- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Cyclist deaths 1930-2013.pngCycling deaths and serious injuries down in 2013, says DfT
Fewer cyclists were killed or seriously injured on the roads in 2013 than the previous year, according to Department for Transport (DfT) figures released today, but the number of cyclist casualties has not declined as quickly as the total road death toll.
Last year there were 109 cyclist deaths on the roads of Great Britain (Northern Ireland stats are collected and reported separately), down from 118 in 2012. That figure has fluctuated between roughly 100 and 120 over the last six years, so even an apparently substantial drop shouldn't be afforded much weight. The report says: "Given the fluctuating nature of this figure it is not possible to tell whether this latest annual change is simply a one-off fluctuation or the start of a longer term downward trend."
Perhaps significant is that the number of cyclists seriously injured fell by two per cent to 3,143 in 2013 from 3,222 in 2012. This is the first decrease in reported seriously injured cyclist casualties since 2004, but the report again warns that it's not possible to be sure whether this is the start of a long term trend or a one-off fluctuation.
The overall road death toll was 1,713 in 2013, the lowest since records began in 1926, and half as many as in 2000. The number of road users seriously injured fell by 6 per cent to 21,657, 43 percent lower than in 2000.
The number of seriously injured cyclists is still 31 per cent higher than the 2005 to 2009 average, the report says. Road traffic estimates put the distance cycled in the UK as having increased 13 percent from the 2005-2009 average.
This chart shows that the relative change in deaths and serious injuries (KSIs) per distance travelled. While things have clearly improved for pedestrians and car occupants, the roads have become more hazardous for cyclists.
The DfT has included a special report focussing on cycling in its analysis of the 2013 figures. Among other things it puts current figures and trends in a deeper historical context. The highest annual figure for cyclist deaths was a staggering 1,536 in 1934. The number has been declining ever since though the decline has levelled out in recent years.
Much of the reduction may simply be due to the massive drop in cycling in that time, though. In 1949, the first year for which records are available, bikes accounted for 35 per cent of road traffic in Great Britain. Today the figure is just 1 per cent.
Turning its attention to the gender and age of cyclists who are killed or seriously injured, the report finds that the casualty rates of male and female cyclists roughly correspond to their activity levels. Females ride on average only a quarter as much as males. Males make up over 80 percent of KSI casualties, and 80 percent of 2013 deaths. That contradicts the widely held view that women are disproportionately represented among cyclist casualties. An analysis on the socio-political underpinnings of that belief is beyond the scope of this article.
One group that is over-represented in the stats is young males in their teens and twenties, who accounted for around 30 percent of KSIs in 2013, but only 25 percent of miles cycled.
Male cyclists in their 30s and 40s are the most under-represented male group, the report says, making up 40 percent of KSIs despite comprising 50 percent of all male cycling.
The pattern for women is very different. Women between 50 and 59 make up 16 percent of female casualties, yet account for only 8 percent of miles ridden by women. Young women are often portrayed as the most at risk, but women in their 20s cover a third of miles ridden by females yet account for just a quarter of casualties. The chart below summarises the findings.
The proportion of total distance cycled and the proportion of killed or seriously
injured casualties by gender and age group, GB: 2013
John has been writing about bikes and cycling for over 30 years since discovering that people were mug enough to pay him for it rather than expecting him to do an honest day's work.
He was heavily involved in the mountain bike boom of the late 1980s as a racer, team manager and race promoter, and that led to writing for Mountain Biking UK magazine shortly after its inception. He got the gig by phoning up the editor and telling him the magazine was rubbish and he could do better. Rather than telling him to get lost, MBUK editor Tym Manley called John’s bluff and the rest is history.
Since then he has worked on MTB Pro magazine and was editor of Maximum Mountain Bike and Australian Mountain Bike magazines, before switching to the web in 2000 to work for CyclingNews.com. Along with road.cc founder Tony Farrelly, John was on the launch team for BikeRadar.com and subsequently became editor in chief of Future Publishing’s group of cycling magazines and websites, including Cycling Plus, MBUK, What Mountain Bike and Procycling.
John has also written for Cyclist magazine, edited the BikeMagic website and was founding editor of TotalWomensCycling.com before handing over to someone far more representative of the site's main audience.
He joined road.cc in 2013. He lives in Cambridge where the lack of hills is more than made up for by the headwinds.
