bikes are just that, cheap. That means that when your bike is stolen it's not as painful. It also means that buying one…is cheap (I'm repeating myself, I know). If you're going to get a bike for 20-50 EUR don't expect it to be some kind of fancy machine. There's no love affair with bicycles, it's simply a matter of utility. > Of course, the cycle paths lend themselves to sauntering along in summer dresses in a way a death-defying, white-knuckle ride in rush-hour traffic does not. It is also partly because of this that people don't need showers at work to be able to commute by bike - it's a no-sweat experience. I know PLENTY of people who sweat on their bikes and who constantly carry around deodorant. I sweat like hell on a bicycle because I own a mountain bike. Especially with a backpack on it's a sweaty ride. Maybe it's also because I _hate_ riding at a moderate pace. I'm constantly pushing my bike. Then again, I don't ride my bike every single day. > The fact that everyone cycles, or knows someone who does, means that drivers are more sympathetic to cyclists when they have to share space on the roads. > In turn, the cyclists are expected to respect and obey the rules of the road. You may be fined for riding recklessly, in the wrong place or jumping red lights. Lol that is if the cops are around. People who drive cars are annoyed and afraid of cyclists because if anything were to happen, the driver would be at fault. When I was getting my driver's license my instructor kept telling me that I should never let a cyclist pass if I have the right of way. Cyclists are arrogant in this regard, I've been on both sides of the table (road?) and I can tell you that when you're on a bike, you know the cars are going to be careful around you because if anything happens, it's usually their fault. Running red lights or engaging in risky maneuvers happens all the time. What strikes me as odd is that this article doesn't mention one of the most important reasons for cycling within cities: It's not attractive to own a car. Owning a car is expensive. Gas is expensive. It's almost impossible to park and maneuvering around the city center is very very difficult. Have a look: http://goo.gl/maps/wRRoZ http://goo.gl/maps/wRRoZ . It takes skill to drive around the canals, especially with the cyclists and scooters buzzing around you.
johnchristopher 13y ago
There is only one, and one reason: their country is flat. A lot of Dutch people come on vacations in Walloon (french speaking part of Belgium) and they never ever can be seen riding a bike because our hilly landscape make it a tiresome activities. Even for inner-city short distance trip. This reflects in the technological development of their bike: heavy frame, few gears, additional front basket while every teen here rides mountain bike made of carbon fibre, 21 gears at least and state of the art front shock absorbing mechanism. I am only slightly exaggerating. And jealous.
- coherentpony 13y ago
  That, and also petrol is $9.23/gal.
  - Graham24 13y ago
    that's about the same as the UK by my calculations.
    - coherentpony 13y ago
      Prices in the UK vary, but let's take a modest £1.35 per litre. That equates to $7.92 per US gallon.
    - scottmcf 13y ago
      For comparison purposes, this would mean $130-140 to fill up a minivan type vehicle in the USA.
- alkonaut 13y ago
  Two reasons actually: its flat, and small (dense). Wherever you want to go, it isn't unrealistic to do so by bicycle. A huge flat country with large sprawling cities wouldn't have as many bikes.
  - adrianN 13y ago
    A country with few bikes tends to produce sprawling cities. You need parking space in the inner city, taking away space that could be used to build homes. More street area in the city means less greenery, worse air. But since commuting by car is not too difficult there is incentive to buy a house in the suburbs.
InclinedPlane 13y ago
By far the most important factor is that it's flat and population density is high (meaning most bike trips aren't necessarily very far). An out of shape person riding a bike a few kilometers over very flat terrain is fairly easy, even with a crappy bike. Throw in more hills or longer distances and things change dramatically. Even a single small hill or overpass on a bike journey changes the amount of effort needed by a huge margin and increases the fitness minimum that would result in that journey feeling comfortable.
- chrismealy 13y ago
  There are plenty of other flat and dense places in the world that have almost zero cyclists. It's the infrastructure that makes the Netherlands special.
- olau 13y ago
  Population density: sure. Hills: that's not really true if you have a bicycle with a gearing system. You can get a cheap new one with 7 speeds for about the same as a smart phone. That's enough to get past most hills with some but not a lot effort, especially if it's tuned to out-of-shape persons (which modern bikes seem to be). You can always get off and walk the steepest slopes.
- ht_th 13y ago
  Outside the cities people still cycle. It is no uncommon for highschool students in the country to cycle over 10 km to and from school (for some up to 20 or 30 km), do the same to meet friends after school, to go clubbing, to go to parties, to go to do things and so on. In the Netherlands there is no such thing as a school bus. There is no driving a car without an expensive and difficult licence after you're 18 years. And the flatness has a downside too: strong headwinds, always it seems. Certainly, it is easier than riding over hills or mountains, I wholeheartedly agree with you, but it ain't all roses and sunshine either. Then again, my fitness when I was young was great. Heck, I don't think I've ever seen one of my schoolmates fail the Cooper test during physical education class unless sick or disabled somehow.
jacobbudin 13y ago
I lived in Breda, The Netherlands for a month several years ago. I agree completely with the article: its a matter of both culture and safety. There are dedicated bike path lanes--fully separated from the roadways. Moreover, both cyclists and drivers alike follow the law. Compared to New York City, where I live now, it's the exact opposite. Bike lanes, in the few places they exist, are rarely anything more than a faded paint line on the road. Very few people (pedestrians, cyclists, or drivers) follow the rules of the road. Even as a twentysomething male--presumable predisposed to a higher degree of risk--riding a bike in NYC seems downright reckless. A contributing factor to its dangerousness may be the city's density; you have trucks at all hours dropping off newspaper deliveries, Amazon.com packages, FreshDirect orders, and so on. These may be some of the worst offenders--not necessarily because of the drivers but also how the vehicles lack visibility. Some recent examples: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/01/nyregion/6-year-old-fatally-hit-by-truck-in-east-harlem.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/01/nyregion/6-year-old-fatall... http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/23/bicyclists-family-criticizes-police-handling-of-fatal-accident/ http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/23/bicyclists-fami...
