Interactive map highlights a decade of cyclist and pedestrian casualties in London

Visualization produced by data mapping specialists ITO World for See Me Save Me

by Simon_MacMichael   April 12, 2012  

London Cyclist and Pedestrian Casualty Map (source- ITO World for See Me Save Me)

See Me Save Me, the road safety campaign founded by the family of Eilidh Cairns, the cyclist killed by a lorry as she rode to work through London’s Notting Hill three years ago, has teamed up with data mapping specialists ITO World to produce a map of cyclist and pedestrian casualties in the capital between 2000 and 2010.

Last year, ITO produced an interactive map that showed road casualty statistics across Britain during the same period. Like that map, the one produced for London is based on the Department for Transport’s Stats 19 road traffic casualty database, and shows the age and gender of the victim as well as the severity of the incident.

For the first time, the London map also distinguishes between the size of the vehicles involved, with those with a gross combination mass of over 3.5 tonnes – which includes medium and large goods vehicles – shown in darker shades than those involving smaller vehicles.

As with the previous map, the data presented should not be used to identify individuals involved in any of the incidents.

One striking feature of the map is the higher prevalence of fatalities and serious injuries among cyclists compared to pedestrians in many parts of Inner and Central London and in particular in and around the City of London and bordering boroughs such as Islington, Camden and Southwark.

When it was revealed earlier this year recently that there had not been a single cyclist fatality in Paris during 2011, the point was made by some that data from the French capital were not directly comparable to those for London, since they only covered a small, central zone; the map shows clearly, however, that it is in such a narrow-defined area that many of the cyclists who died in London over the first decade of the millennium lost their lives.

9 user comments

Oldest firstNewest firstBest rated

And the point is...?

dullard's picture

posted by dullard [140 posts]
12th April 2012 - 13:06

like this
Like (4)

dullard wrote:
And the point is...?

Going to be lost on you

Denzil Dexter's picture

posted by Denzil Dexter [140 posts]
12th April 2012 - 14:20

like this
Like (7)

The point of any infographic is to take data and allow for an easy spotting of changes/trends/hotspots etc. - this map does *not* achieve that goal - it is clunky and impossible to decipher unless you are interested in zooming down to a very small area local to you

National newspaper has *FAIL*

posted by mad_scot_rider [537 posts]
12th April 2012 - 14:31

like this
Like (4)

mad_scot_rider wrote:
The point of any infographic is to take data and allow for an easy spotting of changes/trends/hotspots etc. - this map does *not* achieve that goal - it is clunky and impossible to decipher unless you are interested in zooming down to a very small area local to you

National newspaper has *FAIL*

There's a direct example cited in the article of where it does show areas where there seem to be a particularly heavy concentration of incidents involving cyclists rather than pedestrians.

If you've ever looked at 100-odd pages of raw data compiled from police reports to try and pick out where incidents happened, what type of vehicle was involved and the severity of injury to the cyclist, this type of mapping does help make sense of the stats.

You'll get a bigger map area on the See Me Save Me site (link below), you can also hide the key... I just zoomed out on that and if you look at West London you will see for example concentrations of incidents along the main arterial routes... how is that not taking the data and doing something with it that helps decipher it?

http://www.seemesaveme.com/map/

Simon_MacMichael's picture

posted by Simon_MacMichael [7906 posts]
12th April 2012 - 15:35

like this
Like (5)

I found this useful in my local campaign to get a junction slowed in my area. Although the junction has a very low fatality and injury count for cyclists - this was mainly because it was too dangerous for cyclists to use in the first place!

Sad

Silly me. You're probably right....

MercuryOne's picture

posted by MercuryOne [1028 posts]
12th April 2012 - 16:07

like this
Like (6)

@Denzil

Don't be such an arse - it wasn't a facetious question. Simon's article, though up to his usual excellent standards (again, not being facetious), didn't go into whether the map was for background information, for practical use on planning journeys or to scare people off the road. Blankly, it's a bit of a shock horror tableau with huge concentration on tragedy, loss, blame and finger pointing and, for my money, light on the positives of cycling and, critically, how to keep yourself safe on a bike. It's a little ironic calling itself 'see me save me' that there's no advice on the site on how to cycle better, particularly common-sense basics like putting LIGHTS on your bike WHEN IT'S DARK. I rode home from work yesterday evening at 8.30 (so DARK) in central London and in the space of only six miles, less than 50% of other cyclists didn't have lights on their bikes. And if they get knocked off, the cycling community will default into hand-wringing. Report bad driving, certainly, but there's no excuse for bad cycling either.

dullard's picture

posted by dullard [140 posts]
13th April 2012 - 11:18

like this
Like (5)

dullard wrote:
@Denzil

Don't be such an arse - it wasn't a facetious question. Simon's article, though up to his usual excellent standards (again, not being facetious), didn't go into whether the map was for background information, for practical use on planning journeys or to scare people off the road.

Surely the whole point of information like this is that it is 'purpose-neutral' - otherwise it is just propaganda. You can choose to use it to check out your route and avoid blackspots. Or to campaign to get those blackspots improved. Or to highlight to others how safe/unsafe cycling is, depending on your point of view. It's just information, made easier to view and digest - the purpose is up to you.

posted by step-hent [649 posts]
13th April 2012 - 12:09

like this
Like (6)

Fair point, step-hent, but I was more after what the campaign was claiming for the data. The website is unswervingly negative. The take away is 'a lorry will probably kill you'. Bit of balance required.

dullard's picture

posted by dullard [140 posts]
13th April 2012 - 13:07

like this
Like (4)

@dullard , the only balance required is that which you need whilst riding the bike !
The map can be put to so many uses , whereas reading the paperwork it is based on , would be so boring that 99% would miss any nfo that has relevance to improving " road safety " !
Wish this info had been available years ago , and then there would be fewer regretting their experiences .

Skippy(advocate for "Disabled / Para Sport")@skippydetour. blogging as skippi-cyclist.blogspot & Parrabuddy.blogspot currently on the road with ProTour Grand Tour Events .

skippy's picture

posted by skippy [378 posts]
16th April 2012 - 19:00

like this
Like (4)