Cycling fatalities are rising in the Netherlands – so, why are we still trying to emulate their approach to road safety?

The Netherlands has long been lauded as a safe cycling nation. But, writes Vincent Stops, new data shows that cycling fatalities and rates per billion kilometres are on the rise, with the increased use of e-bikes, especially by older people, seen as a possible reason. In Great Britain, meanwhile, cycling fatalities are going down, he points out, and asks: should we still be trying to emulate the Dutch approach to road safety?

Number of traffic deaths per billion kms for car occupants, cyclists and pedestrians 2012-2022 in the Netherlands. Sources: distance travelled: KiM; traffic deaths: CBS; calculation KiM

Number of traffic deaths per billion kms for car occupants, cyclists and pedestrians 2012-2022 in the Netherlands. Sources: distance travelled: KiM; traffic deaths: CBS; calculation KiM

Reported road fatalities per billion miles travelled by road user type in Great Britain, 2013 to 2023

Reported road fatalities per billion miles travelled by road user type in Great Britain, 2013 to 2023

The surge in cycle activism during the 2010s was driven by blogging and social media campaigning, at the heart of which was the belief that in the Netherlands there was much more cycling, and that it was safer, per kilometre cycled.

The London Cycling Campaign adopted the strap line ‘Love London, Go-Dutch’, which meant, essentially, inserting cycle tracks into London’s streets. However, 15 years on, Dutch cycle safety does not seem to support their thesis. In fact, the scale of cyclist fatalities in the Netherlands is staggeringly high and particularly so in the last two years reported. 

In 2023, Great Britain (GB) had 87¹ cyclist fatalities. In the Netherlands (NL) there were 270² cyclist fatalities, and that in a country with a population a quarter that of GB. In other words, 12 times the fatalities per million population!

The health benefits of cycling outweigh many times the statistically small chance of death and injury to individuals, therefore public policy rightly aspires to more and safer cycling. But the assumptions that are made by the new cycle activism should be challenged, and in particular suggesting that the Netherlands has all the solutions.

NL has a very high cycling mode share compared with Great Britain (GB). Therefore, the policy preference is to consider both the rate of cycling fatalities per km as well as the absolute numbers. This is where the Netherlands has been said to be much better than GB. In 2018 the International Transport Federation, part of the OECD, reported 21 fatalities per Bn Km cycled for GB against eight fatalities per Bn Km cycled for NL³. In 2020 the European Transport Safety Council reported 19 fatalities per Bn Km cycled for GB against 13 fatalities per Bn Km cycled for NL⁴. These are both bona fide institutions in the field of transport safety.

However, these two snapshots mask the trends in both countries. In NL the rate of cyclist fatalities per billion miles cycled is trending upward with a significant jump in 2022⁵. In GB this rate has been trending down. In 2023 in NL there were 15.6⁶ cyclist fatalities per billion kms cycled. By contrast, the rate has fallen in GB from a high in 2006 to 15.0⁷ now. The charts pictured show these trends. Each is published by the relevant NL⁶ and GB¹ governmental organisation.

Comparing serious injuries is harder because severity of injury is, in part, a judgement made by those reporting the injuries. We also know there will be under-reporting of less serious injuries. (Under-reporting is a particular problem with cycle injuries where no motor vehicle is involved, such as crashing into kerbs - which the Dutch seem to do a lot!).

GB data¹ is collated from police reporting and some self-reporting by those involved, whereas NL data⁷ is from A&E hospital admissions. However, the trends of serious injuries follows a similar pattern to that of fatalities. In GB between 2013 and 2022 there was a 10% fall in serious casualties, in NL there was a 40% increase.

The Dutch institute for Road Safety Research (SWOV) has said road safety has been “thrown back in time by 14 to 15 years”⁵. There are many reasons put forward to account for these rising trends. Primary amongst them is the increased use of electric bicycles and the use of these by older people. Solutions put forward include using helmets, enforcement of road traffic law and better cycle infrastructure with less to crash into!

As you see, the Netherlands is grappling with cycle safety too. A question for us is whether GB should carry on as we have been, trying to emulate the Netherlands? We see e-bikes being heavily promoted in the UK these days. Should we carry on regardless under pressure from cycling activism? Or should we revert to data-led road safety interventions we know work?

GB used to have a data-led approach to road safety based on analysis and proper research. The Department for Transport (DfT) maintained a consistent approach requiring assessment of innovation. All that has changed. We see all manner of confusing road layouts appearing across GB, whereas we know that safer road layouts should be intuitive, understandable and self-explaining.

I welcome the new Transport Secretary Louise Haigh embarking on a fresh road safety strategy. A forensic examination of how we are doing would be helpful.

• Note on Data. GB casualty data is published by the DfT using adjusted serious injuries. Kms cycled is also DfT data from its annual road traffic estimates. NL casualty data is published by the governmental statistics body CBS. Kms cycled is published by KiM, a transport and policy analysis organisation within the relevant ministry.

1. DfT: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casualties-great-britain-annual-report-2023/reported-road-casualties-great-britain-annual-report-2023#casualties-and-rates-by-road-user-type

2. Statistics Netherlands: https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/news/2024/15/684-road-traffic-deaths-in-2023#:~:text=In the period between 2019, were not due to collisions.

3. International Transport Federation: https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/exposure-adjusted-road-fatality-rates-cycling-walking-europe.pdf using data from 2011 to 2015.

4. European Transport Safety Council: https://etsc.eu/wp-content/uploads/PIN-Flash-38_FINAL.pdf using data from 2016 to 2018.

5. European Transport Safety Council: https://etsc.eu/dutch-road-safety-thrown-back-in-time-15-years/

6. KiM: https://www.kimnet.nl/binaries/kimnet/documenten/publicaties/2023/11/14/mobiliteitsbeeld-2023/KiM+Mobiliteitsbeeld+2023_pdfAdef2.pdf

7. KiM: https://english.kimnet.nl/binaries/kimnet-english/documenten/publications/2024/01/10/cycling-facts-2023/KiM+brochure+Cycling+facts+2023_def.pdf

Vincent Stops worked for 20 years as the Streets Officer at London TravelWatch, the statutory body representing transport users in London. He was also a councillor and some time lead member for transport at the London Borough of Hackney