Safety in Numbers

The online blog Cycling in Singapore has noted from some websites that as bicycle ridership increases, the number of fatalities decreases.

Statistics show that in 1998, daily ridership in New York City was 80,000 and the number of casualties was 5000. However, when ridership doubled to 160,000 in 2007, the number of casualties decreased to around 2500. That means when the number of people cycling doubles, the number of casualties drops by half.



Photo: Streetsblog.org

Another blog (How We Drive) where the picture came from, also reported the following:

1. London has seen a 91% increase in cycling since 2000 and a 33% fall in cycle casualties since 1994-98. This means that cycling in the city is 2.9 times safer than it was previously.

2. The Netherlands has witnessed a 45% increase in cycling from 1980-2005 and a 58% decrease in cyclist fatalities.

So what does this mean? The blog Cycling in Singapore says that just because cycling seems dangerous in Singapore, the safety in numbers argument reassures us that we are not being irresponsible to promote more cycling, because the more people use bicycles the safer it will become for each individual bicycle user.

I think the implications of the "safety in numbers" effect goes beyond that. The benefits of cycling is already well proven. Individuals who cycle often save time, money, and get healthier. However, each additional individual who cycles raises the level of benefits for each and every bicycle user, although the user himself does not directly benefit from it. It is therefore wise for the government itself to promote cycling as a lifestyle, form of transportation, and a way of life.