- rsofaer 13y ago
  I find biking in NYC pretty calm as long as I'm not running red lights. To me it feels safer than biking in San Francisco did. There is a significant set of protected bike lanes and there are a fair amount of bikers on the road. Drivers not signaling is certainly a problem and it is important to not follow traffic laws when it's safer.
- Spooky23 13y ago
  You make a good point. I live in a small city in NY, and the streets are basically free-for-all zones. You have pedestrians with toddlers crossing in the middle of the block in traffic, cars driving 50mph down narrow sidestreets and lance armstrong wannabe cyclists blowing lights and riding on sidewalks to pass cars. NYC is more than Manhattan, and while I could see some areas in Manhattan that are ok-ish for bikes, many parts of Queens, Brooklyn, etc are difficult for cyclists, and certainly not amenable to casual bicycling. The geography of Amersterdam is different thinking beyond topography. The streets are narrower as well.
nicholassmith 13y ago
This was actually filmed for Newsnight last night, it was quite interesting. Mostly it was in the context of 'why is cycling so popular and great in the Netherlands and what can we do to get people cycling in the UK', but it felt like it ignored a whole host of social factors that'll make it difficult in the UK. Potentially, we could have had a similar experience to the Dutch however during the 70s/80s the car was raised to be as important as house ownership (there's some specific quote from a member of the Conservative government to that effect, but I cannot for the life of me remember it). Cars are massively important in British life, the roads have been designed specifically for them, traffic lights (new ones) are designed more for drivers than pedestrians. The car lobby is huge, there was a guy from the Association of British Drivers who basically said 'why would anyone cycle, it's one of the most risky occupations you can undertake, you should have a car'. It's nice to see how well organised the Netherlands is (despite what I'm sure are many flaws in the system), but it'll take another oil crisis to shake British love for cycling. As a postscript, I've just started cycling part of my commute recently (9 mile round trip), and whilst cycling in Britain is definitely doable, it's scary how close some drivers get to you at times. I think it's a lack of respect of the distances, and a little blindness to anything outside of your bubble rather than malicious intent, but I can't imagine any parent being happy about sending their teenagers out on the roads.
- gpvos 13y ago
  There is a quote that is often attributed to Margaret Thatcher about that people who still ride a bus when they're 30 have failed, but she probably never said it. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Margaret_Thatcher#Bus_.22failure.22_quote http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Margaret_Thatcher#Bus_.22f...
- martswite 13y ago
  I also cycle my commute. When I used to cycle to the old office this was 14 mile commute on a variety of surfaces. When I initially rode on the road I would gutter crawl; cars would pass real close. Then I read a few tips on cycling safer and realised that my gutter crawling was actually very dangerous as cars will try to squeeze past to overtake. I don't know how confident you are but for me, riding a third into the lane at all times has improved my safety as cars will now only overtake if they have a ton of room and they'll always go way over into the other lane to do it. I will also take the full lane if I feel I need to. I essentially just needed to be more confident. YMMV
dcc1 13y ago
hmm let me see, one reason would be is petrol is at €1.90/liter thats about 2.5x to 3x more than in US
- _delirium 13y ago
  That probably helps, but most of Europe has relatively high gas prices, and yet the popularity of biking as a method of daily transport varies widely between countries.
jseliger 13y ago
It's arguably a sign of larger happiness: http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2013/06/17/danish-happiness-bicycle-infrastructure http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2013/06/17/danish-happine..., or at least that's one reading from American Philip Greenspun. See also his post on "Danish Happiness" and its relation to relatively low material needs, at least by American standards: http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2013/06/18/the-secret-to-danish-happiness/ http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2013/06/18/the-secret-to-...
helloTree 13y ago
I live in Austria and cycling is very popular here. E.g. I use my bike everyday often multiple times it's the preferred transportation unit and I do not have to own a car and can reach every part of the city and all the things I need in 30m. There is just no need for a car here. If I want to get further away I can use an excellent (although, admittedly rather expensive) public transport system.
sebnukem2 13y ago
It's not about the flatness or the distances or the weather, it's about the culture. I can't count how many times I have been called a fag, or a loser, or have been engulfed in a cloud of black smoke from a diesel pick up truck, or have been physically threatened by the driver to make a point that I don't belong on the road. I live in Colorado, but it could be a lot worse. See http://www.reddit.com/r/lowcar/comments/1i0dzx/the_sacred_rac/ http://www.reddit.com/r/lowcar/comments/1i0dzx/the_sacred_ra...
tomc1985 13y ago
Because the country is flat? How hard is it to guess?
leke 13y ago
I'm writing from Oulu in Finland and we are considered to be a cycling town. The reason why it is so popular is simple. Walking paths double as cycle paths and this works because they are as wide as a car lane. The other reason is because Oulu is designed in such a way where most of the residents live in apartment blocks -- all within cycling distance to the town centre. Most workplaces are also located around town.
