Investigating the rates and impacts of near misses and related incidents among UK cyclists

The paper investigates the occurrence of non-injury incidents among cyclists in the UK, seeking to (i) generate a rate that can be compared with injury rates, (ii) analyse factors affecting incident rates, and (iii) analyse factors affecting the impact of incidents on cyclists. We collected data on non-injury cycling ‘incidents’ (near misses and other frightening and/or annoying incidents) from 1692 online diaries of cycle trip stages1 and incidents, participants having signed up in advance for a specific day. Following data cleaning and coding, a dataset was created covering 1532 diary days and 3994 records of incidents occurring within the UK. Incident rates were calculated and compared to injury risks for cyclists. Cross-tabulation and regression were used to identify factors affecting incident rates and the effect an incident has on the cyclist. Frightening or annoying non-injury incidents, unlike slight injuries, are an everyday experience for most people cycling in the UK. For regular cyclists ‘very scary’ incidents (rated as 3 on a 0–3 scale) are on average a weekly experience, with deliberate aggression experienced monthly. Per mile, non-injury incidents were more frequent for people making shorter and slower trips. People aged over 55 were at lower risk, as were those cycling at the weekend and outside the morning peak. Incidents that involved motor vehicles, especially those involving larger vehicles, were more frightening than those that did not. Near miss and other non-injury incidents are widespread in the UK and may have a substantial impact on cycling experience and uptake. Policy and research should initially target the most frightening types of incident, such as very close passes and incidents involving large vehicles. Further attention needs to be paid to the experiences of groups under-represented among cyclists, such as women making shorter trips.

Der Widerspruch zwischen nationalen Berufsbildungssystemen und dem europäischen Arbeitsmarkt: der Fall der Maurerqualifikationen

This paper draws on research into bricklaying qualifications in eight countries to show how equivalence might be established between qualitative differences in occupational qualifications so facilitating the implementation of a European Qualifications Framework (EQF). These differences are associated with different forms of vocational education and training (VET) and related to social partner (trade union and employer) involvement and the significance attached to underpinning knowledge and broader educational components. A main distinction is drawn between countries where bricklaying continues to be predominantly a ‘trade’, based on narrow skills gained at the workplace, and those where it is conceived as a broader occupation with a substantial knowledge base. A contradiction exists between national VET systems and the European labour market, from which stems the necessity for a European Sectoral Qualifications Framework (SQF) if differences in qualification are to be recognised and if the EQF is to function as a meaningful translational device.