CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News

"the 10% vision, as currently measured, is unlikely to be achieved by 2020"

(36 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. chdot
    Admin

    "
    Cycling levels are increasing significantly but statistical data and stakeholder views indicate that the 10% vision, as currently measured, is unlikely to be achieved by 2020, the year marking the end of the current CAPS policy timeframe. The level of modal shift remains theoretically possible, but requires a rapid shift in resources and behaviour, with a modal shift to cycling at a speed not seen in evidence in any other country, at least when measured at a national level. This report recommends that the vision must be maintained to drive progress but additional milestones to measure success are required at a national and city level (where change can and should be more rapidly achieved).

    The focus should be for cycling to be promoted as an activity for anyone, irrespective of age, gender or income with everyday utility trips being the top priority. The evidence indicates that the greatest modal shifts at a population level are most likely to be achieved by a primary focus on short journeys in urban areas. The recommended ‘cycling for all’ approach means that other types of cycling (tourism, recreation, and sport) remain relevant to achieving the modal shift ambition. Given the primary focus on short journeys, objectives for increased modal share for cycling should make explicit the expected reduction in car travel with no conversion of walking journeys to cycling journeys.

    "www.cyclingscotland.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Second-CAPS-Progress-Report-FINAL-Cycling-Scotland.pdf

    Posted 9 years ago #
  2. Rosie
    Member

    "Cycling as an activity" rather than "a means of transport".

    Posted 9 years ago #
  3. SRD
    Moderator

    more positively:

    "A long term increase in sustained funding is required, with year-on-year increases over time towards a 10% allocation of national and council transport budgets as Edinburgh is achieving. The long term commitment to 2030 to dual carriageways between seven Scottish cities should be matched by an equally long term commitment to cycling if modal shift ambitions are to be met and sustained."

    which sounds remarkably like the POP manifesto

    Posted 9 years ago #
  4. gibbo
    Member

    The focus should be for cycling to be promoted as an activity for anyone, irrespective of age, gender or income with everyday utility trips being the top priority.

    The focus should be on making cycling safe and pleasant.

    How many years have already been wasted on the fantasy that there needs to be a shift in thinking?

    There's nothing wrong with people's thinking - people aren't dumb, they can see it's unacceptably dangerous.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  5. Rosie
    Member

    @gibbo - Yes "promoted" as if it was a brand of chocolate. You couldn't "promote" chocolate if it was likely to choke you.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  6. gibbo
    Member

    @Rosie

    It's even worse than that, because cycling has an image problem. You probably wouldn't have complete strangers hate your guts just because you eat a chocolate bar each day.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  7. "... as currently measured..."

    Expect the measure to be amended....

    Posted 9 years ago #
  8. crowriver
    Member

    @Wilmington's Cow: exactly.

    If it works for carbon emissions, why not cycling? Just change how you measure it, or just which measures are included in the total, or even how the totals are calculated.

    I'm looking forward to the SNP triumphantly announcing in a few months' time that they have met the cycling target four years early, followed by a vague statement that "much more needs to be done in the future". Then it's back to building dual carriageways!

    Posted 9 years ago #
  9. SRD
    Moderator

    have any of you actually looked at the report?

    5 years ago we would have laughed at anyone telling us this would be written by a quasi-governmental agency:

    "Priority should be given to reducing car modal share at the same time as increasing both walking and cycling modal share."

    Look at the diagram on page 20 - top of the page 'build and maintain high quality dedicated infrastructure"

    how about this on page 21:

    "The European Comparator supports a CAPS focus on short journeys. According to the report, this is where cycling is ‘most competitive with motorised modes in terms of journey times, and which most people tend to consider achievable on bike with no more than a modest amount of physical effort and with no need to change clothes’ (p.75). This does not mean to say that other types of cycling (leisure, recreation, sport, and tourism) should not be considered within the scope of CAPS. "

    Posted 9 years ago #
  10. ih
    Member

    " have any of you actually looked at the report?"

    Yep. Just read it all, and the targets will change. They will have to because the existing ones won't be met.

    There are some good things, not least the quote about reducing the modal share of car driving and the recommendation to achieve 10% of the transport spend on cycling nationally, but those will be quietly forgotten.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  11. SRD
    Moderator

    I'm not claiming they're going to meet any of their targets. but I think they fully realise that too.

    the attitude here is far more realistic and informed than anything they have ever published before.

    the original caps started with bloody behavioural change and tacked on some very vague points about infrastructuire - from memory mainly stuff about long-distance leisure routes.

    when they 'refreshed' CAPs in 2013, I said : "So the CRAPS refresh today, instead of accepting that with the current policy they will not meet any of their targets, redefines it to a 'vision' and blindly carries on with the same old failed policies."

