Ranking Bordeaux and Nantes next to Amsterdam is nonsense.
Amsterdam is miles ahead in terms of infrastructure. This ranking dilutes the most important thing to get these results : good bike lancés everywhere with no discontinuity.
Disclaimer : I've built villes.plus, an open source automated evaluation of bike lanes. 100 points, compute itineraries in "secure" mode with Brouter between these points, count the % of secured km -> score.
Amsterdam tops at 8/10. Bordeaux is at 3/10, Nantes 2/10.
I can't speak about Nantes which I haven't visited for decades but I think it is wrong to count bikes lanes as a single parameter.
Dutch urbanists have found that bike lanes are very important when streets used by cars are unaltered. Once you implement a lot of traffic calming features and cars never reach 30kph comfortably, bike lanes aren't that important and then streets can be shared across all users.
I always have a laugh when I see Copenhagen brag about its cycling infrastructure (e.g. Scandinavian Airlines declaring it bike-mecca in their flyers). I am very sorry, but it really doesn't come even close to Amsterdam, or most other Dutch cities really. There are a tonne of places where high-volume car traffic still intersects with low-speed bicycle traffic in Copenhagen, a lot of high-speed car roads with painted on lines, instead of actually separated infrastructure.
Also, the Netherlands is in its entirety covered in separated infrastructure optimized over decades. Just take a look at how anemic Denmark's infrastructure is outside the cities (https://www.opencyclemap.org/).
Things like "usage of cargo bikes", "percentage of women on bikes", "presence of NGOs", "media tone" all make for rather arbitrary outliers depending on how much they weigh in the final score.
Paris being 5th when biking there is pure chaos compared to many Asian cities makes the ranking look capricious. Paris's City hall is definitely pro bike and a lot of money and effort was poured into infrastructure, but that dosn't suddenly makes it safe or largely adopted.
More generally, infrastructure isn't everything. Tokyo small streets with absolutely no markings can be way safer and bike friendlier than a bright lane in the middle of constant car traffic.
I'll note the company doing the ranking is based on Paris, so familiarity might hide many of the flaws.
I didn't even feel particularly safe as a pedestrian in Tokyo or Osaka. Despite the good public transport, Japanese cities have cars absolutely everywhere, even in tiny streets that should really be pedestrian zones. Paris is much better in my opinion.
Came here to say that. I've lived a long time in both Amsteram and Paris, and seeing those two cities close in that ranking call the whole thing into question. For sure, cities couldn't game the metrics used by tha ranking, but I'm sure the metrics definitions have been gamed to make some cities look better.
"Usage and Reach" is ranked better for Paris than Amsterdam? But in Amsterdam I can safely and efficiently bicycle from anywhere to anywhere, including across the rings, to the countryside and even to the sea, with the kids, and no fear. In Paris, I would not dare to venture outside of the touristic city center, and even there I would keep an eye on kids.
Montreal's city leaders might be friendly. Its climate is not. Once the snow falls, the number of bicycle commuters plummets towards zero. Paris, vancouver, the netherlands ... they have stable climates condusive to bike use. At -10 it isnt the cars that will cause a crash, it is the physics of a two rubber wheels trying to navigate on ice.
Also, Quebec is not a city. The city is called "Quebec City" just as how New York and New York City are very different places.
Of course it helps if the city, and country in general, is completely flat. Cities in Norway or Nepal have mother nature against all form of manual locomotion.
I think Norway is more about being comfortable riding in the cold on spiked tires. The hills of Oslo don’t bother you after a couple months of riding them.
On my first visit to Amsterdam, my friend picked me up on a bike at Centraal Station, and I rode to his apartment in the traditional Dutch style sitting on the back rack.
On the way said "only three more mountains to go till we're home"! I asked "WTF?" and he explained that's what they call the bridges over the canals.
This is one of the intersections we went through right after one of the mountains, showing how much the local culture affects the traffic safety and bicycle friendliness as much as the geography:
Oh The Urbanity! just did a great episode on Victoria, B.C. The city is too small to make this list (pop. ~100K), but the video is worth checking out if you want to feel a little better about the progress of bike infrastructure in N.A. cities:
They hold themselves in high regard but Copenhagen doesn’t hold a candle to most Dutch cities. And for that matter, very few cities can compare themselves to the Dutch biking infrastructure, without even mentioning the cultural aspects and acceptance by other traffic participants.
