
Why is cycling so popular in the Netherlands? - Libertatea
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23587916
======
johnchristopher
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.

~~~
gbog
If you think so, it means the author did not emphasize enough that cycling is
a life-style and a voluntary effort from the Dutch. There are many flat and
dense cities with much less bikes, think New-York, but the Dutch seem to have
decided together some time ago that biking was cool and cars not.

They were just in advance. Right now the top-du-top of the "bo-bo" chic in
Paris is to not own a car. It means using the bike renting service (velib) and
renting a car when you go outside.

Oh, and as I live in Beijing, I can tell you how much I would love the Chinese
to take early this bike-turn: they have plenty of them, and many Chinese
cities are flat. It's just that for most people in China riding a bike is sign
of the past, poor and hungry China, while driving a German multi-ton mammoth
is a sign of the future.

~~~
megablast
I think don't think many New Yorkers love cars. And they have just started a
new bike share scheme, so hopefully things will change.

And Parisians still love there cars, which is damn ridiculous. If one city
needs to take action, it is Paris. Far too many cars, so many they can park
anywhere and not get in any trouble. Awful narrow streets, and badly designed
as well. One way streets heading into each other. They have the Velib, but
most people I know are just too scared to use it. I do, and I have no problem
with cars, but I have ridden among cars since I was a kid. Even on a beautiful
sunny day, as we have had the last few weeks, people would rather take the
underground. They need to take some clues from London, introduce a congestion
charge, lots more bike lines. But they will not. Paris would have been a
nightmare if it had the olympics instead of London.

~~~
gpvos
I've been told that cycling in Paris is a lot safer than in London.

~~~
yoran
That's because they drive on the left in London!

~~~
SimHacker
But they're phasing in driving on the right in the UK -- first all the
lorries, then once everyone gets used to that, the rest of the cars.

------
saosebastiao
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
> 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.

~~~
gambiting
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.

~~~
LaGrange
You do realize that we just got past the heatwave here, and we also got quite
low temperatures in December? The Polish winter is a bit harsher, but not that
much.

I am _from_ Warsaw, and biked there, and the difference in infrastructure
quality and planner priorities is huge. I mean, people still think it's a good
idea to build elevated highways in the cities there.

------
barry-cotter
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
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
> 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.

------
InclinedPlane
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.

~~~
ht_th
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.

------
ArikBe
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.

~~~
megablast
The guy who wrote this article does not sound like a cyclist at all, where as
you do.

The real question is why are bicycles not popular in more places. In Australia
especially, wide roads, the cities are not that big, the weather is mostly
nice, and so few people cycle.

~~~
sgrock
I think the biggest reason is the lack of good safe bike paths and
infrastructure most places. As someone (in the US) who bikes nearly every day
as my primary form of transportation I'm quick to admit that bike commuting is
dangerous. I love it, but it requires constant vigilance and careful attention
not to get hit by a car or a door (and I live in Portland which is much more
bike friendly than most US cities). Bikers frequently share lanes with fast
moving cars and it's very common for bike lanes to end unexpectedly, leaving
the cyclist in a dangerous spot.

I'm willing to accept these risks, but for most people it's not worth it. My
wife also enjoys biking, but hates to ride on busy streets for fear of ending
up on the wrong end of a distracted motorist. This limits her options to
weekend pleasure rides on dedicated bike paths.

The trick to getting more people to cycle is to invest heavily in bike path
infrastructure so that more people will feel safe using it as a primary form
of transportation.

~~~
Someone
For zillions of examples what investing in infrastructure means, see
[http://bicycledutch.wordpress.com](http://bicycledutch.wordpress.com)

Road redesign:
[http://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2013/08/08/making-a-1960s-...](http://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2013/08/08/making-a-1960s-street-
grid-fit-for-the-21st-century/)

Parking facilities: [http://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2013/08/01/modern-
indoor-b...](http://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2013/08/01/modern-indoor-
bicycle-parking-facilities/) (and, in a few years time:
[http://www.bouwpututrecht.nl/bu/2013/06/21/largest-
bicycle-p...](http://www.bouwpututrecht.nl/bu/2013/06/21/largest-bicycle-
parking/))

[http://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2013/08/05/amsterdam-
cycli...](http://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2013/08/05/amsterdam-cycling-in-
the-1950s/) shows that things have been even better, though.

------
nicholassmith
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.

~~~
martswite
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

~~~
nicholassmith
I've actually started moving further out and establishing my area on the road,
and it has helped, but I'll often have to slow down and move in. Without
typecasting it's often people in 4x4's (Range Rovers, X5s etc), I don't
believe it's always down to the person driving it being, well, an asshat but
due to the size of the vehicle changing your perspective.

Thankfully a lot of my commute is on cycle paths, but the quality level of
road surfaces is some what variable.

------
radicalbyte
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.

~~~
rmc
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
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

------
jseliger
It's arguably a sign of larger happiness:
[http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2013/06/17/danish-
happine...](http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2013/06/17/danish-happiness-
bicycle-infrastructure), 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-...](http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2013/06/18/the-secret-to-danish-
happiness/)

------
jacobbudin
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-
fatall...](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/01/nyregion/6-year-old-fatally-hit-
by-truck-in-east-harlem.html)
[http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/23/bicyclists-
fami...](http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/23/bicyclists-family-
criticizes-police-handling-of-fatal-accident/)

~~~
rsofaer
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.

------
loceng
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.

------
fnordfnordfnord
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
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
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
Good idea. But I'm a little further down the coast from y'all.

~~~
angersock
Well if you're ever in town... :D

------
sebnukem2
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_ra...](http://www.reddit.com/r/lowcar/comments/1i0dzx/the_sacred_rac/)

------
leke
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
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.

------
helloTree
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.

------
forgottenpaswrd
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.

------
rumcajz
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.

------
ralfn
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.

------
dcc1
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
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.

------
GnarfGnarf
Because it's so flat and tiny.

