Making a city safe enough for travel by bicycle: comparing Inner Melbourne, Amsterdam, and Copenhagen by Warwick Hilton Pattinson ORCID: 0000-0003-4603-6546 Submitted for total completion for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy April 2020 Melbourne School of Design The University of Melbourne Abstract Many people in Inner Melbourne are missing out on the benefits of bicycle riding for transport, benefits as demonstrated in cities like Amsterdam and Copenhagen. Safety, however, is a threshold issue for new riders. Previous research has established that a wide range of factors can influence the safety of bicyclists and that local differences in context are important. This thesis explores the possibility that Inner Melbourne could become safe enough for many more adults to travel by bicycle. An interpretive research methodology was used, which involved predominantly qualitative methods together with analysis of quantitative data on road trauma. A case study approach examined the social and technical features that influence city safety for bicycling in Inner Melbourne, Amsterdam, and Copenhagen. The research integrates the Safe System framework from road safety with a broader public health policy framework. Original interviews, document analysis, and observations were used to explore differences in safety and to reveal opportunities for change. Three themes were used for the analysis: the historic and policy contexts; the decision-making processes; and the content of measures that influence safety. The research introduces several concepts to explore the production of good enough safety, including reducing risk and reducing perceptions of danger. It suggests that the policy context needs to be framed to value the potential contribution of bicycling to liveability; that decision processes need to connect bicycling to community needs; and that locally appropriate Safe System content could be re-imagined to consistently communicate safe behaviour for all road users at modest cost. The findings suggest that Inner Melbourne could be made safe enough for new adult riders by co-production involving government, stakeholders and road users. Declaration I certify that this thesis: Making a city safe enough for travel by bicycle: comparing Inner Melbourne, Amsterdam, and Copenhagen (i) comprises only my original work towards the Doctor of Philosophy; (ii) includes due acknowledgement in the text to all other material used; and (iii) is fewer than the maximum (80,000) word limit in length, exclusive of tables, maps, bibliographies, and appendices. Signed: Warwick Pattinson April 2020 Acknowledgements I express my gratitude to my Supervisor Dr John Stone for his support, patience, and knowledge. His guidance helped me through critical times in the conduct and writing of this thesis. I would like to thank the members of my supervisory committee: Assoc Prof. Russell Thompson, and Mr Alistair Cumming for their insightful comments and encouragement. Also, Prof. Prian Mendis from Infrastructure Engineering who encouraged me to apply for an APA scholarship and then supported me in the early stages of my research. Supervision that was then provided by Prof Carolyn Whitzman, who helped me on my research journey, recognised that I needed to learn about research methodologies, and connected me to a supportive cohort of PhD researchers. The ongoing assistance of Jane Trewin in the Graduate Research office was much appreciated. Also, thanks to fellow PhD candidates and people who attended presentations I gave for the stimulating discussions and helpful suggestions. I thank my professional friends in VicRoads, TAC, City of Melbourne, RACV, ARRB, the Department of Transport, staff at Bicycle Network and the Amy Gillet Foundation for helpful discussions and material. My deep thanks go to Prof. Amanda Sinclair, Prof. Billie Giles-Corti, Dr Mary Black, Prof. John Alford, Dr Jan Garrard, and Prof. Mary Sheehan AO, who together with many others provided advice and suggestions. During my scouting fieldwork, I met with social research methods expert Prof. Emma Bell, who suggested I use the Interpretive Research approach as described by Schwartz- Shea and Yanow (2012). The interpretive approach became central to my work. Without the support of these people and my family I would not have enjoyed or completed this research. I thank my interview participants and the many people who have contributed ideas, shared experiences, and suggested people to interview, key documents, seminars, and meetings to attend. I am also grateful for the changes suggested by the examiners. Finally, I thank my family for support throughout the process. My wife, Prof. Amanda Sinclair who provided academic wisdom; Amy, Huw, and Charlie for technical support; and Tom for excusing my lack of performance as a grandparent while this thesis monopolised my attention. Table of Contents Abstract ..........................................................................................................................................ii Declaration .................................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................................iv Common abbreviations .................................................................................................................xi Units of measurement .................................................................................................................. xii Chapter 1 Introduction.................................................................. 1 1.1 Research purpose and approach ........................................................... 3 1.2 Aim: understanding safety for potential bicyclists ................................... 5 1.3 Research questions and approach ......................................................... 9 1.4 Significance and contribution ................................................................ 10 Chapter 2 Literature review: the safety of city bicycling ......... 15 2.1 Why safety for bicyclists is important .................................................... 15 2.2 What Melbourne crash studies show .................................................... 17 2.3 Beyond recorded injuries ...................................................................... 23 2.4 Systematic approaches to road safety ................................................. 36 2.5 Local implementation of a Safe System ............................................... 42 2.6 A city safe enough for bicyclists ........................................................... 46 2.7 Implementing change ........................................................................... 47 2.8 An integrated model for analysis .......................................................... 56 2.9 Research gap and questions ................................................................ 57 Chapter 3 Study approach and methods .................................. 59 3.1 Methodology ......................................................................................... 59 3.2 Methods................................................................................................ 60 3.3 Preliminary scoping and engagement .................................................. 60 3.4 Comparative case study ....................................................................... 62 3.5 Injury data ............................................................................................. 64 3.6 Qualitative exploration .......................................................................... 67 3.7 Ensuring ethical and quality research ................................................... 75 3.8 Summary .............................................................................................. 78 Chapter 4 Understanding safety ................................................ 79 4.1 Defining the case study areas .............................................................. 79 4.2 Comparing risk ..................................................................................... 85 4.3 Conclusion ............................................................................................ 91 Chapter 5 Amsterdam, where people on bikes are the ‘queens’ and ‘kings’ of the road .............................................. 93 5.1 Amsterdam ........................................................................................... 94 5.2 Context ................................................................................................. 98 5.3 City processes .................................................................................... 103 5.4 Content ............................................................................................... 110 5.5 Conclusions ........................................................................................ 124 Chapter 6 Bicycles and cars in Copenhagen .......................... 127 6.1 Copenhagen ....................................................................................... 127 6.2 Context ............................................................................................... 133 6.3 City processes .................................................................................... 144 6.4 Content ............................................................................................... 150 6.5 Conclusions .......................................................................................