Making Walking and Cycling Safer: lessons for Australia from the Netherlands experience.

By Alan A Parker. Secretary of the Town and Country Planning Association, 50 Stirling St Footscray Vic 3011 Email: alanpar@labyrinth.net.au

Abstract

Introduction

Dutch cities are rightly famous for being bicycle friendly and the transport data confirm that popular perception. In 1996 28% of all trips were made by bicycle, more bicycle trips were made by women than men and the elderly made 20% of all their trips by bicycle. (Pucher and Dijkstra 2000). The data also reveal that, compared to Australian cities, Dutch cities are also pedestrian friendly, safer and more secure for all road users and provide more transport choices for children, female and elderly travellers. Most disabled people, especially wheel chair users, find it a lot easier and less hazardous to get around. (Parker 2001 ) In 1995 46% of all trips in the Netherlands were made by either walking or riding bicycles, the highest level of non-motorised travel in the entire OECD. (see Figure 1 ) and this paper describes the national planning measures responsible for this. Australia had the third lowest level of non-motorised travel in the OECD and the reasons for that are also described.

The primary objective of this paper is to show how the the Dutch have achieved synergetic joint outcomes in the areas of road safety, health, and the reduction of air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, which is perhaps second to none. This paper indicates that, as both Sweden and the Netherlands are world leaders in national environmental planning, (Yencken and Wilkinson 2000) it seems likely that adopting the Swedish Zero Road toll vision for Australia will only be practical within the context of a coordinated national environmental plan ?

For 25 years pedestrian and bicyclist safety have had a much higher priority in the Netherlands than Australia (Parker 2001) but over the last ten years that priority has been reinforced by a coordinated system of national environment planning. The high level of non-motorised travel in the Netherlands is not accidental nor the result of Dutch culture but of a whole range of integrated planning measures designed to create a more sustainable and safer transport system. Indeed the National Environment and Policy Plan (N.E.P.P ) that drives national planning, involves all government agencies, industry and other groups and updated every four years so as to achieve sustainability by 2010.

Supporting the Dutch NEPP is a national road safety policy which in practice results in fewer and fewer road users being exposed to injurious mechanical forces in collisions that produce death or crippling injuries. The Dutch have a "sustainable road safety philosophy" that recognises the vulnerability of non-motorised road users and gives priority to their safety needs in such a way as that high level of non- motorised travel is maintained. (Corben 1998)

However there are also car related safety factors involved. The Dutch car fleet has many more newer car and smaller cars with the rounded frontages found in newer car designs. The"green tax laws" in the NEPP have resulted in far fewer old cars and four wheel drives and there are no pedestrian crippling devices like bullbars fitted to the front of them. These pedestrian friendly features are particularly beneficial when cars are driven at lower speeds in built up areas where most pedestrian accidents occur and when there is more rigorous traffic law enforcement. The Dutch car fleet is therefore is more pedestrian friendly than the Australian car fleet and contributes significantly to the low pedestrian and bicycle death rate per million km travelled.

As a result of the huge demand for bicycle facilities pedestrians have benefited greatly from the upgrading of most road intersections in a way that has reduced vehicle speeds and made them safer for all non-motorised users. There are side by side traffic lighted crossings for cyclists and pedestrians on main roads with conveniently situated button actuators and mini signal lights between the footpath and bikepath. There are central refuges. at most unsignalised crossings with pedestrian routes, or access points to residential precincts. The widespread implementation of the Dutch Bikeway design manual (CROW 1993 A) has been of great benefit to both pedestrians and cyclists.

No analysis of the Dutch experience would be complete without taking into account the views of Australian community representatives who have cycled and walked extensively in the Netherlands and have informed views on what can be applied to Australia. Hence the inclusion of the common road safety policy recommendations of the Bicycle Federation of Australia and the Pedestrian Council of Australia at the end of this paper.

Comparing 'urban Australia' and the Netherlands

The Netherlands cannot be compared with the sparsely populated inland continent of Australia which is mostly bush, desert and forest. Indeed 90% of 7.8 million square km of continental Australia is mostly uninhabited and is 200 times larger than the Netherlands. However, some comparisons are possible if like is compared with like. Here we compare two areas of land almost the same size with almost the same population .That is urban Australia where 85% of Australians live (in cities of 10,000 population or more) is compared with all the Netherlands.which have many similar characteristics. Even so Figures 1, 5, 6 and 7 use data for all of Australia but that is reasonable given that 95% of pedestrian fatalities are in urban areas.

