A large-scale survey of nearly 3,700 residents reveals a country still largely dominated by the car, but where cycling is gaining ground — provided the infrastructure keeps pace.
In Luxembourg, the car remains king. That is the unequivocal finding of an extensive survey carried out in February 2026 in collaboration with Euroconsumers among ACL members. But behind this automotive dominance, the data paints a more nuanced picture, in which cycling occupies a growing place in residents’ daily lives — while still running up against persistent obstacles.
A country on four wheels, but not only
The figures speak for themselves: 46% of respondents use their personal car six to seven days a week, and barely 0.8% say they never get behind the wheel. At the other end of the spectrum, nearly half of those surveyed (49%) never cycle. The contrast is striking.
Yet the other half of the cycling population deserves particular attention. Around a quarter of residents use a bicycle at least once a week — 12% cycle one to two days, 8% three to five days and 4% almost daily. This is far from negligible in a country where hilly terrain and unpredictable weather do not always make cycling easy.
Why do people cycle?
The survey reveals that cycling in Luxembourg is first and foremost a matter of leisure and sport. Recreational rides top the list of uses among cyclists, with 84% of them pedalling for this purpose at least occasionally, followed closely by physical exercise (81%). Expressed as a share of the total population, 43% of residents use the bicycle for leisure rides and 42% for sport.
Utilitarian uses lag well behind. Only 30% of residents use a bicycle for errands and daily travel, and 21% to get to work or school. The latter figure is, however, mechanically pulled down by the presence in the sample of retirees, homemakers and jobseekers, who do not have such journeys to make. Focusing exclusively on working people and students — the only individuals concerned by a home-to-work commute — the rate rises to 26%, or roughly one in four. In some cities, the practice is even more widespread: in Luxembourg City, half of active cyclists pedal to work every week, and in Esch-sur-Alzette, 44% do so on a weekly basis.
A generational and gender divide also emerges. Men are significantly more inclined to cycle than women (57% of male respondents are cyclists, compared with 43% of women). The 55–74 age group, contrary to what one might expect, are the most regular cyclists: 29% of them pedal every week, compared with 19% of 18–34 year-olds. This is most likely explained by the greater free time available to retirees and those nearing the end of their careers, as well as a cycling culture more deeply rooted in that generation.
Key figures from the survey
49% of residents never cycle — but the other half pedal at least occasionally.
4.2/10 — The score given to the feeling of safety when sharing the road with motorised vehicles. The lowest score in the entire survey.
19% of female non-cyclists cite the risk of accidents as their main reason for not cycling, twice as many as men (9.5%).
23% of cyclists have been involved in a cycling accident over the past five years. In Luxembourg City, this figure rises to 30%.
Why non-cyclists do not pedal
Among the 1,368 people who never get on a bicycle, the reasons cited paint a revealing picture of the country’s structural challenges. The top reason is simply not owning a bicycle (26%), followed by a preference for other modes of transport (20%). But the third reason is more concerning: 15% of non-cyclists cite the risk of accidents and a feeling of insecurity in traffic as their main reason.
This feeling of insecurity particularly affects women, 19% of whom rank it as their main reason, compared with only 9.5% of men. It also worsens with age: 19% of 55–74 year-olds cite it, compared with 8% of 18–34 year-olds. The lack of cycling infrastructure (7%), geography (5%) and weather conditions (5%) round out the picture of barriers to cycling.
Perceived benefits: health and environment lead the way
For those who do cycle, the motivations are clear and consistent. The most cited advantage is maintaining fitness and health (85%), followed by the ecological and non-polluting nature of cycling (73%). Next come practical considerations: avoiding traffic jams and parking problems (53%), speed of travel (49%), freedom of movement (49%) and low cost (47%).
Notably, among those who cycle to work, these practical advantages weigh even more heavily: 70% appreciate being able to avoid traffic jams and 67% consider cycling a fast means of transport. In a country where traffic congestion is a daily affliction, cycling appears to these commuters as a concrete solution rather than merely a virtuous choice.
A critical view of infrastructure
The assessment of conditions offered to cyclists is harsh. On a scale of 1 to 10, overall satisfaction with the cycle path network reaches only 5.2 at municipal level and 5.4 at national level — barely passable scores. The lowest-rated dimensions are the completeness of the network (5.0), its connectivity (4.9 at national level), its safety and pleasantness (4.8 at local level) and available cycling facilities (4.7 at local level).
Safety is the major weak point. The feeling of safety when sharing the road with other vehicles receives the lowest score in the entire survey: 4.3 at municipal level and 4.2 at national level. Safety from theft and vandalism is barely better perceived (4.5 and 4.4 respectively). Only road surface quality (6.1 and 6.2) and pollution levels (5.8) receive adequate scores.
