Cycle Paths: Understanding road risks through data

Every year, cyclists are killed on roads that were never designed with them in mind.

In Great Britain, 85 cyclists lost their lives in 2024, according to the Department for Transport. Behind that number lies infrastructure that hasn’t kept pace with the growth of cycling as a mode of transport.

The question is no longer whether to invest in cycling infrastructure. It’s where, and in what form because not every road carries the same level of risk.

The growing importance of cycle paths in urban mobility

Cycling has moved from alternative mode to strategic priority.

Across the UK, the shift is measurable. Transport for London reported 1.33 million daily cycling journeys in 2024, a 5% increase on the previous year (TfL, 2024). Yet expansion alone doesn’t equal safety.

Where cyclists and motorised vehicles share the same space without clear separation, risk doesn’t disappear. It concentrates. The real challenge is identifying which corridors require structural intervention and which don’t.

When mixed traffic becomes risky

Shared roads aren’t inherently dangerous. On low-traffic streets with genuine speed compliance, mixed circulation can function without exposing cyclists to structural risk. But the data tells a more nuanced story.

56% of pedal cycle fatalities in Great Britain between 2020 and 2024 occurred on rural roads, despite those routes carrying only 31% of total traffic (Department for Transport, 2024). Serious incidents don’t distribute randomly across the network. They cluster on specific types of infrastructure.

Three factors systematically amplify severity:

Speed differential: above 30 km/h, the kinetic gap between a car and a cyclist dramatically increases injury severity on impact
Angle of collision: lateral impacts, the most common in mixed traffic, offer cyclists zero protection zone
Road legibility: ambiguous or worn markings degrade driver anticipation behaviour, increasing the probability of conflict at junctions and transitions

Identifying when separation is necessary

There is no universal threshold but there are reliable indicators. Technical frameworks from Active Travel England and Department for Transport guidelines point to a combination of factors that justify physical separation: daily motorised traffic exceeding 3,000 to 5,000 vehicles on the corridor, actual speeds above 30 km/h regardless of the posted limit, significant and growing cycling volumes creating recurring friction points, and existing accident or incident records on the segment.

None of these criteria work in isolation. It’s their combination, read through real mobility data, that reveals where separation is structurally justified and where a speed reduction or improved markings would be sufficient. This distinction matters in terms of both safety outcomes and infrastructure investment.

How data can be used to identify high-risk areas

Diagnosing cycling infrastructure risk requires layering multiple data sources: actual vehicle and cyclist speeds, traffic volumes by user type and time of day, accident history, incident patterns, and network geometry.

45% of cyclist fatalities in the UK involved a two-vehicle collision with a car (DfT, 2024). Collisions involving HGVs proved the most deadly, with a 5.8% fatality rate per collision (DfT, 2024). Peak risk consistently coincides with commuter hours: 7am to 10am and 4pm to 7pm on weekdays (DfT, 2024).

The question is no longer whether a road is dangerous. It becomes which stretch concentrates risk, at which time of day, and for which reason.

That level of precision changes how decisions get made. It allows mobility planners and local authorities to prioritise interventions where safety impact will be measurable and avoid costly infrastructure where risk doesn’t justify it.

At MICHELIN Mobility Intelligence, we combine accident data and user behaviour analytics to help mobility stakeholders identify where cycling separation is necessary and act on it with confidence.

If you’d like an overview of the risks associated with road traffic, contact us today to learn how our products support mobility stakeholders.

Ready to get started?