The process of evaluating English cycle cities

Kevin Mayne

The opportunity

.Growing recognition that cycling contributes to tackling:

• Obesity

• Traffic congestion

• Climate change

• Improving quality of life

• Creating wealth through tourism and leisure

• Rising transport prices

• Recession

Planning for cycling – the value of cycle

infrastructure

Economic case for cycling

Analysis of the cycling towns

investment

12

3

Making the economic case

Cycling as a mainstream modeof transport

Economic case

But where’s the evidence?

.

Economic benefits of cycling are not fully understood

Cycling not viewed as a mainstream mode of transport

Systematic underinvestment

Translating benefits into hard numbers – the SQW study

. The measurable benefits of cycling:

• Improvements in general health and fitness

• Cutting pollution and CO2 emissions

• Contribution to easing congestion

10% of 10 yr olds are clinically obese, 29% are overweight

Adult obesity currently costs £8bn pa

50,000 deaths pa are from illnesses caused by inactivity

Valuing the benefits of cycling

. The value of cycling is higher where:• Inactive people become active• Older people are persuaded to cycle• Where cycling replaces a car trip, particularly in urban

areas• Where the journey is a regular trip

These are conservative indications - no allowance has been made for reductions in obesity / for children cycling / for the social benefits of cycling

•

Low High

Low

High

Age

of

addi

tiona

l cyc

lists

Proportion of cycle trips that replace car trips

Health Health/pollution congestion

Pollution/ congestion

£176 per additional cyclist

£382 per additional cyclist

£87 per additional cyclist

£293 per additional cyclist

The value of a cyclist

Economic case > Investment case

The investment case

. • A 50% increase in trips between 2005 and 2015 will generate savings of £1.3 billion

Investment in cycling projects shows a return of between 3:1 and 4.5:1

Implications for infrastructure

.

Cost of project Number of additional cyclists needed

£10,000 1

£100,000 11

£1,000,000 109

Investment case > evidence base

Cycling City and Towns

Phase one: • Original six Cycling

Demonstration Towns appointed in 2005

• Cycling England has invested £17m in these six towns

Phase one: The CDT programme

• First phase: October 2005 – October 2008

• All towns funded at approx £5 per head per year, matched by the local authority – total investment £10 per head

• All towns ‘medium-sized’; larger ones focussed effort on part of their population

• Consistent, co-ordinated investment and ‘joined-up’ measures leads to a step-change in cycling levels

Phase one: A taste of CDT achievements

• Aylesbury – Gemstone Cycle Network

• Brighton and Hove – Cycle Freeway Network and Personalised Travel Planning

• Darlington – Local Motion campaign

• Derby – Focus on children and young people

• Exeter – Engaged with local employers

• Lancaster with Morecambe – Expanded cycle routes in the area

Cycling Demonstration Towns – programme ingredients

• Cycle parking in schools• Bike It• Bikeability training• Engagement with the local business community• Major cycling events• Publicity

The results

Source data

Continuous cycle count dataQuarterly manual cycle count dataSchool travel dataCounts of parked bikesBehaviour and attitude surveysWorkplace travel survey data

Major themes addressed by findings

The effectiveness of targeting investmentThe importance of high quality provisionDistribution of cycling activityLessons in growing cycling

Key results from phase one• Cycle counts up in all six

towns, by between 10% and 57%

• Cycling levels increased on average by 28% in the three years

• Increase in number of people cycling

• Increase in physical activity amongst the most inactive

• Comparator towns do not show this

Physical activity assessment

• European Prospective Investigation into Cancer (EPIC)

• Asks about activity in usual week

• Includes cycling in categories

• Validated against accelerometers

• Predictive of all-cause mortality

The effectiveness of targeting investment:

growth in cycling to schools Hands Up

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0%

2004/05

2005/06

2006/07

2007/08

2008/09

Percentage of pupils cycling to schoolHands Up - all schools Hands Up - primary schools

Hands Up - secondary schools

Dat

a fr

om D

arlin

gton

Lessons in growing cycling:a marked change in the rate of growth

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Aug-06 Feb-07 Sep-07 Mar-08 Oct-08

Date

Me

dia

n d

aily

co

un

t

Dat

a fr

om D

arlin

gton

Lessons in growing cycling:increasing the rate of growth

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Jan-98 May-99 Sep-00 Feb-02 Jun-03 Nov-04 Mar-06 Aug-07 Dec-08

Date

Me

dia

n d

aily

co

un

t

Dat

a fr

om D

erby

Headline comparison with London

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

160%

180%

200%

220%

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

years

ind

ex

of

cy

cli

ng

le

ve

ls

London 0=2000/01 CDTs 0=2006

Caution! Figures are approximate and indicative only; work in progressBase year for London = first year of strategic London-wide focus & investmentBase year for CDTs = first full calendar year of CDT project

Lift Off for Cycling

• Appraisal by the Department for Transport– The benefit to cost ratio is at least 3:1, and

may be as high as 5 or 6:1 if benefits are sustained over 30 years.

– These calculations are based on conservative assumptions, and do not include all the benefits of the programme.

Phase two: The Cycling City and Towns

• In 2008 another 11 more Cycling Towns and a Cycling City were recruited

• CDTs now in the second phase – all Towns funded until 2011

• New Towns are benefiting from the experience of the original six

• £100m investment package• Over 2.5 million people to

benefit

Planning for cycling – the value of cycle

infrastructure

Economic case for cycling

Analysis of the cycling towns

investment

12

3

Conclusion: The Economic case proven!

Cycling as a mainstream modeof transport