As the Australian transport data base regarding motor vehicles is robust we can draw some very firm conclusions about the comparative efficiency of the two car fleets and the role of non-motorised trips in substituting for a high proportion of short and mostly dirty car trips made with cold start engines. The 38 comparative data items for Urban Australia and The Netherlands referred to throughout this paper are collated in a table (see Appendix 1). 1996 was selected as the year for comparison because of the almost identical population that year. Also the availability of 1996 data make it very easy to show the efficiency and cleanliness of the Dutch passenger car fleet.

A secondary objective of this comparison is too make it clear that even though the average density of Dutch cities is now three times that of the Australian capital cities (Kenworthy et all 1997) encouraging safe non-motorised travel is much more complex and difficult to achieve than merely increasing urban density through urban consolidation and similar programs. Higher densities are just one of the preconditions for high levels of non motorised travel. Indeed there are many other cities, in many other countries, that have similar high densities but far lower levels of non-motorised travel and high levels of greenhouse gas emissions. Frankfurt and Hamburg and London are just three examples.

The complementary roles of Walking and Cycling

Dutch transport planners clearly understand that in an age of increasing mobility and time scarcity pedestrians will take to cars unless they are given the option of safe cycling trips for short distances or a bike/rail trips for long journeys. (Wellemen 1999) It would sensible to regard the 'real cyclist' for planning purposes as the everyday cyclist. Like the typical European office worker in his work clothes and often riding a wreck of bike with a lady frame and upright handle bars; or a woman cycling home from the shops with bike carrier full of food, or maybe a child on a carrier.

The reality is that the safe bikeways that men and women choose to use every day in the Netherlands are also well used by racing and touring cyclists. The Dutch view that the 'real cyclist' is actually an ordinary pedestrian on two wheels who wants a more convenient way to get from A to B for trip of 1 to 3 km. If we want to encourage non-motorised travel generally in Australia it makes good sense to regard the bicycle as a pedestrian vehicle. If pedestrians are not given a safe cycling option Australian experience shows they will use cars instead.

The most important lesson to learn from the Dutch experience is just how difficult it is to increase the level of non-motorised travel.

The discouragement of walking and cycling in Australia

In Australia the practice in recent years of subsidising large car use as part of the salary package, has resulted in, car dependency for 'all trips' including the trip to work and school.(Hawes 1999). The over use of the motor car and the decline of informal car sharing for the trip to work from 1976 results in single occupant cars causing severe congestion in cities.

In Victoria trips to school (Figure 2) show a large decline in walking and cycling and this is typical of other states. For example in Adelaide in 1981 only 24% of Adelaide’s children were being chauffeured to school and 55% of them either walked (42%) or cycled (14%). By 1997 60% of Adelaide’s children were being chauffeured to school and only 24.5 % of them either walked (20.5%) or cycled (4.5 %).(ABS 1997)

Furthermore the 1976 to 1996 Census data for the journey to work in urban Australia (See Figure 3) suggest that the trends shown will continue for many years to at least 2001. On average three times as many men will continue to ride a bicycle as women because of the actual and perceived hazards.(Parker 2000) and that is not the case in the Netherlands where as many women cycle to work as men.

There are no official national data for 'all trips' made in urban Australia except for 'trip to work' data from the ABS Census (see Figure 3). Melbourne data are the nearest we will get to a surrogate national indicator. (see left side graph on Figure 4 ) Note that from 1978 to 1996 the decline of the more sustainable transport modes in the Netherlands is far less than for Melbourne. Notably the 28% of bicycle trips in the Netherlands compared to 2% in Melbourne.

Significantly, after 18 years, bicycle trip making has been maintained at a high level in the Netherlands but only 2 % of all trips are made by bicycle in urban Australia. The problem is the lack of national data for Australia. The ups and downs do show trends that show changes over time. However what the specific percentage figures for walking are in urban Australia we do not know. This writer assumes that Melbourne trends for all walking trips will be similar to that for urban Australia as this is the case for walking trips to work. If that assumption is correct the rate of decline for walking trips was far less in the Netherlands than urban Australia. There has been a large decline in the percentage of public transport trips in Melbourne and a slight increase in the Netherlands so that by 1996 the Netherlands had proportionally more public transport trips. The decline of public transport in Melbourne for the trip to work is similar to the trends for urban Australia (see Figure 3).

