Walking the Talk: Why Active Transport Promises Rarely Hit the Road
Key Takeaways
The gap between active transport rhetoric and reality isn't inevitable. Leading cities have shown that transformation is possible. We need to give decision-makers the enablers to give them the confidence to ‘go large’ on active transport.
These enablers include:
- Provide a compelling vision.
- Start changing mindsets.
- Start with quick wins that build momentum.
- Create a substantial dedicated active transport budget.
- Set ambitious targets
- Build out a network.
- Build your delivery capability before you need it
- Focus on rapid deployment
- Collect data
- When benefits become visible, communicate them relentlessly
- Manage stakeholders strategically, not reactively
- Consider other incentives
Next Steps for Transport Leaders
Talking to decision makers about using the enablers to ramp up active transport.
Introduction
Jurisdictions worldwide are announcing ambitious walking and cycling aspirations, yet less than 2% of transport budgets go to active transport. Here's why the rhetoric doesn't match reality and how leading jurisdictions are breaking through.
The Barriers
Despite clear evidence that active transport projects often deliver the highest cost-benefit ratios, most cities remain stuck in a cycle of underinvestment. The numbers tell a stark story - while political leaders routinely promote walking and cycling and emphasise various benefits, only a tiny fraction of transport budgets follow. Most cities allocate less than 2% of their transport spending to active modes, even as they trumpet ambitious mode-shift aspirations. Why is there a mismatch between rhetoric and resources?
First, there are deeply embedded institutional barriers. Decades of transport planning have created physical infrastructure, organisational mindsets, and expertise that make active transport a low priority. These institutional barriers skew the advice decision-makers receive, the projects considered, the budgeting process and the ability to implement active transport projects successfully.
Second, financial constraints make it more challenging. Many governments are struggling financially, and transport departments are feeling that pressure. Not only do transport departments need to find savings, but they also have to find additional money for active transport.
Third, political resistance to active transport is challenging in many places. If mishandled, groups of significant stakeholders, including drivers and businesses, can get offside. We can identify valuable lessons from places like Ontario, Canada, where cycle lanes are being removed.
Finally, consider the decision-makers, the politicians. Their rhetoric (and social media posts) certainly support active transport, but their decisions do not match those aspirations. Some might be cynical and claim this is a deliberate deceit by politicians. However, knowing many politicians, I disagree. Most politicians would want a closer fit between their rhetoric and reality. However, the issues listed above make it more challenging, although certainly not impossible.
Lessons from around the world
Some people suggest politicians just have to do what the Mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo, has done, building 300km of cycle lanes over the last 5 years, and all it takes is enough political courage. Certainly, if you can find a highly courageous politician, it will help. However, hoping and waiting for a highly courageous politician is hardly a strategy. Are there things we can do so we do not need superhero politicians to get better active transport infrastructure? Fortunately, if we look around the world, there are ways to reduce the risks involved in ramping up active transport and giving the confidence to politicians they need to match their rhetoric.
Staying with Paris, the lessons from the French capital go beyond a courageous mayor. Three things stand out. First, active transport has been framed as a quality-of-life issue and tied into the 15-minute city concept. Second, iconic active transport projects, such as the Rue de Rivoli, were undertaken to act as exemplars and generate momentum for further changes. Thirdly, Paris's Vélib bike share system is integrated with its transport payment system, making it easier to access a bike.
Now, let’s move on to one of the poster children for active transport, the Netherlands.
The country was car-centric in the 1970’s. However, following a change of direction catalysed by road safety for children, the country has sustained investment in cycling over many years, with 10-25% of transport budgets committed to cycling infrastructure, providing certainty for long-term planning. The Dutch also require all transport projects, including roads, to include cycling infrastructure. They have managed to get around the problem of active transport being seen as a nice to have on projects and cut from scope as soon as a project is over budget.
Of course, we do not want to wait several decades to close the gap with the Netherlands.
Seville shows that rapid transformation is possible. The Spanish city built 80km of protected bike lanes in just 18 months, increasing cycling mode share from 0.5% to 7%. Their secret? Building a complete network rather than disconnected segments and moving fast enough that benefits became visible before opposition could organise.
In addition to infrastructure, jurisdictions have found ways to boost an active transport culture and mindset in the public and transport agencies. Bogota, Colombia, has had Car-free Sundays weekly for over 50 years, helping people visualise and experience a world with fewer cars. Car-free Sundays (although not every week) have been successfully copied in cities like London and New York.
London pioneered Low-Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs), where filtered permeability and traffic calming are deployed to reduce motor through traffic. LTNs are often implemented through cheap infrastructure such as bollards, boom barriers and planters. LTNs are now spreading across Europe.
London also provides some other lessons. London’s cycling future routes program developed standardised designs that enabled rapid deployment and reduced costs.
The UK also has a growing Schools Streets initiative, where a road outside a school temporarily restricts motorised traffic at school drop-off and pick-up times.
Some jurisdictions are offering economic incentives to accelerate change. For example, Belgium’s cycling allowance provides a tax-free benefit for private-sector employees who regularly commute by bicycle. Meanwhile, France offers up to €4,000 in a trade-in scheme when people replace their cars with e-bikes. A common incentive is to provide business improvement grants for adding bike parking and facilities to help build private-sector support.
While the above examples provide valuable lessons on what to do, there are also jurisdictions that are heading backward when it comes to active transport. Ontario, Canada, is the latest example where cycle lanes are being removed following a change of government. Ontario provides valuable lessons on what not to do. So, what can we learn from the Canadian province?
First, cycling did not have a broad coalition of support, especially across party lines, always making it vulnerable to changes in political leadership.
Second, cycling critics dominated the public narrative, exacerbated by the failure to measure and communicate the benefits or address business concerns about parking and access.
Third, there were implementation issues, such as insufficient consultation, disconnected segments rather than a network approach, and questionable design choices.
The Enablers
Considering this all together, what are the key enablers a jurisdiction can use to boost active transport, minimise the risks of a backlash and give politicians the confidence to ‘go large’ on active transport?
Building an Active Transport Culture
1: Provide a compelling vision. Decision makers need to lean in on active transport. A piecemeal approach is not going to deliver an active transport step-change. Do not shirk the trade-offs; messy compromises that sacrifice your vision will not placate critics and will alienate supporters.
2: Start changing mindsets. Run initiatives, such as car-free Sundays, that begin to change people’s views of active transport and what is possible.
3: Start with quick wins that build momentum. Focus initial projects on high-visibility locations where demand is already evident. Early successes can shift public perception and build an appetite for broader change.
Strategic Planning
4: Create a substantial dedicated active transport budget. Decision makers need to fund the active transport budget adequately, which may mean reallocating money from road budgets. A dedicated budget will also help re-prioritise projects as the money is followed. You could set a target for the percentage of the transport budget allocated to active transport, but note it will take time to ramp up.
5: Set ambitious targets. For example, the distance of protected cycle lanes to be delivered by a set date.
6: Build out a network. Fragmented bike lanes will be much less effective than a network, where each new part adds value to the rest of the network. Bike share schemes should be integrated with the rest of the transport network, including payment systems.
Implementation
7: Build your delivery capability before you need it. Many cities struggle to deliver active transport projects because they lack internal expertise. Create dedicated active transport teams with their own budgets and clear mandates. Invest in upskilling existing staff and recruiting specialists. Make active transport mandatory in all public transport projects.
The team should include communications and stakeholder managers who are specialists in active transport projects.
8: Focus on rapid deployment. Develop standardised designs that can be rapidly deployed. Consider framework contracts with suppliers to speed up delivery once funding is secured. Minimise the disruption caused by projects.
9: Collect data. Data is a powerful tool for winning the argument on active transport. It should include usage, safety, and footfall data. To demonstrate improvements, baseline data will need to be collected.
Strategic Communications
10: When benefits become visible, communicate them relentlessly. Use the metrics that resonate with different audiences, from business groups to parents. Anticipate and plan for resistance. Every successful active transport program has faced opposition.
11: Manage stakeholders strategically, not reactively. Identify and engage potential allies early - public health officials, school groups, and business improvement districts. Build relationships with local media before you need them. Create stakeholder working groups that give vocal opponents a seat at the table while ensuring they don't dominate the conversation. Most importantly, frame projects around outcomes that matter to your audience - congestion reduction for drivers, footfall for businesses, and safety for parents.
Additional
12: Consider other incentives. Economic incentives may help build momentum and make it easier for people to use active transport. Prioritisation will be key, as people will be unlikely to switch until the infrastructure is in place.
Conclusion
The gap between active transport rhetoric and reality isn't inevitable - it's a product of choices we continue to make. Leading cities have shown that transformation is possible with the right combination of political vision, strategic planning, and sustained investment. The tools and policies needed for change are well understood. The benefits are proven. The public appetite for liveable cities has never been stronger. What's missing in most cities is not knowledge or public support but providing decision-makers with the confidence to challenge the status quo and reallocate resources at scale. The experiences of Paris, Seville, and others show that bold action builds its own momentum. Those cities that continue to pursue incremental change risk being left behind and stuck in an increasingly outdated paradigm of car-dependent development. The question for transport leaders is no longer whether to invest significantly in active transport but how quickly they can pivot to the future of active transport that their citizens increasingly demand.
If you wish to discuss this in more detail, please contact me at russell@transportlc.org