I've cycled the SF South Bay Area, Davis, Amsterdam, Kinderdijk, Bruge, and Antwerp.
Austin TX plants random, worn out, unpainted, leftover, camouflaged concrete shapes that serve no discernible positive purpose in the middle of city streets frequented by motorcycles, pedestrians, cyclists, scooters, and skaters. That's how much of a shit they give about anyone not in a truck or a rented Slingshot.
The biggest hurdle to biking for me is parking safely. Unless I can park it behind locked doors I have an anxious feeling that it may not be still there when I return. This is no problem when bicycling to work, but for arbitrary errands it is. A good lock helps of course, but it still feels like a gamble.
This is the ultimate American urbanist conundrum. Bikes are pretty useless for transportation in American cities because of rampant theft. Locks get cut in the broad daylight and even if the thief is too inept to steal an angle grinder, or already ran out of batteries for today, they will still rip off parts (wheels, saddle, brakes, group, they will even rip out lights from the mounts, just because). But they also cannot demand the law enforcement against it because the thieves are the precious "unhoused" (which is very easy to check by visiting any encampment and observing all the bikes and bike parts there). So we get this strange situation when cities build bike lanes and bike parks which are empty because, at most, you can only commute on your bike if your place of work has a secure storage.
Enforcing the laws against bike thieves would be 100x more effective in promoting biking than building anything.
I always kept my bicycle inside my office. I also found out that if you ask politely, many shops allows you to enter with your bike provided there is enough space.
I went to Copenhagen this summer. I was quite disappointed in the bicycle infrastructure, I felt like it was on par with what we have in Stockholm. Rented bikes and biked around for two days. It was nice!
Not sure how this index is being calculated (site breaks a lot), but my general feeling was that Denmark is just better at marketing than actual infrastructure when comparing to Stockholm at least
It is currently -1 to -3 in Montreal and -2 to -7 in Quebec (city).
So yes folks literally freezing. It will remain so (down to -35) for the next 4 months.
I'm not surprised to see Utrecht in the first place, but quite a bit surprised to see the other Dutch cities so low. No offense, but Rotterdam or The Heague is 100x better than Paris from safety and convenience point of view. I'm curious why is the ranking like this.
How did you even manage to see the page? I just clicked on it and got to WPAdmin install page, asking to setup the admin account.
Completely agree with you, I've traveled with my bike to many cities in Europe, the Netherlands in general has a fantastic bike infrastructure, not even sure why it's called "Copenhagenize" since I go to Copenhagen quite often and compared to Dutch's bike infrastructure it's still not on par to it. It's definitely great but the Dutch have it ahead.
"Welcome to the famous five-minute WordPress installation process! Just fill in the information below and you’ll be on your way to using the most extendable and powerful personal publishing platform in the world."
yes, seems the site is completely broken and I suspect someone is in the middle of a panicked reinstall or reconfigure of WP. I feel for them.
[edit] back up now, it seems.
maelito|3 months ago
Amsterdam is miles ahead in terms of infrastructure. This ranking dilutes the most important thing to get these results : good bike lancés everywhere with no discontinuity.
Disclaimer : I've built villes.plus, an open source automated evaluation of bike lanes. 100 points, compute itineraries in "secure" mode with Brouter between these points, count the % of secured km -> score.
Amsterdam tops at 8/10. Bordeaux is at 3/10, Nantes 2/10.
https://villes.plus/cyclables/Amsterdam?id=271110
https://villes.plus/cyclables/Nantes.8
prmoustache|3 months ago
Dutch urbanists have found that bike lanes are very important when streets used by cars are unaltered. Once you implement a lot of traffic calming features and cars never reach 30kph comfortably, bike lanes aren't that important and then streets can be shared across all users.
noobcoder|3 months ago
DonHopkins|3 months ago
Amsterdammers prefer to think of themselves as kilometers ahead. ;)
throwaway198846|3 months ago
jonkoops|3 months ago
Also, the Netherlands is in its entirety covered in separated infrastructure optimized over decades. Just take a look at how anemic Denmark's infrastructure is outside the cities (https://www.opencyclemap.org/).
jeroenhd|3 months ago
The note about Copenhagenize being a consulting firm probably explains why the list is so full of weird and arbitrary choices.
