Originally Posted by LittleBigMan
Alan Wachtel and Diana Lewiston published in the ITE Journal, Sept/Oct 1994 (from the Institute of Transportation Engineers):
"The average cyclist in this study incurs a risk on the sidewalk 1.8 times as great as on the roadway. The risk on the sidewalk is higher than on the roadway for both age groups, for both sexes, and for wrong-way travel. The greatest risk found in this study is 5.3 times the average risk for bicyclists over 18 traveling against traffic on the sidewalk."
The researchers showed the same sloppy mischaracterization/misuse of the term "risk" as their mentor. Nowhere in their "risk" study is accident severity level evaluated. A risk analysis that does not factor in the severity of the various mishaps is WORTHLESS for evaluating comparative risk. Except possibly for those researchers with a predetermined agenda to "prove."
Not surprisingly the researchers suggested Effective Cycling Instruction as a likely candidate for risk reduction (with no supporting evidence.) One of the researchers is an instructor in that program; the other researcher is an associate of the owner of the program; a program whose promotion is predicated on such sophomoric risk analysis.