\n This photo show people cycling in Siem Reap. Photo: Zul Rorvy\n <\/p>\n
Recent increases in gasoline prices have again made people aware of the cost of moving through the city. <\/p>\n
This reveals a dependence on fossil fuel-based transport in a city where cycling was once part of everyday life.<\/p>\n
I remember a different Phnom Penh from two decades ago, when the city was less crowded and less urbanized. I lived on the first floor along Kampuchea Krom Boulevard, and every morning at 6am, my brother and I rode our bicycles from Psar Depo to Bak Touk School.\u00a0<\/p>\n
In the afternoon, we cycled home with classmates, gradually parting ways as each of us returned to our neighborhoods.<\/p>\n
The journey was never just about getting from one place to another. Along the route were small but memorable stops: kuy teav stalls, French sandwich carts, modest coffee shops and even a small aquarium store in an alley.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The streets were active but manageable. There were not many cars, and cycling felt natural. Sometimes we rode on the sidewalk, and sometimes we cut through narrow alleys.\u00a0<\/p>\n
It was part of the everyday rhythm of the city. At home, bicycles were parked in shared spaces downstairs, turning these areas into informal bike racks before being carried back upstairs in the evening.<\/p>\n
Today, that city feels different. On the same route, during a typical weekday morning in April, bicycles are almost absent from the main boulevards. Sidewalks are filled with parked vehicles, leaving little space for pedestrians and forcing cyclists to compete with other vehicles.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Street trees have gradually disappeared and many shortcut alleys have become informally occupied, making them less accessible and less safe.<\/p>\n
Yet cycling has not disappeared. It has simply changed form. On weekends, groups of people cycle toward the outskirts of the city. This kind of travel is no longer everyday mobility. It is leisure. The bicycle is no longer part of daily life, but something reserved for spare time. It has shifted from necessity to lifestyle activity.<\/p>\n
This contrast raises an important question: is this how cities are meant to evolve, or have we lost something that should have been preserved and adapted?\u00a0<\/p>\n
If cycling exists only as a weekend activity, it will remain a trend. To matter again, it must return to everyday life.<\/p>\n
Bike Urbanism and Lessons from Elsewhere<\/p>\n
Phnom Penh\u2019s situation is not unfamiliar. Cities such as Copenhagen and Amsterdam experienced similar conditions in the mid-twentieth century, when urban life became increasingly dependent on fossil fuel transport.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Their transformation into cycling cities was not accidental. It was the result of existing biking culture and long-term planning decisions shaped by crisis, policy and a clear shift in priorities.<\/p>\n
In Copenhagen, cycling is treated as a default rather than an alternative mode of transport. This shift was achieved by prioritizing cycling in street design<\/a> and traffic systems.\u00a0<\/p>\n Planners redesigned bike lanes and intersections to favor cyclists and timed green waves<\/a> to allow smoother, safer, and more continuous movement on the street.\u00a0<\/p>\n Cycling bridges, bike parking and supporting physical infrastructures were introduced to form a reliable network<\/a>. These are also well connected to public transport, including buses, trains and metro systems.<\/p>\n Over the past decade, Copenhagen has invested heavily in this infrastructure. In 2018, approximately 49<\/a> percent of all trips to work and education in the city were made by bicycle. Recent goals for the capital region aim to increase this to 50 percent of commuting trips<\/a>.<\/p>\n Amsterdam followed a slightly different path. Alongside building strong cycling infrastructure, the city reduced the dominance of cars. Today, cycling accounts for roughly 38 percent<\/a> of all trips in the city, with hundreds of thousands of daily journeys made by bicycle.\u00a0<\/p>\n