The city of Amsterdam is often praised, and visited, for the prominence of the bicycle in the city. Both the existing infrastructure and the bicycle culture play a role in this prominence, as do both the bicycle trade and the experience / expertise developed by traffic specialists. Most recently the emphasis has been on bicycle theft prevention, with great success. Factors in this success:
I. the bicycle has maintained its importance as a means of transport despite the growth of carownership
II. appreciation for and maintenance of the human scale of the city
III. the great value that both the public and politicians place on the bicycle
IV. the cyclists’ union that has developed from being a body of activists to a professional organization
Despite the above, Amsterdam struggles with a number of limitations. Ambition often seems to outstrip the final results. There is very little done institutionally towards achieving great results. Amsterdam tends to rest on its past laurels and the knowledge and experience of this generation of experts and advisers. Some issues have lain unresolved for decades. The Cyclists’ Union working with the city council’s own experts, have produced a causal diagram in an attempt to get this matter under control. Limits within Amsterdam:
I. constant changes of opinions on the main cycle route network, which is a hindrance to the development of the network
II. largescale (nonbicycle) projects often have priority
III. complicated problems are “never” tackled
IV. new urban development project planners often take insufficient account of bicycle and cyclists’ needs.
These limits are as applicable to other cities as they are to Amsterdam.