Latest Comments
- hawkinspeter 3 sec ago
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/van-gets-submerged-incoming-tide-9721373 Bloody surfers don't even pay their wave tax
- hawkinspeter 11 min 14 sec ago
Yeah, these look to me like up-market bike locking devices. I don't think people on relatively cheaper bikes are going to be wanting to pay to lock...
- mdavidford 21 min 27 sec ago
The cars aren't just self-aware now - they're starting to breed.
- Rendel Harris 3 hours 1 min ago
Wasn't her quote something like "Any man who takes the bus after the age of twenty-five [maybe thirty?] is a failure?...
- andystow 5 hours 51 min ago
Based on my experience with the Hunt wheels, I might do a review on their durability in three or four years.
- Destroyer666 10 hours 18 min ago
"...the beeswax-based covering magically shuns off whatever might be lurking in the corners. Even after multiple rides, when the bars rattled about...
- David9694 11 hours 40 min ago
t-boned
- Rendel Harris 13 hours 1 min ago
I didn't know the blue RA saddle was a holy grail - I had a 1986 RA bought new in 1987 with a blue saddle that lasted me very well until 2002 when...
- newbankgyratory 13 hours 11 min ago
Solution: Put these up everywhere. Source: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/traffic-signs
- Rendel Harris 14 hours 8 min ago
Glad you like it - this week was the first proper commuting week since I got it, 250kms nice and warm but not boiled, indeed - and when the...
Add new comment
18 comments
I'd hazard a guess that the perception of more hazard now is caused by the large increase in traffic.
Far more pleasant to ride on quiet roads but not necessarily safer.
In essence any efforts of government towards road safety have been on the back of motor companies with air bags and driver aids. It has merely got safer to be an idiot, which I'd argue has only fuelled the mind set to drive faster as you're safer in a modern car than one made ten years ago.
No legislation to protect the vulnerable along with the ability to clock up 30+ points on your licence and speed camera location alerts to defeat the point of having them (complete own goal on safety) means the oppressive in steel cages continue to kill those without cages around them.
I no longer ride to work and do most training indoors. Had enough of being hit and considered as indispensable. Bring on the national obesity crisis, government deserves it!
One reason why car occupant injuries have declined so much has to be the increasing numbers (as a percentage of total cars on the road) of cars with airbags. I can imagine the outcry if we were all told we had to wear anti-collision suits while cycling. Anyway, car drivers might cause more crashes with cyclists just to go hysterical at the sight of another Michelin man bouncing down the road....
John, I think the reason there's a perception that women make up a large portion of KSIs is because in London they do represent a high proportion of fatalities, and this seems to have been extrapolated to the rest of the UK. I don't know figures off the top of my head though unfortunately. Why this is the case in London would be interesting to know. Perhaps the proportion of female cyclists there is higher than the rest of the UK.
My perception is that the roads in London require a lot more concentration and awareness. I don't think that women give it any more or any less (I think the level of road awareness is generally woeful). But that men exert themselves on the road more - whether it be breaking a red light or accelerating away from a junction.
What scares me about the women on bikes is that lack of road awareness is usually coupled with a grossley inappropriate bike which is over geared and heavy. Hardly the thing that enables you to escape a trucks blind spot if inadvertently and dangerously caught in there. To be fair though, the impetuous actions of men probably put them in as much danger, but more through their own idiocy. I have no idea if men or women are more at risk in London though.
"While things have clearly improved for pedestrians and car occupants, the roads have become more hazardous for cyclists."
If this were one of the daily newsrags, or even the BBC, a causative link would be drawn between the two statements. Actually, come to think of it...
The '10 year test' - wasn't that what the original MoT was called - anyway I would agree it could equally be applied to the drivers/riders as the vehicles
I think the prospect of a test for road users (pass or fail style) would be very unpopular but an 'assessment' (obligatory but advisory) might be more acceptable.
Meanwhile I hope, like the excellent example quoted above, I have the good sense to quit when I no longer have what it takes
In fact it was NOT much more dangerous to cycle in the mid 1930s.
The reasons for the decline in cycling deaths since then is (as referred to) a cut by about 60 -80% in the amount of cycling, and abopve all a massive increase in the quality of trauma care.
On top of that cyclists were far less careful - because you didn't have to be. People always adapt to the conditions they find themselves in, depending on their perception of risk (risk compensation). people cycled on all kinds of roads which nowadays they are too scared to ride on. Similarly, the smaller numbers of motorists were less vigilant because there was far less danger.