- Benji_San 13y ago
  Turku here, which is also considered to be a cycling town. I was really shocked to see Finland placed fourth on the list of bike friendly countries. I'll admit that most bike lanes on the countryside are great but the bike lanes in cities are generally not safe to ride on. Both pedestrians and drivers have no idea that they should take bikes into consideration when moving around. Most bike lanes are poorly marked and are blocked by bus stops, dooring areas, stopped cars, pedestrians, snow dumps and dead ends. There's no consistency and impossible to follow all the rules and not get killed if you bike as your primary transportation. Ranking countries in terms of cycling friendliness is also kinda misleading as countries are on completely different levels. The Netherlands and Denmark are leaps and bounds ahead of Sweden, Sweden is leaps and bounds ahead of Finland.
GnarfGnarf 13y ago
Because it's so flat and tiny.
saosebastiao 13y ago
Gas is expensive, land is flat, weather is nice...all true, but then again, the same could be said about Paris, Barcelona, Milan, etc. The most important factor is that they accommodated them. Cities should always accommodate the lowest common denominators of society first and foremost (starting with pedestrians), and then progressively accommodate more, but never more at the expense of those that came before. It is very difficult to harm pedestrian activity with public transportation and bicycles. When it comes to cars, the picture changes drastically: people clamoring for free parking are implicitly raising the price of housing for people that do not drive. Wide boulevards and high speed freeways divide cities geographically, increase noise to the point of hindering inhabitability (also increases housing costs), and inhibit movement (which essentially limits trade in the same way that national borders do). Accommodating their preferences for traffic light timing drastically increases walk times for pedestrians. And their speed preferences and right-of-way preferences increase death risks. That isn't to say that cities shouldn't accommodate cars. They should just stop doing it at the expense of pedestrians, bicyclists, and public transportation users.
- iskander 13y ago
  > weather is nice People keep saying this all over the thread but it rains so damn much in Amsterdam! The Dutch don't seem to mind, throw on some rain gear and bike 10km to work. Almost no one does that in the US, I think it's just a big expression of cultural differences.
  - saosebastiao 13y ago
    It rains a lot in Seattle, and we still have plenty of cyclists. Rain isn't as big of a factor as extreme heat/cold when considering whether to ride a bike or not.
  - gambiting 13y ago
    Rain is not a problem - temperature is. In Poland we get two completely opposite extremes. Today it was 40C outside and I can't imagine biking anywhere, and in winter it can go as low as -30C. Again, almost impossible to bike. It leaves you with a few months when biking to work is a reasonable to choice. In the UK though, I could bike to work every single day of the year, because it's never too cold or too hot to cycle. I imagine that the Netherlands are similar.
forgottenpaswrd 13y ago
Obviously, because they live in flatland. In Spain I lived in Granada, Oviedo and Gijón(north), Madrid(center) and Alicante, all of them near big mountains. Every single time I took my bicycle, and I love it, I will have to go up or down 200, 400meters. I log it with the GPS. Electrical bikes improve the issue, but it will take time until they are cheap.
ralfn 13y ago
As a dutch person, i want to correct some of the arguments made. Bikes are popular in _old cities_, and _with kids_, but adults living in suburbia will drive and use a car for everything, just like an american in sururbia would. In old cities, they are the best form factor. And if Holland weren't flat, we would all be driving scooters (like they do in Rome, Paris or Greece). It's the form factor that works best in old cities, because the roads are simply _too small_ and the population density is _too high_. Cars are for moving furniture and deliveries in old cities, not for navigation. I live in Utrecht where you would sometimes have to navigate around the city for 30 minutes to reach a place you could walk to in 2 minutes. Then you pay 3 to 7 euro's an hour to park your car, after looking for 10 minutes to find a free spot. It's a hellish experience, you will only opt-in to, if you really need to. Secondly, we raise our kids with freedom and independence, and that starts with trust. That means, between the age of 5 and 10, your child will start navigating to and from school, their sports club and friends, by themselves, using their bike. And yes, we were doing this for decades before mobile phones even existed. If your child was late out of school, you would generally just assume they were with a friend, or working on a school project. And most of these kids live in suburbia. The reason few people choose to raise kids in the city, is exactly because you can't allow them to navigate freely: you would be more inclined to escort them. Now, suddenly, its clear just why these bike paths are so safe. Our children are riding there: unsupervised. They are not just safe in terms of traffic, but also safe in social terms. The paths are always in the view of shops and houses and other traffic. They aggressively clear bushes and dark corners. So people can keep an eye out on the kids. And getting a driver's licence is much harder in Holland. You would have to be at least 18 years old, pass about three exams and spend hundreds of euro's, and the legal amount of alcohol in your blood until you are 21, is 0,000000000% If you make a big mistake, you'll loose the right to even apply for a new licence until you are 21. So bikes are used in old cities, because those city planners didn't know cars were going to be invented the next century, and they are used by pretty much all of the youth in Holland, everywhere. The american style, of navigating your child from your prison home, using your prison family car, to the prison school, is not the dutch approach to raising children. People that drive their kids to school get a serious talking to, and schools are often in fuck-off-cars neighborhoods, optimized for child safety and free exploration. Places where cars shouldn't be going faster than 15 km/h, and where all kinds of obstructions are placed to slow them down. It's not about health. It's not about having a pro-bike culture. It's about what's a usefull form factor, and how do we raise our kids.

