Q9: What about making hi-vis compulsory, then?

Q9: What about making hi-vis compulsory, then?

If wearing a hi-visibility jacket helps people feel safer when they’re cycling and more willing to do it, that’s a good thing. But deciding to make anything compulsory in law should be evidence-based – and there’s no compelling evidence showing that hi-vis makes cyclists any safer.

If cyclists wear hi-vis, drivers may spot them more readily – but, it seems, spotting is one thing and driving safely around them another.47 One academic study, for example, found that whether a cyclist is wearing hi-vis or not makes very little difference to how closely motorists overtake them.48 On the other hand, research does imply that retroreflective accessories designed to make you more conspicuous in the dark – especially ankle straps that move when you pedal – are probably worth the investment.49 Contrasting colours (i.e. colours that contrast with the background) seem to make a difference to drivers’ detection of motorcyclists – e.g. riding in a black outfit against nothing other than the sky in daylight. This may be true for cyclists as well. Irrespective of hi-vis, people at the wheel of a large, heavy vehicles capable of high speeds should always been on the lookout for vulnerable road users anyway. It also makes sense for cyclists to know how to make themselves as visible as possible through road positioning, and for drivers to appreciate that cyclists ride in the centre of their lane in certain circumstances in order to do exactly that. Rules 72 and 213 of the Highway Code now explain this to both cyclists and drivers in some detail (se Q5). Finally, to put the issue of cyclists wearing ‘dark clothing’ in perspective – which, it appears, some drivers see everywhere and all the time – only 5% of the top ten contributory factors (CFs) allocated to the cyclists involved in fatal or serious collisions from 2015-2020 (GB) were assigned by the police to ‘rider wearing dark clothing’.

• See our collection of evidence on hi-vis for more.

47 A review of hi-vis (i.e. fluorescent / retroreflective) found it made a difference to drivers' ability to detect and recognise pedestrians (& presumably cyclists), but it was impossible to tell by how much, and if it made them any safer. Kwan I, Mapstone J. Interventions for increasing pedestrian and cyclist visibility for the prevention of death and injuries. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 4. A similar lack of detectable benefits was found by JM Wood et al, (see ref below), and Miller P, The use of conspicuity aids by cyclists and the risk of crashes involving other road users. 2012. 48 Walker I et al. The influence of a bicycle commuter's appearance on drivers’ overtaking proximities: An on-road test of bicyclist stereotypes, high visibility clothing and safety aids in the United Kingdom. Nov 2013. 49 Wood, JM et al. 2010. Cyclist visibility at night: Perceptions of visibility do not necessarily match reality.