Dutch road safety policy is based on the philosophy of "sustainable road safety" which in practice results in fewer road users being exposed to mechanical forces in collisions that produce death or crippling injuries. As a result of traffic calming since the early 1970s and there are now 6,500 "Woonerfs", that is safe local streets where cars can only travel at 12 kph or less. and 30 kph limits in all other residential precincts.

Even though elderly cyclists and pedestrians are far more susceptible to dying due to injuries when run over, the Dutch are not deterred from making these trips, as are many elderly Australians and Americans. (Pucher and Dijkstra 2000).The disabled use their small electric vehicles on bikepaths and in residential areas (Parker 2000).

The philosophy of "sustainable road safety" recognises the vulnerability of non-motorised road users and gives priority to their safety needs. This is why, amongst other things, the default speed limit on undivided main roads in built up areas is 50 kph (Corben 1998). As Corben puts it:-

"they are providing more pedestrian crossings and accepting that 'the car' is no longer sacred"......"designating appropriate road function, while important in managing all types of road traffic, could be especially effective in improving pedestrian safety...they will be upgrading main roads that tend towards a flow function and downgrading main roads with mixed flow and access functions".

In addition most main roads have separate bicycle paths separate from the footpath and in places where that is not possible bikelanes are provided subject to there being a maximum speed limit of 50 km/hr . Pedestrian zones that are found in all Dutch cities often take in much of the city centre. (Pucher and Dijkstra 2000) The philosophy of "sustainable road safety" informs the Dutch approach to road hierarchy in the central area of cities. They integrate the provision of bicycle and pedestrian facilities as part of an overall plan to constrain motor vehicle traffic, restrict car parking (CROW 1994) and provide short cuts for walkers and cyclists (CROW 1993 A).

Developing one way street systems that remain as two-way routes for cyclists has freed up road lanes in the arterial road network for pedestrian use and to increase bicycle and public transport access. Some of the road lanes and on-street parking spaces are removed and replaced with bikeways, bicycle parking bays, pedestrian malls, and tram and bus lanes in car free areas. All these measures constrain car use because they effectively increase the mesh size of the arterial road network so that driving is less convenient and cycling is more convenient.

Figure 5 shows that the Dutch have one of the lowest road death rates per 100,000 population in the OECD. It is 30% less than Australian death rate, despite the high level of bicycle use ( 28% of all trips) and the absence of compulsory helmet wearing legislation, in the Netherlands. However there is a problem with using Figure 5 as an indicator as we are comparing the death rate for urban Australia. The death rate is much lower being 6% less than the Netherlands because half the Australian motor vehicle fatalities are in rural areas.(see the table in the appendix.)

Even so, nearly all the Australian pedestrian fatalities are in urban areas so we can use the national pedestrian death rates on Figure 6 as an indicator. The large reduction in the pedestrian death rate per 100,000 population from 1965 to 1998 shows that in both urban Australia and the Netherlands there has been a great improvement in pedestrian safety. The problem with Figure 6 is that pedestrian trips as a percentage of all trips has been around 18% in the Netherlands since 1980 to 1998 and the walk just as far as they did 20 years ago. Whereas the percentage of Australian walk trips has decreased over this period from around 24% to 16%. Figure 6 tells us that the Dutch are making walking much safer because they are still walking as much as they did in 1980 (Wellemen 1999) All we can say about the Australian death rate per 100,000 population is that it was around 50% higher in 1965 and since 1979 has been around 150% higher. However we cannot use Figure 6 as a measure of Australian pedestrian safety trends because Australian pedestrians are walking much less than they did twenty years ago.

The only useful bench marking measure for Australian pedestrian (and bicycle) safety is to measure deaths per distance travelled. In Australia that is problem because we do not know the reduction in both the proportion or length of all trips over the last 20 years. Data on Australian trips to work and school are reliable, but they do not tell us about changes in the per capita distance walked, nor do we know the percentage of all trips or the decline in distance walked. We know that there is much less walking done according several minor studies in the cities or states, that are not comparable with one another, and that is all.