164 points by Libertatea 13y ago

It surprised me that Slovakia is among 10 most cyclist friendly countries. There's almost no infrastructure like bike lanes or bike stands and the country itself is mostly mountainous. Strange.

barry-cotter 13y ago

1. Because they're very serious about making it easy and convenient. 2. Because the Netherlands are very, very flat and densely populated. 3. Because cycling is completely normal

yoran 13y ago
4. Because it's often faster for short distances In the city I used to live (Eindhoven), I often had the situation that trips were shorter by bicycle than by car. This happened especially when I had to move around the city center, where they have many one-way streets (one-way for cars only) and many red lights (you don't always have to respect those when on the bicycle). It sucks though when it's around between 1 and 5 degrees Celsius and it's raining...
- megablast 13y ago
  > Because it's often faster for short distances Every city I have lived in this has been true, cities in the UK, Europe, US and Australia, lots of distance are a lot faster, when you don't have to worry about finding your car, getting through traffic, and then finding a park.
loceng 13y ago
In part this has to do with good city design.
ptgloden 13y ago
On points 1 and 3 especially, I highly recommend Bike Snob NYC's new book "Bike Snob Abroad." [1] He writes about the viability and acceptability of everyday cycling in New York City (his home), and then does the same while travelling to London and Amsterdam. One of his observations is that infrastructure isn't everything-- cycling is still a "special" thing to do in Portland, the Bay Area, or New York City, after all. Rather, in a place like the Netherlands, cycling is just a normal thing to do that doesn't require specialized, expensive gear, lycra, or even (gasp) helmets. I don't think there's a simple way to get to that point anywhere in America. His hunch, one I agree with, is that people in this country have to make things The Biggest and The Fastest and The Best, which is why we are at the forefront of bike technology & craftsmanship but are so pisspoor when it comes to cycling as a safe, simple means of transportation. [1] http://www.chroniclebooks.com/titles/a-bike-snob-abroad.html http://www.chroniclebooks.com/titles/a-bike-snob-abroad.html
- Anderkent 13y ago
  I'd be interested to see the fatality rates for riders without a helmet. The article seems to suggest that it's fine to do because cars are careful around cyclists - but that misses the point completely. The helmet is not there to save you from a car crash. It's there to save you when you get distracted and miss a pot hole or hit something. Perhaps my perception is skewed because I've had two friends be saved from a serious head injury only thanks to their helmets. One rode into a parked car (she doesn't remember how it happened due to amnesia), riding at relaxed speed, and was unconscious for a couple days. It seems really weird to take that risk just to avoid a slight discomfort.
  - apendleton 13y ago
    It's a very hard thing to measure, mostly because double-blind studies are unethical, and well-controlled case-control studies are generally difficult. An 85% reduction in head injuries is often cited, but it's based on a study from the mid-'80s that, it turns out, had some pretty substantial methodological flaws, so it's generally agreed that that number overstates helmets' efficacy pretty considerably. More recent studies put the number somewhere around a 20% reduction in head injuries for adults in the US, accompanied by a slight increase in the rate of torsional injuries to the neck because of the larger circumference of a helmeted vs. unhelmeted head. In general, though, helmet use is not an especially good predictor of the outcome of a bike accident; it's much less well correlated with likelihood of death than, say, the cyclists's speed at the time of the accident.