Disparities between municipalities are striking. Bertrange stands out with the best ratings (overall satisfaction of 6.7), followed by Mamer (6.1) and Mersch (6.0). At the opposite end, Esch-sur-Alzette brings up the rear with a satisfaction score of only 5.2 and particularly low marks for safety from theft (3.6) and road sharing (3.6).
Three key messages
Cycling has considerable but largely untapped potential. Half the population never cycles, but among those who do, engagement is strong and the recognised benefits are manifold. The main lever for converting non-cyclists does not lie in raising awareness of the benefits of cycling — these are already widely acknowledged — but in removing concrete obstacles: road safety concerns, lack of infrastructure and the absence of continuous cycle paths.
Safety is the Achilles heel of Luxembourg’s cycling policy. Whether it is the feeling of insecurity among non-cyclists, the dismal score given to sharing the road with motorised vehicles, or the high rate of reported accidents, everything converges on the same diagnosis: cycling in Luxembourg is still perceived — and experienced — as risky. This is the first barrier to remove in order to democratise the practice, particularly among women and older people, who are the most discouraged by this insecurity.
Existing infrastructure fails to convince even its own users. When a majority of cyclists bypass cycle paths because they are poorly designed, discontinuous or obstructed, it is a sign that the problem is not merely quantitative — it is not enough simply to build more paths — but qualitative. The challenge for public authorities is to design a cycling network that is coherent, continuous, separated from motorised traffic and properly maintained.
Cyclists versus motorists: a tense dialogue
The survey highlights a palpable tension between road users. Around 50% of respondents believe that cyclists do not obey the highway code, and 55% consider that groups of cyclists (tourists, sports clubs) often create traffic conflicts. At the same time, around 35% feel that cars and motorcycles do not respect cyclists, and 24% level the same criticism at bus drivers.
Perceptions diverge radically depending on whether one is a cyclist or not. On a scale where 1 means no agreement and 3 means full agreement, non-cyclists are significantly more inclined to point out cyclists’ infractions (average agreement score of 2.46 versus 2.01 among cyclists). Conversely, cyclists are far more likely to denounce motorists’ lack of respect towards them (score of 2.15 versus 1.83 among non-cyclists). Each side tends to minimise its own shortcomings and amplify those of the other.
Interestingly, a large majority (64%) agrees that the government should create more cycle paths. This consensus transcends the cyclist/non-cyclist divide, although cyclists are even more in favour (81% agreement versus 47% among non-cyclists).
Persistent risky behaviours
The survey also reveals concerning behaviours among cyclists themselves. While helmet-wearing is now well established — 71% of cyclists wear one very often and 77% at least often — other practices are more problematic. Around 20% of cyclists admit to not obeying traffic lights and signs at least from time to time, and more than 30% ride more frequently on pavements or in pedestrian zones.
The use of lights in daytime conditions remains insufficient: only 57.5% of cyclists always or often use lights and reflectors during the day. In contrast, the vast majority (88%) light up properly when it is dark.
Existing cycle paths, where available, are bypassed by a majority of cyclists: only 35% never avoid them, while 11% avoid them often or very often. The main reason? Their design is judged to be poor or discontinuous (40% of responses), followed by obstructions — parked cars, roadworks, pedestrians (20%).
Theft, vandalism and accidents: a significant reality
Over the past five years, 9.5% of cyclists have had their bicycle stolen and 11% have suffered acts of vandalism. More worryingly still, 23% have been involved in a cycling accident. Luxembourg City records the highest figures, with 19% theft, 16% vandalism and, most strikingly, 30% accidents — a figure that demands attention.
Among those involved in accidents, half (50%) were involved in a solo incident with no other vehicle, which points to infrastructure problems (road conditions, path design). Collisions with a car account for 39% of cases, confirming the danger of sharing the road.
Conclusion
The survey paints the portrait of a Luxembourg at a crossroads in terms of sustainable mobility. Cycling is valued by those who practise it, perceived as beneficial for health and the environment, and recognised as a credible alternative to the car for daily commutes — particularly in congested urban centres. But this potential comes up against a cycling ecosystem judged inadequate by its own users: incomplete paths, an omnipresent feeling of insecurity and difficult cohabitation with motorised traffic.
The near-unanimous consensus on the need to create more cycle paths sends a clear signal to policymakers. But the most important lesson from this survey may lie elsewhere: it is not so much the number of paths that is lacking as their quality, their continuity and their ability to offer cyclists — both current and potential — a genuine feeling of safety. The highest-ranked municipalities, such as Bertrange and Mersch, show that this is achievable. The challenge now is to extend these good practices across the entire country, if Luxembourg wishes to convert its 49% of non-cyclists into committed adopters.
Methodology: Online survey conducted in February 2026 among ACL members. 3,699 valid responses (questionnaires in French, German and English). Sample weighted by sex, age, nationality, region and education level of the Luxembourg population aged 18 to 74.
Tags