    I think we are failing to appreciate how far we've come.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  12. Erm, SRD didn't the first CAPS, the one with targets that aren't going to be met, say similar stuff?

    I mean, I may be being cynical, and I'm happy to be proven wrong, but just what is it about this report, compared to any other report that said all the same stuff in different orders with little or no effect, that means it will happen this time?

    "Priority should be given to reducing car modal share at the same time as increasing both walking and cycling modal share"

    So you believe this report will make this happen?

    "'build and maintain high quality dedicated infrastructure"

    And this?

    "have any of you actually looked at the report?"

    Looks like the answer is yes.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  13. "So the CRAPS refresh today"

    Freudian much? ;)

    Posted 9 years ago #
  14. "I think we are failing to appreciate how far we've come"

    No, fully appreciate that, but also appreciate how far we still have to go, and how unlikely that is to happen with lovely words and little true political will, viz. Roseburn, QBC, focus on dualling roads, third forth crossing with no walking and cycling provision, ongoing problems with spaces on trains, no cyclepath alongside the tram, no cyclepath under the bypass alongside the trainline to Tweedbank, etc etc etc

    Posted 9 years ago #
  15. SRD
    Moderator

    @WC - intentional not freudian

    so we should all just give up?? go home to a burrow somewhere and hide? move to Holland?

    Yes, if they'd said some of this 5 years ago, we would be in a very different place now, but they didn't and we're not.

    they're saying it now because a concerted lobby has been active for the past 5 years, and things have changed.

    do i think they're going to come anywhere near meeting their targets? no. obviously not.

    do i think they actually understand how they might achieve it? yes. that's what the bloody report says.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  16. "so we should all just give up?? go home to a burrow somewhere and hide? move to Holland? "

    No

    Posted 9 years ago #
  17. crowriver
    Member

    "move to Holland?"

    Must admit it'd be tempting except the bit about having to learn how to speak fluent Dutch within a few years of arriving...

    It will be interesting to see if the government meets any cycling targets by say 2030 (forget 2020), even revised or finessed ones. I'll be a few short years off retirement by then, if my luck continues to hold. Perhaps we'll have some decent European style cycling infrastructure.....or perhaps not. In the meantime I'll probably just keep on taking my life, and that of my partner and children, in my hands every time we cycle anywhere.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  18. stiltskin
    Member

    Must admit it'd be tempting except the bit about having to learn how to speak fluent Dutch within a few years of arriving...
    Every Dutch person I've ever met already speaks fluent colloquial English so that ain't a problem

    Posted 9 years ago #
  19. chdot
    Admin

    "Yes, if they'd said some of this 5 years ago, we would be in a very different place now, but they didn't and we're not."

    Perhaps.

    Perhaps not.

    There is no more reason to believe the SG will 'act' on this report NOW than they would/might have 5 years ago.

    If this had been written 5 years ago, perhaps there wouldn't have been enough disquiet to cause people to create PoP.

    'We' (people who ride bikes in Edinburgh) ARE better off - but it would be hard to say that it was due to CE. CEC has had the political leadership - and plenty of sustained pressure/lobbying/support.

    Over the last 5 years CS has done some questionable (or worse) advertising campaigns - funded (and presumably approved) by SG.

    Fortunately SG has also put money into Sustrans - some of which has (match) funded infrastructure produced by LAs (particularly CEC).

    Bottom line is - SG needs to spend more money and, if any targets are supposed to be Scotland-wide, make (most) LAs do more.

    IF the latest CAP helps then GREAT.

    There is some chance it will be used by the new Transport Minister to get more money for Active Travel. Might be easier to rebalance the existing budget, but...

    Posted 9 years ago #
  20. chdot
    Admin

    "

    Meaningful messages in new #CAPS report!! --> http://ow.ly/Bas5301mgyz. They listened --> http://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/snp-s-cycling-vision-is-now-impossible-say-campaigners-1-4116230

    [2/2] That is the consultation report https://twitter.com/SpokesLothian/status/743803806685749248 Question now is will @HumzaYousaf @transcotland & @DerekMackaySNP act on it?