radicalbyte 13y ago

1. Because car tax is between 300 and 1800 euros a year, with a few exceptions (some "green" cars are exempt). 2. Because new (and imported 2nd hand) cars have an extra sales tax applied, which can be up to 40% of the price. Coming from the UK, the price of driving was the biggest culture shock.

weego 13y ago
It definitely also helps that a lot of cycle route paths are actually well considered and planned out giving a decent network of coverage for making journeys, rather than being a badly indicated part at the side of the road as in the UK so you are either still at the mercy of traffic for safety or end up (as I suffer from) having to use the roads and being screwed by one way systems making it no easier while being more dangerous than by car.
rmc 13y ago
Ireland also has a high car tax (of about the same rate as you mention for NL), but has similar driving/cycling culture as the UK.
- dcc1 13y ago
  Having cycled for years here, I would rather pay for a car than continue to put my life at risk, neither are many Irish towns as flat as Netherlands
silvestrov 13y ago
In Denmark (which is tied for 1st place with Netherlands) the car tax is 180% Cycling is popular in Denmark for pretty much the same reasons. There are seperate bike paths everywhere.
tty 13y ago
>1. Because car tax is between 300 and 1800 euros a year, with a few exceptions (some "green" cars are exempt). It's worth noting that the use of motor vehicles in Netherlands isn't _low_, Netherlands is still a _heavily_ motorized country. Also, the tax that you've mentioned is even higher in some post-communist countries of Central/Eastern Europe.

fnordfnordfnord 13y ago

Because its weather isn't oppressively hot like the Gulf Coast? (I bike to/from work, and live on the Gulf Coast. Fortunately it is only a couple hundred meters.)

bsmith 13y ago
Second. I live in Houston, and my commute is 3.5 miles each way. If the sun is up and you're outside, you are sweating. Doesn't matter how slow of a jaunt it is. For those not familiar with summer near the Gulf, the high the past week has been consistently 95-100 F, with relative humidity ranging from 40% to 90%.
- angersock 13y ago
  Thirding the Houston biking club (we should grab beers sometime!). The nice thing about moving here is that everything is flat, the roads are fun if you have a mountain bike, and you know that everyone else outside (walking, biking, or driving) is as sweaty and gross as you are. It's the great equalizer.
  - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
    Good idea. But I'm a little further down the coast from y'all.
    - angersock 13y ago
      Well if you're ever in town... :D

loceng 13y ago

It's the synergy of all pieces that exist. Their population is healthier (in part because of cycling, and quality food, and good healthcare, education, etc), so cycling is a fun and useful activity. They have the city planning designs for cycling lanes that are safe, make you feel safe. And yeah, other incentives and de-incentives applied to driving.

ArikBe 13y ago

I've lived in Amsterdam since 1997 – since I was 6, so I'd like to voice my opinion as I do not completely agree with everything that has been written in the article. > If you chain your bike in the wrong place you could find that it is removed and impounded, and that you will have to hand over 25 euros to get it back. Unless it says that you can't lock up your bike in the area, you pretty much can. I have never heard or experienced anyone's bike being impounded for chaining it up to a pole or post that is not officially "a designated area to chain your bike." > In that kind of relationship it is longevity that counts - so the older, the better. It's not uncommon to hear a bike coming up behind you with the mudguard rattling against the wheel. If anything, having a tatty, battered old bike affords more status as it attests to a long and lasting love. Wrong. Cheap bikes are just that, cheap. That means that when your bike is stolen it's not as painful. It also means that buying one…is cheap (I'm repeating myself, I know). If you're going to get a bike for 20-50 EUR don't expect it to be some kind of fancy machine. There's no love affair with bicycles, it's simply a matter of utility. > Of course, the cycle paths lend themselves to sauntering along in summer dresses in a way a death-defying, white-knuckle ride in rush-hour traffic does not. It is also partly because of this that people don't need showers at work to be able to commute by bike - it's a no-sweat experience. I know PLENTY of people who sweat on their bikes and who constantly carry around deodorant. I sweat like hell on a bicycle because I own a mountain bike. Especially with a backpack on it's a sweaty ride. Maybe it's also because I _hate_ riding at a moderate pace. I'm constantly pushing my bike. Then again, I don't ride my bike every single day. > The fact that everyone cycles, or knows someone who does, means that drivers are more sympathetic to cyclists when they have to share space on the roads. > In turn, the cyclists are expected to respect and obey the rules of the road. You may be fined for riding recklessly, in the wrong place or jumping red lights. Lol that is if the cops are around. People who drive cars are annoyed and afraid of cyclists because if anything were to happen, the driver would be at fault. When I was getting my driver's license my instructor kept telling me that I should never let a cyclist pass if I have the right of way. Cyclists are arrogant in this regard, I've been on both sides of the table (road?) and I can tell you that when you're on a bike, you know the cars are going to be careful around you because if anything happens, it's usually their fault. Running red lights or engaging in risky maneuvers happens all the time. What strikes me as odd is that this article doesn't mention one of the most important reasons for cycling within cities: It's not attractive to own a car. Owning a car is expensive. Gas is expensive. It's almost impossible to park and maneuvering around the city center is very very difficult. Have a look: http://goo.gl/maps/wRRoZ http://goo.gl/maps/wRRoZ . It takes skill to drive around the canals, especially with the cyclists and scooters buzzing around you.

johnchristopher 13y ago

There is only one, and one reason: their country is flat. A lot of Dutch people come on vacations in Walloon (french speaking part of Belgium) and they never ever can be seen riding a bike because our hilly landscape make it a tiresome activities. Even for inner-city short distance trip. This reflects in the technological development of their bike: heavy frame, few gears, additional front basket while every teen here rides mountain bike made of carbon fibre, 21 gears at least and state of the art front shock absorbing mechanism. I am only slightly exaggerating. And jealous.

coherentpony 13y ago
That, and also petrol is $9.23/gal.
- Graham24 13y ago
  that's about the same as the UK by my calculations.
  - coherentpony 13y ago
    Prices in the UK vary, but let's take a modest £1.35 per litre. That equates to $7.92 per US gallon.
  - scottmcf 13y ago
    For comparison purposes, this would mean $130-140 to fill up a minivan type vehicle in the USA.
alkonaut 13y ago
Two reasons actually: its flat, and small (dense). Wherever you want to go, it isn't unrealistic to do so by bicycle. A huge flat country with large sprawling cities wouldn't have as many bikes.
- adrianN 13y ago
  A country with few bikes tends to produce sprawling cities. You need parking space in the inner city, taking away space that could be used to build homes. More street area in the city means less greenery, worse air. But since commuting by car is not too difficult there is incentive to buy a house in the suburbs.

InclinedPlane 13y ago

By far the most important factor is that it's flat and population density is high (meaning most bike trips aren't necessarily very far). An out of shape person riding a bike a few kilometers over very flat terrain is fairly easy, even with a crappy bike. Throw in more hills or longer distances and things change dramatically. Even a single small hill or overpass on a bike journey changes the amount of effort needed by a huge margin and increases the fitness minimum that would result in that journey feeling comfortable.

chrismealy 13y ago
There are plenty of other flat and dense places in the world that have almost zero cyclists. It's the infrastructure that makes the Netherlands special.
olau 13y ago
Population density: sure. Hills: that's not really true if you have a bicycle with a gearing system. You can get a cheap new one with 7 speeds for about the same as a smart phone. That's enough to get past most hills with some but not a lot effort, especially if it's tuned to out-of-shape persons (which modern bikes seem to be). You can always get off and walk the steepest slopes.
ht_th 13y ago
Outside the cities people still cycle. It is no uncommon for highschool students in the country to cycle over 10 km to and from school (for some up to 20 or 30 km), do the same to meet friends after school, to go clubbing, to go to parties, to go to do things and so on. In the Netherlands there is no such thing as a school bus. There is no driving a car without an expensive and difficult licence after you're 18 years. And the flatness has a downside too: strong headwinds, always it seems. Certainly, it is easier than riding over hills or mountains, I wholeheartedly agree with you, but it ain't all roses and sunshine either. Then again, my fitness when I was young was great. Heck, I don't think I've ever seen one of my schoolmates fail the Cooper test during physical education class unless sick or disabled somehow.

jacobbudin 13y ago

I lived in Breda, The Netherlands for a month several years ago. I agree completely with the article: its a matter of both culture and safety. There are dedicated bike path lanes--fully separated from the roadways. Moreover, both cyclists and drivers alike follow the law. Compared to New York City, where I live now, it's the exact opposite. Bike lanes, in the few places they exist, are rarely anything more than a faded paint line on the road. Very few people (pedestrians, cyclists, or drivers) follow the rules of the road. Even as a twentysomething male--presumable predisposed to a higher degree of risk--riding a bike in NYC seems downright reckless. A contributing factor to its dangerousness may be the city's density; you have trucks at all hours dropping off newspaper deliveries, Amazon.com packages, FreshDirect orders, and so on. These may be some of the worst offenders--not necessarily because of the drivers but also how the vehicles lack visibility. Some recent examples: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/01/nyregion/6-year-old-fatally-hit-by-truck-in-east-harlem.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/01/nyregion/6-year-old-fatall... http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/23/bicyclists-family-criticizes-police-handling-of-fatal-accident/ http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/23/bicyclists-fami...

