Copenhagenize Index 2025: The Global Ranking of Bicycle-Friendly Cities

Site reliability and usability

• Several commenters report the index site intermittently showing a raw WordPress install page, suggesting a botched deployment.
• This undermines confidence in the professionalism of the project for some readers, though the site later comes back up.

Topography, e-bikes, and everyday practicality

• Debate over whether flatness is a decisive advantage: some argue it explains why Dutch/Danish cities dominate; others point to many cities being naturally flat due to development near waterways.
• E-bikes are seen by some as largely negating hills; others counter that range, charging safety in apartments, theft risk, and storage needs limit their practicality.
• Examples from Norway and US/Canada suggest riders can adapt to hills and cold with time and equipment (spiked tires).

Winter and climate constraints

• Strong disagreement on how much cold limits cycling.
• Some say places like Montreal/Quebec are simply too harsh (ice, -20°C, windchill), pushing people to cars or transit.
• Others cite Nordic examples where year‑round cycling works when paths are prioritized for snow clearing and riders use studded tires and proper clothing.

Copenhagen, Dutch cities, and Paris rankings

• Many feel the ranking overstates Copenhagen versus Dutch cities, which are described as having more continuous, fully separated networks and better intercity cycling.
• Surprise and skepticism about Utrecht ranking above Amsterdam; locals disagree on which feels more “bike‑centered.”
• Strong criticism of Paris and French cities (Bordeaux, Nantes) being placed near Amsterdam; riders report Paris as chaotic and far less safe, and French infrastructure as far less continuous.

Montreal, Quebec City, and North American context

• Montreal’s inclusion is hotly debated: some say it’s only “bike friendly” by North American standards and still car‑dominated.
• Others note significant but demographically narrow bike use (more male, student, downtown‑centric) and harsh winters that sharply reduce ridership.
• Quebec City is praised by some as enjoyable for cycling.

Methodology and potential bias

• Commenters highlight that Copenhagenize is a consulting firm, raising concerns about incentives and “gaming” metric definitions.
• The published methodology weights factors like cargo-bike usage, share of women cycling, NGOs, and media tone—seen by some as subjective or easy to manipulate.
• Alternative data-driven tools (e.g., measuring percentage of “secure” km via routing on OpenStreetMap data) are presented and show large gaps between cities the index ranks similarly.

Bike parking, theft, and security

• Several note that fear of theft and lack of truly secure parking can be a major deterrent to using bikes for errands, especially in North American cities.
• In the Netherlands, strategies include using cheap “junk” bikes with simple locks or accepting varying security norms by neighborhood.
• One long subthread argues over how common theft/parts-stripping is, how much it deters cycling, and whether enforcement is lax—especially regarding homeless people.
  • One side claims rampant theft linked to encampments, minimal prosecution, and argues stopping theft would do more for cycling than new infrastructure.
  • The other side calls this exaggerated and stigmatizing, citing prosecutions that do occur and insisting fear of traffic, not theft, is the main barrier for most non‑cyclists.

Culture vs. infrastructure

• Multiple comments stress that culture (driver behavior, social acceptance of cycling, expectations of riding in rain/cold) is as important as lanes and paths.
• Examples from Amsterdam, Tokyo backstreets, and Dutch “traffic-calmed” streets illustrate that low car speeds and shared-space norms can yield safety even without painted or separated bike lanes.
• Some argue that investments and policy choices, not climate or “hardiness,” largely determine whether year‑round cycling becomes normal.