Some argue that implementing a cycling test can improve road safety standards, thereby prohibiting those who fail the test from riding bicycles on public roads. I largely believe that this measure would be ineffective in reducing road accidents and could even decrease the number of cyclists.
The lack of opportunities for safe cycling is the primary problem, rather than the cyclists themselves. For example, the absence of separate cycling paths in many countries forces people to cycle on open roads, where they can easily collide with vehicles or public transport. Cyclists should not necessarily be blamed for these accidents, even though they might not be sufficiently familiar with road rules, as poor infrastructure is a major cause of such collisions. Similarly, inadequate cycling signs or poorly maintained road surfaces are responsible for many other road accidents, demonstrating that improving infrastructure should be prioritised over cyclists’ road education.
While having minimal effects on road safety, a cycling test can discourage people from cycling. The benefits of cars outweigh those of bicycles in many situations, making cars a common choice for daily travel. For short journeys, however, some people might choose to ride a bicycle because it is convenient and can be more efficient in heavy traffic. A test can be time-consuming and burdensome, so people may simply choose cars for all their journeys. This can be negative for the environment because the more people use cars, the more carbon emissions are produced.
In conclusion, I strongly disagree with those who promote the idea of introducing a cycling test to reduce road accidents. This is unlikely to be effective, since the core problem is not primarily related to cyclists’ education. Furthermore, such a test could reduce the number of people who choose to cycle.