Of course it helps if the city, and country in general, is completely flat. Cities in Norway or Nepal have mother nature against all form of manual locomotion.
I'm not surprised to see Utrecht in the first place, but quite a bit surprised to see the other Dutch cities so low. No offense, but Rotterdam or The Heague is 100x better than Paris from safety and convenience point of view. I'm curious why is the ranking like this.
"Welcome to the famous five-minute WordPress installation process! Just fill in the information below and you’ll be on your way to using the most extendable and powerful personal publishing platform in the world."
I went to Copenhagen this summer. I was quite disappointed in the bicycle infrastructure, I felt like it was on par with what we have in Stockholm. Rented bikes and biked around for two days. It was nice!
Not sure how this index is being calculated (site breaks a lot), but my general feeling was that Denmark is just better at marketing than actual infrastructure when comparing to Stockholm at least
Ranking Bordeaux and Nantes next to Amsterdam is nonsense.
Amsterdam is miles ahead in terms of infrastructure. This ranking dilutes the most important thing to get these results : good bike lancés everywhere with no discontinuity.
Disclaimer : I've built villes.plus, an open source automated evaluation of bike lanes. 100 points, compute itineraries in "secure" mode with Brouter between these points, count the % of secured km -> score.
Amsterdam tops at 8/10. Bordeaux is at 3/10, Nantes 2/10.
The biggest hurdle to biking for me is parking safely. Unless I can park it behind locked doors I have an anxious feeling that it may not be still there when I return. This is no problem when bicycling to work, but for arbitrary errands it is. A good lock helps of course, but it still feels like a gamble.
This is the ultimate American urbanist conundrum. Bikes are pretty useless for transportation in American cities because of rampant theft. Locks get cut in the broad daylight and even if the thief is too inept to steal an angle grinder, or already ran out of batteries for today, they will still rip off parts (wheels, saddle, brakes, group, they will even rip out lights from the mounts, just because). But they also cannot demand the law enforcement against it because the thieves are the precious "unhoused" (which is very easy to check by visiting any encampment and observing all the bikes and bike parts there). So we get this strange situation when cities build bike lanes and bike parks which are empty because, at most, you can only commute on your bike if your place of work has a secure storage.
Enforcing the laws against bike thieves would be 100x more effective in promoting biking than building anything.
It is currently -1 to -3 in Montreal and -2 to -7 in Quebec (city).
So yes folks literally freezing. It will remain so (down to -35) for the next 4 months.
Paris being 5th when biking there is pure chaos compared to many Asian cities makes the ranking look capricious. Paris's City hall is definitely pro bike and a lot of money and effort was poured into infrastructure, but that dosn't suddenly makes it safe or largely adopted.
More generally, infrastructure isn't everything. Tokyo small streets with absolutely no markings can be way safer and bike friendlier than a bright lane in the middle of constant car traffic.
I'll note the company doing the ranking is based on Paris, so familiarity might hide many of the flaws.
I always have a laugh when I see Copenhagen brag about its cycling infrastructure (e.g. Scandinavian Airlines declaring it bike-mecca in their flyers). I am very sorry, but it really doesn't come even close to Amsterdam, or most other Dutch cities really. There are a tonne of places where high-volume car traffic still intersects with low-speed bicycle traffic in Copenhagen, a lot of high-speed car roads with painted on lines, instead of actually separated infrastructure.
Also, the Netherlands is in its entirety covered in separated infrastructure optimized over decades. Just take a look at how anemic Denmark's infrastructure is outside the cities (https://www.opencyclemap.org/).
Things like "usage of cargo bikes", "percentage of women on bikes", "presence of NGOs", "media tone" all make for rather arbitrary outliers depending on how much they weigh in the final score.
Oh The Urbanity! just did a great episode on Victoria, B.C. The city is too small to make this list (pop. ~100K), but the video is worth checking out if you want to feel a little better about the progress of bike infrastructure in N.A. cities:
I've cycled the SF South Bay Area, Davis, Amsterdam, Kinderdijk, Bruge, and Antwerp.
Austin TX plants random, worn out, unpainted, leftover, camouflaged concrete shapes that serve no discernible positive purpose in the middle of city streets frequented by motorcycles, pedestrians, cyclists, scooters, and skaters. That's how much of a shit they give about anyone not in a truck or a rented Slingshot.
20 comments
[ 0.20 ms ] story [ 38.2 ms ] threadOoops.
Cars dominate the topology.
Not sure how this index is being calculated (site breaks a lot), but my general feeling was that Denmark is just better at marketing than actual infrastructure when comparing to Stockholm at least
Amsterdam is miles ahead in terms of infrastructure. This ranking dilutes the most important thing to get these results : good bike lancés everywhere with no discontinuity.
Disclaimer : I've built villes.plus, an open source automated evaluation of bike lanes. 100 points, compute itineraries in "secure" mode with Brouter between these points, count the % of secured km -> score.
Amsterdam tops at 8/10. Bordeaux is at 3/10, Nantes 2/10.
https://villes.plus/cyclables/Amsterdam?id=271110
https://villes.plus/cyclables/Nantes.8
Enforcing the laws against bike thieves would be 100x more effective in promoting biking than building anything.
More generally, infrastructure isn't everything. Tokyo small streets with absolutely no markings can be way safer and bike friendlier than a bright lane in the middle of constant car traffic.
I'll note the company doing the ranking is based on Paris, so familiarity might hide many of the flaws.
Also, the Netherlands is in its entirety covered in separated infrastructure optimized over decades. Just take a look at how anemic Denmark's infrastructure is outside the cities (https://www.opencyclemap.org/).
The note about Copenhagenize being a consulting firm probably explains why the list is so full of weird and arbitrary choices.
At least their method is somewhat open (though I can't find the raw data they used/compensation factors/calculations): https://copenhagenizeindex.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/COP...
Things like "usage of cargo bikes", "percentage of women on bikes", "presence of NGOs", "media tone" all make for rather arbitrary outliers depending on how much they weigh in the final score.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpWm45qting
Austin TX plants random, worn out, unpainted, leftover, camouflaged concrete shapes that serve no discernible positive purpose in the middle of city streets frequented by motorcycles, pedestrians, cyclists, scooters, and skaters. That's how much of a shit they give about anyone not in a truck or a rented Slingshot.
I keep meaning to cycle DC and Portland.