Add that all up and the supposed progress we have looks less impressive. See this about how we can actually measure danger: http://rdrf.org.uk/2013/11/15/if-we-want-safer-roads-for-cycling-we-have...
You're probably right about that. I do get a bit irritated by people complaining how cycling seems to be getting more dangerous - the statistics show otherwise. More improvement could be achieved for sure but it's important to recognise that peak fatality levels on the UK network, for cyclists included, happened in the 1970s.
Data from the 30s didn't specifically identify particular road user groups. But the death rate on the UK network is now lower than it was in 1926 when records began. Bear in mind motor vehicles in the 30s had terrible brakes, many heavy vehicles still used solid tyres with even worse braking, plus there was no driving test, no restrictions on drink driving and vehicle condition could be extremely poor. Horse drawn transport was also very dangerous, with drays in poor condition, minimal brakes and often the horse had more sense than the drunk supposedly in charge.
The good old days were actually pretty bad.
And yet I was allowed to cycle freely in my early teens in the early 60s. I regularly rode to school on an A road, which is now intimidating to me, and I would hesitate to allow an eleven year old to do this nowadays. By all reports children had more freedom again in the thirties. You may be irritated by people who think cycling is getting more dangerous, but you should consider the possibilty that they are right, and it is precisely that estimate of danger which keeps the cycling death rate down. The idea that the roads are getting more dangerous is very widespread and often expressed. Unless the number of deaths can be relared to exposure it is not a good measure of danger.
The Brake/Churchill survey also reported here shows that most people don't think the roads are very safe these days. Things must have been terrible if they really were much more dangerous in the thirties.
And I was allowed to cycle to school in the 70s. One road I had to cross was particularly dangerous. There was a serious incident involving a child on that stretch of road at least once/year, including several fatalities. Most were pedestrian deaths.
The statistics on cycle fatalities simply don't bear out the feeling that cycling is getting more dangerous. I've got comparable statistics for Germany and the death rate amongst cyclists was in the thousands in the 70s compared with now. Yes, more people cycled then but the data also shows the risk/km travelled was significantly higher.
Awareness of risk is far greater now than it ever was, while reporting of serious traffic incidents is more effective and widespread. In the bad old days, road deaths were rarely reported on simply because there were so many.
wow, 1,500+ deaths in 1934, I know there were a lot more people on bikes, but there were a lot fewer cars, and a lot less road users in general, that's a pretty scary figure (not that the current figures are exactly great reading)
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/history-of-road-safety-and-the-driving-test
Now you see why the highway code and driving tests were introduced in the 30's. Have a look at Belgium to see what happens if you don't have driving tests. They only introduced compulsory tests in 1977! which means plenty of people driving who have never sat a test.
And there is an increasing number of people in Britain who have never passed a test either. I worked with a guy who was fond of telling us how he bought his license in a different country and exchanged it for one here.
A family friend got a driving licence without having to pass a test, because she was required to drive to support the war effort in the 40s.
However, she decided that it was important to be properly qualified to drive, so took (and passed) her advanced driving test a couple of times over the years. She continued driving (safely) well into her 80s before deciding for herself that it was time to stop (while still in very good health and in full possession of all her faculties).
Would be quite a different world if all road users maintained this kind of perspective.
I recently trained to ride a motorcycle, over 20 years after I had passed my driving test. I found the process of being taught again to think about road conditions, and from the perspective of a different kind of road user, really very interesting and useful. Makes me think about the road situations in a fresh way when I am back in the car or on my (pedal) bike.
Whilst a nightmare to put into practice, I can certainly see the benefit of drivers having to undergo some form of training/testing every 1-2 decades.
I would suggest that even every 10 years would be too infrequent, but would be a step in the right direction. Driving is not a right, and should never be seen as one. Problem we have is that driving is seen as a right and too many complain when they get caught breaking the law, the common refrain, "why aren't you catching real criminals."
That speeding, illegal parking, dangerous driving, do have consequences, do impact on the quality of life, well that is ignored.
Cyclists made up 11% of all road casualties, yet make up only 1% of the road users in the UK. The comparison in the second graph with other transit methods shows the stark reality - every other form of transport is becoming safer, even if you compare 2013 with 2012 overall figures (KSI) were up 18%. Every other mode was down by at least 18%.