My Journey

advocacy 5 mistakes

5 min read

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7d2gkfikNfs
Title: 5 Mistakes That Kill Bike Advocacy (And How to Fix Them)
Author: Shifter
Thumbnail: https://i.ytimg.com/vi/7d2gkfikNfs/mqdefault.jpg
AuthorUrl: https://www.youtube.com/@Shifter_Cycling

This video by Shifter features an interview with Carter Lavin, a veteran transportation activist and author of If You Want to Win, You’ve Got to Fight.

  • The discussion outlines five psychological and strategic pitfalls that often prevent successful infrastructure changes in cities.

I. The 5 Common Advocacy Mistakes

  • 1. “You vs. The World” (The Lone Wolf Mentality):
    • The Mistake: Advocates often feel like solitary “warriors” fighting against a car-centric society.
    • The Fix: Realize that politicians don’t care about making one person happy; they care about large groups. Transition from being “the crazy bike person” to building a broad base (e.g., getting a school principal involved makes it about “protecting kids” rather than “pleasing one cyclist”). [01:19]
  • 2. Only Building Coalitions with “Bike People”:
    • The Mistake: Restricting your circle to existing cyclists who are already convinced.
    • The Fix: Partner with non-cyclists who benefit from the change. [[02:29] (expand to drill down in each)(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7d2gkfikNfs&t=149)]
      • I. Cycle-Related & Micro-Mobility Businesses collapsed:: true
        • Rental & Shared Mobility Companies:
          • Incentive: Higher ridership directly increases their revenue.
          • Contribution: They possess “heat map” data showing where people actually want to ride, which can be used to justify where new lanes should be built.
        • Local Bike Shops (LBS) & Repair Cafes:
          • Incentive: More people on bikes means more maintenance, parts, and accessory sales.
          • Contribution: These serve as “community hubs” where flyers can be distributed and petitions signed by a diverse customer base.
        • Last-Mile Delivery Services:
          • Incentive: Cargo bike couriers and delivery riders (food, parcels) need safe, efficient routes to meet delivery windows and reduce insurance costs.
          • Contribution: They provide a “business efficiency” argument that appeals to conservative or commerce-focused politicians. II. General Business & Economic Partners collapsed:: true
        • Local High Street Retailers (Cafes, Bookshops, etc.):
          • Incentive: Studies consistently show that pedestrians and cyclists spend more per month in local shops than drivers, who often head to out-of-town malls.
          • Contribution: Testimonials from shop owners about increased footfall can neutralize “anti-business” arguments from opponents.
        • Major Local Employers:
          • Incentive: Large companies (including engineering firms or universities) want to reduce the cost of providing employee parking and improve staff health/retention.
          • Contribution: Letters from major taxpayers/employers carry significant weight with city councils. III. Institutional & Social Partners collapsed:: true
        • Educational Institutions (Universities & Schools):
          • Incentive: Ensuring the safety of students—particularly those in engineering or environmental programs who may be studying sustainable urbanism—is a primary duty.
          • Contribution: Organizing “Bike Trains” for children or students creates a powerful visual of vulnerable road users that is difficult for politicians to ignore.
        • Healthcare Providers & Public Health Experts:
          • Incentive: Reducing sedentary lifestyles and air pollution lowers the burden on local health services (like the NHS).
          • Contribution: Doctors and public health officials provide “expert authority” that frames the issue as a medical necessity rather than a lifestyle choice.
        • Faith-Based Organizations & Community Centers:
          • Incentive: These groups often care about “equity” and “stewardship,” ensuring that elderly or low-income members who don’t drive can still access services safely.
          • Contribution: They offer access to a demographic that politicians view as “reliable voters,” moving the needle on the “political consequences” mentioned in the video.
      • IV. The “Unexpected” Allies collapsed:: true
        • Motoring Associations (The “Rational Driver”):
          • Incentive: Every person on a bike is one less car in front of a driver in a traffic jam. Better infrastructure for others means less congestion for those who must drive.
          • Contribution: Support from a “car-friendly” group can be the ultimate “shield” for a politician worried about a backlash.
  • 3. Thinking Too Short-Term:
    • The Mistake: Expecting immediate results (like a bike lane next month) leads to burnout when progress is slow.
    • The Fix: Accept that transportation advocacy has no end date. Use “stepping stone” victories to “daisy chain” smaller fights into long-term systemic change, similar to how cities like Amsterdam or Montreal evolved over decades. [04:28]
  • 4. Separating Culture Wars from Infrastructure:
    • The Mistake: Focusing purely on the “party” side (bike mixers, social rides) without linking them to policy.
    • The Fix: Create a “virtuous cycle.” Use social events to gather a crowd, then use that crowd’s energy to sign petitions or pass out flyers. Cultural shifts must reaffirm and demand political infrastructure. [06:05]
  • 5. Lack of Political Consequences:

    • The Mistake: Allowing decision-makers to say “no” without any follow-up or accountability.

    • The Fix: Make it difficult for politicians to ignore you. If a mayor says no, ensure every person who signed your petition knows exactly who blocked the safety measure. It’s not about personal conflict, but about making sure the “boop on the snoot” (political pressure) is felt. [07:54]

  • Relevant Content & Analysis

  • Engineering & Urban Systems:
    • The video emphasizes that infrastructure isn’t just a technical challenge but a social and political negotiation.
    • The “virtuous cycle” mentioned [06:05] aligns with feedback loops often studied in Environmental Engineering and urban planning, where increased visibility leads to better infrastructure, which in t

Graph View