The problem in Australia there is no reliable national date for either the percentage of all trips or the distance travelled. The only time the the national death rate per 100 million kms travelled was measured was in 1985 and that is shown on Figure 7 . In 1985 walking was 5 times safer in the Netherlands than Australia in 1985 and cycling was over twice as safe. The Australian death rate per million km walked in 1985 was appalling and this writer assumes it now much worse than the Dutch rate?.

Perhaps the reason for the absence of national data in Australia is due to the influence of the roads lobby. ATSB staff on many occasions have state that the way to make walking and cycling safe is to substitute as many walking and bicycle trips with car trips as is physically practical. Moreover they assume that these walking and cycling are safety problems when in fact (as this paper shows) they are part of a solution designed to create as sustainable urban passenger transport system in the Netherlands. Indeed, the policy of the ATSB is contrary to many states and the commonwealths official environment and greenhouse gas policies. It would be prudent for the ATSB to collect the data because many people are suggesting that roads lobby interests are improperly influencing national road safety policy and undermining GHG and air pollution reduction policies. This paper shows that the Dutch equivalent to the ATSB can integrate its policies with that of other agencies in working towards common national goals and that is what should happen here.

Road user education and enforcement policy in the Netherlands

Two other radical Dutch approaches that improve the safety of walkers and cyclists are innovations in driver and rider education and new traffic laws that recognise the vulnerability of non-motorised users.

Driving training in the Netherlands is more relevant to the safety needs of cyclists and pedestrians than in Australia because it enables drivers to anticipate unsafe and illegal behaviour by cyclists and pedestrians. By the age of ten every child has received extensive instruction on safe walking and bicycling practice.(Pucher and Dijkstra 2000).

Fortunately Australia also educates young children, the Bike-Ed program is promoted nationally but needs more emphasis on the on-road elements in the program.

Dutch traffic law was changed in 1998 regarding accidents involving cyclists and pedestrians so that motorists are now considered to be wholly at fault. Having the right of way does not excuse motorists from hitting cyclists and pedestrians and the courts require that motorists should anticipate unsafe walking and cycling behaviour. That applies even to illegal behaviour and insurance companies pay damages to cyclists and pedestrians automatically regardless of guilt. It is much safer crossing Dutch roads in built up areas because the lower speed limits which are more rigorously enforced, with no leeway given to offending drivers. Note that in Australia offending drivers are rarely charged by the traffic police unless they are 8kph to 12kph above the default limit.(varies from State to State) Finally, the punishment of driving offenders is more severe in the Netherlands (Pucher and Dijkstra 2000)(Harland 2000)

Figure 8 Map showing the Randstaat "Green Heart" and most Dutch cities

The Dutch approach to sustainable land use and spatial planning

Most of major cities of the Netherlands are shown on Figure 9 and are on the edge of an open scenic area called the Randstad (Green Heart) which mostly lies below the level of the North Sea as result of 700 years of land reclamation and the building of great dikes. The long term climatic threat of rising sea levels is well understood by the Dutch people.

For the Dutch the elimination of car dependent urban sprawl and preservation of non urban land for farming and recreation is not really a matter of choice but of environmental necessity; after all, it is a very small country threatened by rising North sea levels and flooding from European rivers due to climate change.

Sixteen million Dutch have to do everything they need to do in the space occupied by 16 million Australian city dwellers, which amount to 34.400 square km. Refer to Appendix 1. So it is not surprising that there is a long standing consensus in the bureaucracy and government that what little land they have must be carefully cared for and preserved for future generations. In the historic cities there are powerful resident action groups only too aware that the only way to fit in more car traffic would be to fill in many of the canals and make them into roads and that is not going to happen because of the Dutch peoples' civic pride in their historic buildings. For all these reasons spatial planning will not be delegated by government to private developers; it is much too important for that to happen. (Parker 2000)

Nearly all residential and urban development is subject to "spatial planning controls" that exist for all levels of government. In Australia there is nothing comparable to the long term "spatial planning" and housing policy that has been creating the ‘compact urbanisation’ at the edge of existing Dutch cities since the 1970s. This is not just a policy of increasing the average density but to do it in such a way that it reduces the need to travel by car and this has greatly contributed to bikeway networks being so heavily used. (N.S.P.A. 1997)

The crucial industrial and commercial spatial planning policy is to put the "right business in the right place". For example outer urban super markets surrounded by hectares of car parking or low rise, low density, new universities which are conveniently accessible only by car, are no longer built. Instead there are compact local shopping areas within walking distance or multi story campuses built alongside rail lines and if there is no local station they build one.

The Dutch experience shows that letting private property developers, large retailing organisations and the road building agencies have too much control over urban planning is unsustainable and inequitable. From a demand management perspective aimed at encouraging the non-motorised modes this form of development is inherently unsustainable.

How to safely deploy cyclists and pedestrians to "green' the car fleet

Urban Australia and the Netherlands have the following similar characteristics in 1996.

1. Both areas have a population of approximately 15.6 million

2. Both areas cover around 34,300 square kilometres of land.

3. Both areas had the same standard of living; per capita GDP of around $20,250

4. Similar per capita travel by all modes on an average weekday. The average Dutch person travels 35 kms which is only only 2.5 km less (7%) than the average Australian.

5. Similar proportion of single occupant car users for all trips in both countries; 48% in Australia and 43% in the Netherlands.

6. Similar per capita travel by car passengers for all purposes on the average work day; Dutch car passengers travel only 10% less (1.1 km) than Australians.

There were also some demographic differences in 1996. The Dutch rate of population growth has been lower for many years resulting in 14% more Dutch households.There is a greater proportion of older people living in smaller households, who make around 25 % of their trips by bicycle. Also given the above similarities we need to find out why there was such a large difference in transport system performance in 1996 which resulted in the Dutch car fleet producing fewer emissions.

This improvement in Dutch car fleet performance is clearly only partly due to the fact that per capita travel by car drivers on the average work day was only 3.6 km less (18%). Nearly all the reduction in car travel, but only part of the huge emissions reduction, was due to the following differences-

1. 810% (2.6 km) increase in average per capita bicycle travel every weekday.

2. 73% (0.4 km) increase in average per capita distance walked.

3. 25% fewer Dutch car trips were less than 2.5 km, than in urban Australia (45%)

4. 50 % (1.5 km ) more per workday trips were made by public transport.

5. Twice as many Dutch households are without a car.

These data suggest that bicycles and walking substitute for many short car trips in the Netherlands. As most short car trips are made with cold engines which are very dirty this reduces a large proportion of polluting emissions. This certainly accounts for a significant proportion of emission reductions and the Dutch when calculating the emission reduction potential of new bicycle facilities make the assumption that car emissions during short trips are double those of long trips.(C.R.O.W.1993)

It seems likely that bicycle and walking trips in the Netherlands are substituting for around 10 billion car kms per year which is a very significant reduction in emissions and fuel consumption. Given that the Dutch only travelled 2.5 km less each workday by all modes than Australians these are large reductions indeed. Calculating the emission reduction potential of bicycles in Australia is beyond the scope of this paper. Even so the data on Figures 9 and 10 indicate a need to calculate that potential and to collect data for that purpose.

The objective here is to draw attention to all of the factors responsible for the improved performance of the Dutch car fleet. The 28% reduction in the energy use (MJ/vehicle km) of the average car in the Dutch car fleet in 1996 is also assisted by the incentive of petrol being twice as expensive. However, it is not that simple and there are several other factors that contribute to the reduced emissions in 1996:-

1. 41% of passenger cars are powered by LPG which produces 14 % less GHG and significantly less air pollution.

2. There are 24 % fewer cars in the Dutch car fleet than the urban Australian car fleet and the average car is smaller and uses 26% less fuel. There have policies in place for several years that encourage the purchase of new fuel efficient car.

3. Only 23% of the Dutch car fleet was older than 10 years compared to 43% of the Australian car fleet. Even though the average Dutch car travels 3,170 km more each year Australia has many more old cars in its fleet many of which may not be used very much by the people that own them but their aggregate use is relatively and to accelerate the scrappage rates of old dirty cars in Australia would significantly reduce emissions (BTCE 1996) This is not a problem in the the Netherlands because it has a low level of multiple car ownership with 60% fewer households with two cars and 90% fewer households with three or more cars and bicycles can safely be used instead of addition household cars for many purposes.

4. Public transport patronage has maintained market share in the two decades prior to 1996 and has increased considerably since then.

There is a lot of commuting by workers and students between the Randstad cities by express train. Parked at each of the central rail stations there are between 2000 and 6000 (Parker 2000) and bike/rail trips replace many long intercity commuter trips by car. Bicycles make better use of Dutch public transport fleet, because bicycles substitute for so many short bus trips and local train trips. This means that buses and trains are better utilised with less peak loading in the rush hours. The better rail service that increasing bicycle access to stations has generated means that pedestrians who walk or access stations by buses have better services. Again the symbiotic relation between walking and cycling reveals itself.

For the future the Dutch have programs and infrastructure in place so as to increase non-motorised trip substitution for short car trips to 16 billion km per year by the year 2010. (Wellemen 1999) Note that that planned increase is around 20%. That is more than the total bicycle/walking km in urban Australia in 1996. Not only that but the relative energy efficiency of the Dutch car will also be accelerated by the more rapid replacement of cars in the Dutch car fleet and the fact that Dutch new cars are on average 14% more energy efficient than new Australian cars. As shown on Figure 2, Dutch car fleet per capita carbon dioxide emissions will reduce even further to around one third of the urban Australian car fleet by 2010.

Figures 2 and 3 quantify what has happened and is likely to happen from 1990 to 2010 in the Netherlands. Unfortunately the BTCE data for Australia is likely to be a conservative under estimate from 1996 to 2010. Especially given the unpredicted increase in the proportion of high performance cars and four wheel drives in the Australian car fleet since 1996 and car industry predictions of increased sales to come.

What is clear from the Netherlands experience is that the best way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants by encouraging walking and cycling and at the same time reduce road accidents is to recognise the need to both provide extensive bicycle and pedestrian facilities and to actively constrain car use and urban sprawl simultaneously It is practical to increase the level of non-motorised travel using the integrated Dutch approach but not with the piecemeal and band aid measures applied in Australia or the lack of a comprehensive transport data base.

The safety benefits of the Dutch National Environment and Policy Plans

Due to the implementation of three successive Dutch National Environment and Policy Plans (NEPPS 1,2 and 3) over the last 12 years. The Dutch car fleet not only has proportionally more safer cars, these cars are driven at lower speeds in built up areas which is much safer for cyclists and pedestrians and a higher proportion of the population can use safer and more sustainable forms of transportation.

Furthermore The NEPPs have contributed to the build up of a car fleet with an average vehicle fuel consumption 26% less than the average car in the Australian urban car fleet and the implementation of the Bicycle Master Plan. Unlike Australia the Netherlands has been moving slowly towards Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD). 1998) The central ESD goal of N.E.P.P 3 is:-

"decoupling economic growth from the growth in fuel consumption and use of non renewable resources which is seen as both a sound economic and environmental strategy".

As the NEPPs evolved they improved and were better targeted.NEPP 3 makes it very clear why non-motorised travel is considered to be so important and why the car which in the 1960 and 1970s years was regarded as a sacred cow, as it still is in Australia, is now subject to many regulatory constraints: The transport objectives of the NEPP are:-

• Vehicles must be as clean, quiet, safe and economical as possible.

• The choice of mode for passenger transport must result in the lowest possible energy consumption and least possible pollution.

• The locations where people live shop, work and spend their leisure time will be coordinated in such a way that the need to travel is minimised.

1. The greening of the tax system, whereby there is a shift from the taxation of labour to the taxation of environmentally harmful activities. Direct taxation of wages and incomes will be reduced while taxes on consumption will be increased. (Depending on the environmental implications of that consumption).

2. Increase in fuel tax rates (1995); increase the variable component of motoring costs by increasing excise duty on motor fuels (1997). Petrol costs A$1.60c per litre at the pump.

3. Value-added tax incentives for employers to provide bicycles (1996) Reimbursement of cycle commuting costs in wages and income tax (1997)

4. Increase in scope and magnitude of the tax allowance for trips to work travel costs by means of public transport and the tax free reimbursement of public transport costs in wages and income tax (1997); increased allowance (1998)

5. Freeze on car commuting tax allowance (1997)

6. Incentives for tele-working in wages and income tax (1997) increased concessions (1998)

7. Widening and simplification of wages and income tax concessions for car pooling (1998)

8. The government is studying the scope for incorporating an environmental component in the excise levied on new vehicles and the annual vehicle tax so as to provide incentives for the purchase of clean, energy-efficient cars, and to optimise the fuel mix.

An example of World best practice: the Dutch Bicycle Master Plan (BMP)

There are far fewer kilometres bikelanes than kilometres of bicycle paths and that there are relatively few "shared footways" particularly in built up urban areas. Most bikeway networks are safe and provide continuous routes for cyclists of all ages and avoid conflict with pedestrians in built up areas because they are alongside separate footpaths and separate signalised crossings at main road intersections.(Parker 1998 A) That has been the pattern of bicycle network provision for 40 years and fact that it has always been a sound approach for all non-motorised travellers has been confirmed by a recent UK study of shared footways revealed that wheel chair users and the frail and aged found shared footways intimidating.(Davies and Sharpe 2000) The Dutch avoided this problem by building separate one way bicycle paths on both sides of main roads in built up areas.

Studies conducted for the BMP have dispelled the myth that cycling is inherently unsafe compared to driving. For example if we compare like with like, that is car drivers and bicycle riders in the same age group, we find that young drivers of 18 to 24 years of age are more at risk than bicycle riders per million km travelled (Wellemen 1999). We have data to make such a comparison in Australia. but for some reason like has never compared with like and the casualties of cyclists of all ages has been unfavourable compared with the car casualties.

In comparison to the Dutch BMP the Australian National Bicycle Strategy 1999-2004 (Austroads 1999 A) has little substance. The Strategy states that its goal is to "double bicycle use by 2004" and that one of the objectives is to "reduce the casualty rate". Data do not exist that can tell us what the national level of bicycle use is for all trips or the death rate or serious injury rate per 100 kms cycled in 1999. A process of data collection is not in place that could establish the benchmark data for cycling in 1999. The Strategy to double bicycle use by 2004 when the use of the bicycle by children to go to school has reduced significantly in the last 15 years is not explained.

The English language version of the Dutch bikeway design manual (CROW 1993 B) and the BMP are both targeted at a European audience.(Welleman 1999) What is not so obvious to the Australian or American reader is that there are bikeway shortcuts through the entire Dutch road system for cyclists, pedestrians and often moped users in both rural and urban areas in a comprehensive national network which provides continuous safe routes.

There are very few multilane roundabouts in built up areas because they are dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians.(C.R.O.W 1993 C) instead they have low speed single lane roundabouts on urban main roads that are much safer. Some have separate paths or coloured bikelanes some of which are protected by high concrete kerbs called "hedgehogs. (Parker 1998 C).There are also service roads designated as bikeways with intersection crossings that clearly show areas where cyclists and pedestrians have the right of way.

Synergetic joint outcomes in the areas of road safety, health and the environment.

The overall historical trends for bicycling in six cities including Melbourne and Amsterdam are shown on Figure 12. The European data was taken from the historical overview and evaluation of the BMP (Wellemen 1999) Some progress has been made in Melbourne but it is invisible at the scale shown for last decade, (as it would be for other Australian capital cities). Figure 12 shows a growth in bicycle use in both Amsterdam and Stockholm since the mid 1970s and both these cities have a much better road safety record for all road users than Melbourne.This suggests as does Figure 1 that as both Sweden and the Netherlands are world leaders in national environmental planning, (Yencken and Wilkinson 2000) it seems likely that adopting the Swedish Zero Road toll vision for Australia will only be practical within the context of a coordinated national environmental plan.

Both Amsterdam and Stockholm have achieved synergetic joint outcomes in the areas of road safety, and the environment which is perhaps second to none. However further more detailed studies beyond the scope of this paper indicate that there are also large health benefits (NHMRC 1997))According to (World Health Organisation 1999) the lack of physical activity is one of the major risk factors for coronary heart disease, which the leading cause of mortality in the developed world . On the other hand, walking and cycling as daily activities can promote health by providing physical activity, as well decreasing noise and air pollution. The health benefits of regular physical activity are summarised by the WHO as:

1. 50% reduction in the risk of developing coronary heart diseases (i.e. a similar effect to not smoking);

2. 50% reduction in the risk of developing adult diabetes;

3. 50% reduction in the risk of becoming obese;

4. 30% reduction in the risk of developing hypertension;

5. 10/8 mm Hg decline in blood pressure in hypertensive subjects (i.e. a similar effect to that obtained from anti hypertensive drugs).

6. Other effects include reduced osteoporosis, relief of symptoms of depression and anxiety, and the prevention of falls in the elderly.

Common PCA and BFA policy recommendations regarding Road safety.

BFA recommendations on environmental policy to enhance safety and encourage walking and cycling

Table 1. Comparisons between Australia and the Netherlands

©Copyright 2001 Bicycle Federation of Australia Inc.