rsofaer 13y ago
I find biking in NYC pretty calm as long as I'm not running red lights. To me it feels safer than biking in San Francisco did. There is a significant set of protected bike lanes and there are a fair amount of bikers on the road. Drivers not signaling is certainly a problem and it is important to not follow traffic laws when it's safer.
Spooky23 13y ago
You make a good point. I live in a small city in NY, and the streets are basically free-for-all zones. You have pedestrians with toddlers crossing in the middle of the block in traffic, cars driving 50mph down narrow sidestreets and lance armstrong wannabe cyclists blowing lights and riding on sidewalks to pass cars. NYC is more than Manhattan, and while I could see some areas in Manhattan that are ok-ish for bikes, many parts of Queens, Brooklyn, etc are difficult for cyclists, and certainly not amenable to casual bicycling. The geography of Amersterdam is different thinking beyond topography. The streets are narrower as well.

nicholassmith 13y ago

This was actually filmed for Newsnight last night, it was quite interesting. Mostly it was in the context of 'why is cycling so popular and great in the Netherlands and what can we do to get people cycling in the UK', but it felt like it ignored a whole host of social factors that'll make it difficult in the UK. Potentially, we could have had a similar experience to the Dutch however during the 70s/80s the car was raised to be as important as house ownership (there's some specific quote from a member of the Conservative government to that effect, but I cannot for the life of me remember it). Cars are massively important in British life, the roads have been designed specifically for them, traffic lights (new ones) are designed more for drivers than pedestrians. The car lobby is huge, there was a guy from the Association of British Drivers who basically said 'why would anyone cycle, it's one of the most risky occupations you can undertake, you should have a car'. It's nice to see how well organised the Netherlands is (despite what I'm sure are many flaws in the system), but it'll take another oil crisis to shake British love for cycling. As a postscript, I've just started cycling part of my commute recently (9 mile round trip), and whilst cycling in Britain is definitely doable, it's scary how close some drivers get to you at times. I think it's a lack of respect of the distances, and a little blindness to anything outside of your bubble rather than malicious intent, but I can't imagine any parent being happy about sending their teenagers out on the roads.

gpvos 13y ago
There is a quote that is often attributed to Margaret Thatcher about that people who still ride a bus when they're 30 have failed, but she probably never said it. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Margaret_Thatcher#Bus_.22failure.22_quote http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Margaret_Thatcher#Bus_.22f...
martswite 13y ago
I also cycle my commute. When I used to cycle to the old office this was 14 mile commute on a variety of surfaces. When I initially rode on the road I would gutter crawl; cars would pass real close. Then I read a few tips on cycling safer and realised that my gutter crawling was actually very dangerous as cars will try to squeeze past to overtake. I don't know how confident you are but for me, riding a third into the lane at all times has improved my safety as cars will now only overtake if they have a ton of room and they'll always go way over into the other lane to do it. I will also take the full lane if I feel I need to. I essentially just needed to be more confident. YMMV

dcc1 13y ago

hmm let me see, one reason would be is petrol is at €1.90/liter thats about 2.5x to 3x more than in US

_delirium 13y ago
That probably helps, but most of Europe has relatively high gas prices, and yet the popularity of biking as a method of daily transport varies widely between countries.

jseliger 13y ago

It's arguably a sign of larger happiness: http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2013/06/17/danish-happiness-bicycle-infrastructure http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2013/06/17/danish-happine..., or at least that's one reading from American Philip Greenspun. See also his post on "Danish Happiness" and its relation to relatively low material needs, at least by American standards: http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2013/06/18/the-secret-to-danish-happiness/ http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2013/06/18/the-secret-to-...

helloTree 13y ago

I live in Austria and cycling is very popular here. E.g. I use my bike everyday often multiple times it's the preferred transportation unit and I do not have to own a car and can reach every part of the city and all the things I need in 30m. There is just no need for a car here. If I want to get further away I can use an excellent (although, admittedly rather expensive) public transport system.

sebnukem2 13y ago

It's not about the flatness or the distances or the weather, it's about the culture. I can't count how many times I have been called a fag, or a loser, or have been engulfed in a cloud of black smoke from a diesel pick up truck, or have been physically threatened by the driver to make a point that I don't belong on the road. I live in Colorado, but it could be a lot worse. See http://www.reddit.com/r/lowcar/comments/1i0dzx/the_sacred_rac/ http://www.reddit.com/r/lowcar/comments/1i0dzx/the_sacred_ra...

tomc1985 13y ago

Because the country is flat? How hard is it to guess?

leke 13y ago

I'm writing from Oulu in Finland and we are considered to be a cycling town. The reason why it is so popular is simple. Walking paths double as cycle paths and this works because they are as wide as a car lane. The other reason is because Oulu is designed in such a way where most of the residents live in apartment blocks -- all within cycling distance to the town centre. Most workplaces are also located around town.

Benji_San 13y ago
Turku here, which is also considered to be a cycling town. I was really shocked to see Finland placed fourth on the list of bike friendly countries. I'll admit that most bike lanes on the countryside are great but the bike lanes in cities are generally not safe to ride on. Both pedestrians and drivers have no idea that they should take bikes into consideration when moving around. Most bike lanes are poorly marked and are blocked by bus stops, dooring areas, stopped cars, pedestrians, snow dumps and dead ends. There's no consistency and impossible to follow all the rules and not get killed if you bike as your primary transportation. Ranking countries in terms of cycling friendliness is also kinda misleading as countries are on completely different levels. The Netherlands and Denmark are leaps and bounds ahead of Sweden, Sweden is leaps and bounds ahead of Finland.

