Flecc you have said it many times before. "we are not a cycling nation"
I'd be interested to hear your views as to if and how we could ever become one.
The only comments I can make are to the past conditions that made us one. Some of them made others cycling nations as well, but not all can be repeated of course.
1) Novelty. The introduction of the safety bicycle led to it being quickly adopted by the upper middle classes for leisure, and they were emulated by the "lower" classes as bike prices fell and wages rose. That soon led to realisation that a bike could be transport as well as a leisure means. Of course we can't invent the bike again, so this is out.
2) The social changes after World War 1 and the leisure time they brought led to more time to appreciate the countryside, and this was coupled with demands for greater free movement into the countryside. The wealthy few had access with their motor cars, but the masses could also use their bikes to get out and about.
3) The costs and deficiencies of public transport drove greater use of bikes to a fair extent in the 1920s and '30s, but it was World War 2 with almost no private car use and increasingly severe shortfalls in public transport which pressured many into bicycle use as the only option for commuting. This situation continued into the 1950s as we slowly struggled out of the effects of war.
4) The availablity of affordable alternatives to only pedalling that appeared from about 1950 on was a negative factor, lifting people out of pure cycling into easier means. First it was the add-on bicycle petrol motor and the odd autocycles, then the scooter from the mid 1950s, then low cost small motorbikes and finally cars. As people became better off through the 1960s and '70s, they quickly took advantage of these availabilities and bicycle use crashed. In the northern mainland and some other parts of of Europe, the severe effects of WW2 meant a far slower recovery into personal wealth so their cycling wasn't affected so soon or as quickly.
5) Eventually conditions changed in the Netherlands for example, and they started to rapidly increase car ownership. However, that was so much later than here in the UK that their government was less occupied with struggling out of the war effects and more with running the country normally. They foresaw the dangers of widespead car use and acted immediately with a nationwide program of building good cycling facilities which successfully stopped the rapid cycling decline and even led to some recovery of bike use. It has to be said that was good fortune rather than just foresight, what was possible there in the 1970s was simply impossible for us in the 1950s and early '60s due to our war debts and other recovery needs, so car use became firmly embedded.
6) The terrain must not be discounted. The Low Countries, the flatter half of Germany and in Denmark are where utility cycling is most widespread, and that also leads to the marked difference in their cycling style. When the going is flat, it's very easy to just amble along on a bike at minimal effort, rather like the slight effort of slowly walking, so routine use of a bike in that way as an alternative to walking is not just viable, at 8 to 10mph it's much quicker than 3mph walking so an overall advantage. Flatter areas do lead to more cycling even here in Britain, Cambridge, York and the central and inner South London areas being notable examples of localised high cycling incidence.
Hills have the opposite effect, driven into the high effort to cycle up steep or long hills, those who remain cycling soon routinely apply more effort to all cycling, leading to higher speeds and an emphasis on the sport cycling aspect. The majority who that does not appeal to look for easement or alternatives. As we saw in the 1950s, the cycle add-on motor is seen as a partial benefit, but the wholly motorised vehicle is widely seen as a much better total escape from the drudgery of high effort cycling.
Conclusion: So what can we do?
1) The first thing would be to stop spending fortunes on measures that depress cycling, and in this case I offer a classic example in my area. I live in a major suburban residential area four miles south of the major employment and shopping area of Croydon. The 150,000 of us need to get into Croydon's centre at times, but between the two is a major hill obstacle, the Addington Hills of the North Downs, so a steep climb in both directions.
For years of lower population this was covered by buses and car use, but as my area expanded those were no longer wholly viable so a mass-transit tram system was created. To serve that a major bus-tram interchange was created at the heart of my area and special high frequency T bus routes to feed the trams from the residential areas, the fares included in the tram fares so effectively free. For example, on my T31 route, four single deckers circulate a circa 7 mile route from about 4.30am to well past midnight, most of the time nearly empty, just to conveniently feed the trams. My nearest stop is in sight of my home. not untypical for many.
Of course the costs of building this tram system and running it are vast, and to make matters worse, the Oyster Card scheme reduces the fares and all up to 16 years (or 18 in full time education) or over 60 travel free at all times. What impetus is there to cycle into Croydon, given the intervening heavily trafficked steep hill and convenient low cost tram?
What we could have done at far lower cost instead was to build a major cutting through that steep obstructing hill, accompanied by a top class two lane cycling facility in place of the tram route to enable fairly level cycling into town. The existing bus routes at lower provision levels would serve those who could not cycle. In town large covered cycle parking facilities could have been built to accommodate the incoming bikes.
Of course this is forcing a cycling increase by removal of alternatives as well as cycling provision, carrot and stick, but that is what's necessary to change a culture. It's only with such revolutionary thinking that we'll change our current situation.
.