At least their method is somewhat open (though I can't find the raw data they used/compensation factors/calculations): https://copenhagenizeindex.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/COP...
Things like "usage of cargo bikes", "percentage of women on bikes", "presence of NGOs", "media tone" all make for rather arbitrary outliers depending on how much they weigh in the final score.
makeitdouble|3 months ago
More generally, infrastructure isn't everything. Tokyo small streets with absolutely no markings can be way safer and bike friendlier than a bright lane in the middle of constant car traffic.
I'll note the company doing the ranking is based on Paris, so familiarity might hide many of the flaws.
fsh|3 months ago
rixed|3 months ago
"Usage and Reach" is ranked better for Paris than Amsterdam? But in Amsterdam I can safely and efficiently bicycle from anywhere to anywhere, including across the rings, to the countryside and even to the sea, with the kids, and no fear. In Paris, I would not dare to venture outside of the touristic city center, and even there I would keep an eye on kids.
heresie-dabord|3 months ago
Cars dominate the topology.
sandworm101|3 months ago
Also, Quebec is not a city. The city is called "Quebec City" just as how New York and New York City are very different places.
werdnapk|3 months ago
spooky_deep|3 months ago
betaby|3 months ago
That's a very {Plateau,reddit,no-kids}-centric view.
aallaall|3 months ago
analog31|3 months ago
Oslo is #18 on that list, not too shabby. Kathmandu is in a valley.
unknown|3 months ago
[deleted]
mnky9800n|3 months ago
emilbratt|3 months ago
https://youtu.be/zipZ5kwhFfs?si=2kEsb-7wEpcS2Vkn
DonHopkins|3 months ago
On the way said "only three more mountains to go till we're home"! I asked "WTF?" and he explained that's what they call the bridges over the canals.
This is one of the intersections we went through right after one of the mountains, showing how much the local culture affects the traffic safety and bicycle friendliness as much as the geography:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqQSwQLDIK8
UltraSane|3 months ago
mperham|3 months ago
alamortsubite|3 months ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpWm45qting
MeteorMarc|3 months ago
spooky_deep|3 months ago
usrnm|3 months ago
lifty|3 months ago
burnt-resistor|3 months ago
Austin TX plants random, worn out, unpainted, leftover, camouflaged concrete shapes that serve no discernible positive purpose in the middle of city streets frequented by motorcycles, pedestrians, cyclists, scooters, and skaters. That's how much of a shit they give about anyone not in a truck or a rented Slingshot.
I keep meaning to cycle DC and Portland.
cindyllm|3 months ago
[deleted]
mongol|3 months ago
pandaman|3 months ago
Enforcing the laws against bike thieves would be 100x more effective in promoting biking than building anything.
prmoustache|3 months ago
teekert|3 months ago
aleda145|3 months ago
Not sure how this index is being calculated (site breaks a lot), but my general feeling was that Denmark is just better at marketing than actual infrastructure when comparing to Stockholm at least
petermcneeley|3 months ago
Etheryte|3 months ago
werdnapk|3 months ago
TulliusCicero|3 months ago
vlabakje90|3 months ago
breuleux|3 months ago
lifestyleguru|3 months ago
bgnn|3 months ago
usrnm|3 months ago
piva00|3 months ago
Completely agree with you, I've traveled with my bike to many cities in Europe, the Netherlands in general has a fantastic bike infrastructure, not even sure why it's called "Copenhagenize" since I go to Copenhagen quite often and compared to Dutch's bike infrastructure it's still not on par to it. It's definitely great but the Dutch have it ahead.
akabalanza|3 months ago
ErroneousBosh|3 months ago
Ooops.
bethekidyouwant|3 months ago
allannienhuis|3 months ago
smyk1777|3 months ago