GnarfGnarf 13y ago

Because it's so flat and tiny.

saosebastiao 13y ago

Gas is expensive, land is flat, weather is nice...all true, but then again, the same could be said about Paris, Barcelona, Milan, etc. The most important factor is that they accommodated them. Cities should always accommodate the lowest common denominators of society first and foremost (starting with pedestrians), and then progressively accommodate more, but never more at the expense of those that came before. It is very difficult to harm pedestrian activity with public transportation and bicycles. When it comes to cars, the picture changes drastically: people clamoring for free parking are implicitly raising the price of housing for people that do not drive. Wide boulevards and high speed freeways divide cities geographically, increase noise to the point of hindering inhabitability (also increases housing costs), and inhibit movement (which essentially limits trade in the same way that national borders do). Accommodating their preferences for traffic light timing drastically increases walk times for pedestrians. And their speed preferences and right-of-way preferences increase death risks. That isn't to say that cities shouldn't accommodate cars. They should just stop doing it at the expense of pedestrians, bicyclists, and public transportation users.

iskander 13y ago
> weather is nice People keep saying this all over the thread but it rains so damn much in Amsterdam! The Dutch don't seem to mind, throw on some rain gear and bike 10km to work. Almost no one does that in the US, I think it's just a big expression of cultural differences.
- saosebastiao 13y ago
  It rains a lot in Seattle, and we still have plenty of cyclists. Rain isn't as big of a factor as extreme heat/cold when considering whether to ride a bike or not.
- gambiting 13y ago
  Rain is not a problem - temperature is. In Poland we get two completely opposite extremes. Today it was 40C outside and I can't imagine biking anywhere, and in winter it can go as low as -30C. Again, almost impossible to bike. It leaves you with a few months when biking to work is a reasonable to choice. In the UK though, I could bike to work every single day of the year, because it's never too cold or too hot to cycle. I imagine that the Netherlands are similar.

forgottenpaswrd 13y ago

Obviously, because they live in flatland. In Spain I lived in Granada, Oviedo and Gijón(north), Madrid(center) and Alicante, all of them near big mountains. Every single time I took my bicycle, and I love it, I will have to go up or down 200, 400meters. I log it with the GPS. Electrical bikes improve the issue, but it will take time until they are cheap.

ralfn 13y ago

As a dutch person, i want to correct some of the arguments made. Bikes are popular in _old cities_, and _with kids_, but adults living in suburbia will drive and use a car for everything, just like an american in sururbia would. In old cities, they are the best form factor. And if Holland weren't flat, we would all be driving scooters (like they do in Rome, Paris or Greece). It's the form factor that works best in old cities, because the roads are simply _too small_ and the population density is _too high_. Cars are for moving furniture and deliveries in old cities, not for navigation. I live in Utrecht where you would sometimes have to navigate around the city for 30 minutes to reach a place you could walk to in 2 minutes. Then you pay 3 to 7 euro's an hour to park your car, after looking for 10 minutes to find a free spot. It's a hellish experience, you will only opt-in to, if you really need to. Secondly, we raise our kids with freedom and independence, and that starts with trust. That means, between the age of 5 and 10, your child will start navigating to and from school, their sports club and friends, by themselves, using their bike. And yes, we were doing this for decades before mobile phones even existed. If your child was late out of school, you would generally just assume they were with a friend, or working on a school project. And most of these kids live in suburbia. The reason few people choose to raise kids in the city, is exactly because you can't allow them to navigate freely: you would be more inclined to escort them. Now, suddenly, its clear just why these bike paths are so safe. Our children are riding there: unsupervised. They are not just safe in terms of traffic, but also safe in social terms. The paths are always in the view of shops and houses and other traffic. They aggressively clear bushes and dark corners. So people can keep an eye out on the kids. And getting a driver's licence is much harder in Holland. You would have to be at least 18 years old, pass about three exams and spend hundreds of euro's, and the legal amount of alcohol in your blood until you are 21, is 0,000000000% If you make a big mistake, you'll loose the right to even apply for a new licence until you are 21. So bikes are used in old cities, because those city planners didn't know cars were going to be invented the next century, and they are used by pretty much all of the youth in Holland, everywhere. The american style, of navigating your child from your prison home, using your prison family car, to the prison school, is not the dutch approach to raising children. People that drive their kids to school get a serious talking to, and schools are often in fuck-off-cars neighborhoods, optimized for child safety and free exploration. Places where cars shouldn't be going faster than 15 km/h, and where all kinds of obstructions are placed to slow them down. It's not about health. It's not about having a pro-bike culture. It's about what's a usefull form factor, and how do we raise our kids.