Are cycling advocacy groups in urban planning nothing more than a bunch of armchair experts with no real influence, or are they actually capable of driving meaningful change, and if so, why do we still see cities like Melbourne with laughable bike infrastructure that prioritizes cars over cyclists, despite decades of lobbying and supposed advocacy?
Its time for some hard questions to be asked about the effectiveness of these groups, and whether theyre more interested in self-preservation and empire-building than actually improving the lives of cyclists.
Is it really too much to ask for a network of safe, dedicated bike lanes that dont just disappear at the first sign of a roundabout or highway on-ramp, or are we doomed to forever be treated like second-class citizens on the roads?
What exactly are these advocacy groups doing with their time and resources, and how do they measure their own success, because from where Im sitting, it seems like theyre not achieving a whole lot.
Its time for some hard questions to be asked about the effectiveness of these groups, and whether theyre more interested in self-preservation and empire-building than actually improving the lives of cyclists.
Is it really too much to ask for a network of safe, dedicated bike lanes that dont just disappear at the first sign of a roundabout or highway on-ramp, or are we doomed to forever be treated like second-class citizens on the roads?
What exactly are these advocacy groups doing with their time and resources, and how do they measure their own success, because from where Im sitting, it seems like theyre not achieving a whole lot.