    "

    Posted 9 years ago #
  21. chdot
    Admin

    "

    Question now is will @HumzaYousaf @transcotland & @DerekMackaySNP act on it?

    "

    Quite

    Posted 9 years ago #
  22. crowriver
    Member

    "Every Dutch person I've ever met already speaks fluent colloquial English so that ain't a problem"

    Yeah, but if you want to work in a permanent position you are usually required to learn the language fluently within 2-3 years...

    Posted 9 years ago #
  23. gibbo
    Member

    @SRD

    the attitude here is far more realistic and informed than anything they have ever published before.

    But there's still no action. The active travel budget is still only 1.9% of the travel budget.

    Someone once said, principles aren't principles until they cost you money.

    It costs politicians nothing to say there must be more done to promote active travel.

    When they take money out the budget - and space away from cars - to create properly segregated bike lanes (rather than pink parking lanes), that'll be a sign of commitment.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  24. SRD
    Moderator

    @gibbo and everyone else

    Yes. I do understand that the budget is still pathetic.

    Do you guys really think the Svottish government is just going to randomly announce a new budget allocation to cycling, before introducing any of the necessary policy framework?

    My sense is that this is a necessary but insufficient step on the way.

    If you compare this document to the two previous - or look at the POP posts about the originals if you don't want to read them - maybe you'll understand where I'm coming from.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  25. sallyhinch
    Member

    My understanding is they can't announce anything of significance during the referendum campaign anyway...

    This is coming from Cycling Scotland, rather than the government itself, so it's not actually policy yet. But I think it's definitely an opportunity: with a new minister on board, and this report coming from the Scottish Government's own agency telling them they need to put in significant investment, now's the time to really press home this point. Remember too that the SNP are a minority government so this might be something worth lobbying your Green MSPs about ...

    Posted 9 years ago #
  26. chdot
    Admin

    "This is coming from Cycling Scotland, rather than the government itself, so it's not actually policy yet."

    "Yet"

    I suppose that's what counts as optimism!

    I HOPE you are right.

    I hope someone (Minister or key Transport Scotland figure) is thinking 'well we'll see how many people object to the latest report, and if it goes OK we'll 'adopt' some of it'.

    Is that how Government works??

    I still don't know what CS is for. (That's not the same as saying I don't see any point in it.) It's in charge of cycle training (Bikeability), but has to go along with Gov policy of delivery by volunteers. It produces advertising campaigns trying to get "behaviour change"' but presumably no longer believes these work - at least not without better infrastructure.

    It started an 'engineeing advice arm' which seemed to be in competition with Sustrans.

    Now this new CAP report almost makes it look like a pressure group. A rather well funded one, nipping the hand that feeds. Progress or diversion?

    "But I think it's definitely an opportunity: with a new minister on board, and this report coming from the Scottish Government's own agency telling them they need to put in significant investment, now's the time to really press home this point."

    Well yes.

    So 'we' should write to MSPs and the Minister saying 'you should read the new report from your arms-length agency and do something'.

    I STILL HAVEN'T READ THE REPORT

    I read the Executive Summary, it includes this -

    "

    The report does not cover scenarios of different transport governance or funding arrangements or local government restructuring. What is clear is that, regardless of Scottish Government decisions in those areas, national and local commitment to, and funding for, cycling needs to take into account the health, environmental, especially related to climate change, economic and social costs of failing to change how we travel.

    "

    Apart from the fact that that doesn't really make sense, it just says 'look, cycling isn't just transport, leisure or sport, it needs to be a key part of SG policy across all/most departments'.

    Bit like LOTS of people and groups have been saying for YEARS.

    IF this report makes THE different, then FABULOUS.

    Spokes gets 3 mentions, PoP 1 - all in the appendix.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  27. sallyhinch
    Member

    Absolutely lobby your MSPs!

    Posted 9 years ago #
  28. chdot
    Admin

    "Absolutely lobby your MSPs!"

    Been there, done that.

    More success with encouraging CEC.

    I hope PoP has arranged to meet new Minister.

    He's already met MPs about local bus services.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  29. sallyhinch
    Member

    POP view. Cautious optimism

    http://pedalonparliament.org/a-turning-point/

    Posted 9 years ago #
  30. chdot
    Admin

    "POP view. Cautious optimism"

    I think that's justified.

    Has SG (esp new Minister) acknowledged the existence of this report?

    Posted 9 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin