The National Travel Survey (NTS) for 2017 reveals that an upward trend in average cycling miles has continued. However, the overall number of cycling trips has remained at a similar level to previous years.
The average number of miles cycled in 2017 was 54 per cent higher than in 2002 at 60 miles per person. People did an average of 17 trips per person per year, compared to 18 in 2002.
Around 14 per cent of people cycled at least once a week, but 66 per cent less than once a year or never. These figures have been broadly unchanged since 2003.
Data was collected via interviews and via a one-week travel diary. The NTS defines ‘cyclists’ as those who recorded the use of a bicycle in their travel diary at least once.
On average in 2017, ‘cyclists’ made about six trips a week and travelled around 1,144 miles per year, up from 687 miles on average in 2002.
The report says: “The NTS sample is not identifying more cyclists, but those in the sample have generally been making more cycling trips and travelling further.”
The survey also reports the number of people who had access to a bicycle in 2017. The figure was 42 per cent overall with young children having the highest rates of bicycle access at 82 per cent.
Just 23 per cent of over-60s have access to a bicycle and only 32 per cent of 20-to-29-year-olds, albeit the rate rises between those two age categories to 49 per cent of 40-to-49-year-olds.
Driving remains the most frequent mode of travel with 68 per cent of journeys made under five miles.
Add new comment
5 comments
"People did an average of 17 trips per person per year, compared to 18 in 2002." seems to contradict "The NTS sample is not identifying more cyclists, but those in the sample have generally been making more cycling trips".
As above, the same people are basically travelling further and a bit more often, so 'upward trend' is simply not accurate as it's fewer trips since 2002 and those that are cycling more are generally sporting types. There's still a massive 2/3 of the population who do not cycle at all or less than once a year (same difference isn't it?)
Let's see the stats for 2002, let's see the figures for 2006/7, 2010/11.
When you look at the national figure from 1989 of commuters by bike of 7% and in some places like Hull running at 22% we are an absolute mile off.
Let's see the average miles per population head, which is more representative of the nation as a whole, we already know this is roughly TWELVE times less than NL!
Sorry but simply not impressed.
Slightly good news I suppose, but what is really needed is for more people to be cycling more often, not just the same people riding farther. The utterly appalling, illogical opposition to cycling in our society has to be changed, and there has to be proper investment, not just hot air and verbal support.
It's time that all of us involved in promoting cycling, for whatever reason, be it health, pollution, climate change or just the joy of cycling, started holding our elected representatives to their promises. At every election, the candidates should be asked to make a firm commitment to spend a reasonable percentage of the transport budget on cycling, and then vote accordingly, and then making sure they actually do it.
the voter numbers aren't really in our favour to make it anything more than a token issue in its own right for politicians. It becomes important only as a means to an end for them, not as an end in itself. Cycling can reduce the burden of rising NHS costs and of ever-increasing traffic congestion, both of which are tax/financial matters. Using ng the savings ngs for tax cuts and vanity projects is what makes mainstream politicians do something, not concern for our well-being.
No it's not good news, it's shameful.
Our much touted success at the Olympics and the Tour de France, the London hire bikes, the constant talk of needing to be more active and to tackle obesity (1 in 3 kids primary schoolkids overweight etc etc ad nauseam) count for nothing.
The lack of infrastructure in this country, the perceived danger of being on the road and the appalling anti-cyclist rhetoric in the media combine to deter the many, many people who would like to cycle more.
The Government has, unsurprisingly, done nothing. They are too busy telling us about how Brexit will be great for us, a land of milk and honey, to care about the people of this country. With their offshore investments and tax-avoidance plans sorted, they want to destroy the NHS and run down the public transport network, build more roads, freeze fuel duty while talking up electric and driverless cars as the answer to everything. London mayor Sadiq Khan has done f**k all since taking over from Boris while other bodies are unwilling/incapable of doing anything proactive. My Tory MP is a brexit-loving, sycophantic puppet of the far-right movement in Poland and elsewhere, in the pocket of Saudi Arabia's military, and appears to care more about his backhanders and his second job as a consultant than anything else. Shropshire council is a corrupt cabal of incompetents who couldn't organise a piss-up in a brewery, even if it laid on expert staff to advise them. It's truly sickening. I suspect it's the same elsewhere. They are condemning millions to breathe polluted air, doing nothing to reduce the congestion and pollution that costs this country £billions. Thousands of lives blighted by road crashes, toxic air, the life-shortening stress of living by busy roads.... it's criminal.
With the sole change of "Shropshire" to "South Gloucestershire" I could have written exactly the same comment, and I suspect many others could have too.
Even worse is the media, especially the BBC. There is a prog on R4 which I listen to "You and Yours" and they have just finished a series of articles about obesity; guess how many times the mentioned cycling. It's a round number. Despite all the studies showing the overwhelming health and other benefits of cycling, I've never heard anyone on the BBC mention them, despite their having had any number of progs about health, obesity, congestion, pollution and global warming. Reminds me of Thursday, when I was on our local BBC call in show featuring eye tests for drivers. One guy rings in and said it should apply to cyclists, not electric disabled buggies, horse riders or pedestrians, only cyclists, but he denied being anti-cyclist.