Cyclists in Jersey are being asked to take part in a smart cycling scheme using a data trust to gather and protect user data, the latter part of which is said to be a world first. The data-gathering scheme, called LifeCycle, will use bike lights to collect information on people’s journeys on bikes, which can then be used to make improvements in the future.
Digital Jersey, an organisation that promotes the digital sector on the island, is asking cyclists in Jersey to join the scheme. They will receive a smart bike light from See.Sense, which will collect data from their bike rides - not just on their itineraries, but also on their cycling experience: road conditions, busy spots and conflicts.
Participants are given See.Sense bike lights that use sensor and AI technology to gather information on their experiences. Digital Jersey say they will monitor the environment up to 800 times a second.
Rachel Harker from Digital Jersey said in a BBC Radio Jersey interview that the lights would track people’s journeys, gathering information on infrastructure, what condition the road is in, and hotspots for conflicts with cars.
The scheme aims to both gather information on what it’s like to cycle in Jersey, and to create the island’s first data trust, using trustees to hold information on people’s journeys.
Jersey’s first data trust will hold all of the information gathered by the lights: professional trustees are responsible for people’s data and will only pass it on to relevant organisations. At the same time as improving conditions for cycling, the scheme also serves as a trial for Jersey’s trust law - these are often used in the financial sector, but this scheme could be the start of a whole new sector on the island.
Digital Jersey explains on its website: "The concept involves the innovative use of a trust structure to hold personal data so that it can be stored, managed and shared safely, lawfully, in accordance with the trust parameters and applying fiduciary duties to the stewardship of data within a highly regulated environment."
Kristina Moore, Chief Minister of the Government of Jersey, said: “I think this is a great example of an innovation in our trust sector using the expertise of islanders and professionals working here that will also benefit islanders as a whole by tracking their cycling usage and enabling us to make our roads safer."
The organisation plans to create a pool of data which has been anonymised before being passed on to relevant organisations, in order to improve conditions for cyclists on the island.
Previously, a trial in Glasgow used smart bike lights to make sure that children in a bike bus could all get through traffic lights together.
We’ve noticed you’re using an ad blocker. If you like road.cc, but you don’t like ads, please consider subscribing to the site to support us directly. As a subscriber you can read road.cc ad-free, from as little as £1.99.
If you don’t want to subscribe, please turn your ad blocker off. The revenue from adverts helps to fund our site.
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £1.99. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
In 2017, See Sense in collaboration with BT and Cityserve (whoever they are) gave away loads of rear lights in Manchester with the promise that 'your participation in the trial will give your city valuable data-driven insights to help promote cycling through the design of improved infrastructure and policies.'.
Sounds like this is similar, so is it really the 1st of its kind in the world?
Incidentally, I work for this same city's council, and have never since heard of any of this data being used to '.. help promote cycling through the design of improved infrastructure and policies'. In fact I have no idea what happened to the data they were meant to gather.
Knew people on a similar trial they ran in Suffolk 2019ish,though I think covid curtailed it.
I don't know that the data shaped any council planning or thinking, precious little sign of any changes for sure, but Strava seem to win most of that market share when councils start citing external data is shaping their cycling visions.
Funnily enough, Strava segments have been used to justify putting in some rather dangerous barriers/chicanes (unlit, which would certainly not be permitted on something put in to slow car drivers) on a cycle path in Stockport. The councillor complained that 'cyclists were racing to get the fastest times along this route'. All of them, all the time, clearly. Even the 5-year olds on their way to school.
I love their lights, run a rear one on al spins. I Backed the anti theft device also, (called Air now I think) but never got it.
I've got a front and rear from them with the front one being a fancy one. I checked the KickStarter earlier for the anti-theft device and it's now called Knowhere - they expect to deliver that later this year, but I'd take that with a helping of salt (three years so far).
An interesting way of gathering data, but it won't show the dangerous points that cyclists avoid, it will only gather data on routes cyclists consider safe. Unless the analysis considers roads that cyclists don't ride on as well as those that they do, a vital area of useful information will be missed.
An interesting way of gathering data, but it won't show the dangerous points that cyclists avoid, it will only gather data on routes cyclists consider safe. Unless the analysis considers roads that cyclists don't ride on as well as those that they do, a vital area of useful information will be missed.
I was thinking the same thing. We have potential routes in our town which cyclists could and would use, but for some ill-placed barriers, a busy road crossing, a set of steps etc. These potential routes wouldn't show up using this method, but it wouldn't take much to upgrade them to be cycle-friendly.
Add new comment
9 comments
In 2017, See Sense in collaboration with BT and Cityserve (whoever they are) gave away loads of rear lights in Manchester with the promise that 'your participation in the trial will give your city valuable data-driven insights to help promote cycling through the design of improved infrastructure and policies.'.
Sounds like this is similar, so is it really the 1st of its kind in the world?
Incidentally, I work for this same city's council, and have never since heard of any of this data being used to '.. help promote cycling through the design of improved infrastructure and policies'. In fact I have no idea what happened to the data they were meant to gather.
Knew people on a similar trial they ran in Suffolk 2019ish,though I think covid curtailed it.
I don't know that the data shaped any council planning or thinking, precious little sign of any changes for sure, but Strava seem to win most of that market share when councils start citing external data is shaping their cycling visions.
Funnily enough, Strava segments have been used to justify putting in some rather dangerous barriers/chicanes (unlit, which would certainly not be permitted on something put in to slow car drivers) on a cycle path in Stockport. The councillor complained that 'cyclists were racing to get the fastest times along this route'. All of them, all the time, clearly. Even the 5-year olds on their way to school.
I've got one of those lights, but it's a shame that the data is only used in their specific schemes.
It reminds me though, the KickStarter for their anti-theft device (Knowhere) is still Knowhere to be seen.
I love their lights, run a rear one on al spins. I Backed the anti theft device also, (called Air now I think) but never got it.
I've got a front and rear from them with the front one being a fancy one. I checked the KickStarter earlier for the anti-theft device and it's now called Knowhere - they expect to deliver that later this year, but I'd take that with a helping of salt (three years so far).
An interesting way of gathering data, but it won't show the dangerous points that cyclists avoid, it will only gather data on routes cyclists consider safe. Unless the analysis considers roads that cyclists don't ride on as well as those that they do, a vital area of useful information will be missed.
Good point. Are you Abraham Wald?
I was thinking the same thing. We have potential routes in our town which cyclists could and would use, but for some ill-placed barriers, a busy road crossing, a set of steps etc. These potential routes wouldn't show up using this method, but it wouldn't take much to upgrade them to be cycle-friendly.