The cut comes at a time of growing demand
Bicycles and e-bikes have long since ceased to be merely leisure or sports equipment. For many people, they are an everyday means of transport; for others, they offer a realistic alternative for short and medium-distance journeys. According to figures from the Federal Ministry of Transport, 55 per cent of people in Germany intend to cycle or ride e-bikes more often in future. In 2021, the figure was 41 per cent. Demand is therefore growing significantly, whilst the planned federal funding is set to fall to 544 million euros.
The political question is therefore not merely whether a ten per cent cut is justifiable in a tight budget. The crucial factor is what infrastructure Germany will need in the coming years. If we want to encourage more people to cycle, we must make cycling safe, predictable and convenient as part of everyday life. This cannot be achieved through appeals alone, but rather through cycle paths, safe junctions, cycle parking facilities and reliable connections between residential areas, railway stations, workplaces and city centres.
Not every cut is equally serious
The figure of just under ten per cent paints the overall picture, but masks differences between individual programmes. Of particular relevance to local authorities is the ‘City and Country’ programme, which funds local cycling projects. This is set to fall from 281 to 276 million euros. At first glance, that is five million euros less. However, given the rise in construction and planning costs, the cut actually represents a significantly greater loss of financial leeway in real terms.
Even more serious is the continuation of the cut in funding for cycle paths along federal roads: following last year’s reduction from 120 to 100 million euros, this level is now being maintained. Particularly where federal roads cut through towns or form key commuter routes, safe cycle paths are not a luxury. They determine whether cyclists can actually use the route or are forced to take alternative routes on carriageways with high speeds and heavy traffic.
Once again, no funding has been earmarked for new cycle parking facilities at railway stations. This undermines the integration of cycling and rail travel, even though it is precisely this combination that can replace many car journeys. The cuts set out in the draft also affect active mobility, pilot cycling projects and commercial electric cargo bikes.
A lower take-up of funds is not an argument against investment
One possible objection is that, in the case of cycle highways and cycle paths along federal waterways, funds have in some cases not been fully utilised. The draft budget aims to reduce these allocations by a total of around 43 million euros. Indeed, unspent funds may be an indication that programmes or project structures are not functioning effectively enough.
However, this does not automatically mean that funding for cycling is set too high overall. The problems often lie at a local level: protracted planning processes, complicated lines of responsibility, a shortage of staff in local authorities, conflicts over land use or approval procedures. Anyone who responds to these bottlenecks by cutting funding is confusing cause and effect.
It would make more sense to reallocate unclaimed funds to programmes for which there is high demand, such as local authority cycling projects or safe cycle paths along national roads. It is precisely this reallocation that is missing from the draft. This not only means less investment, but also a missed opportunity to use existing funds in a more targeted manner.
Cycling is infrastructure, not an afterthought
The 2027 federal budget is under considerable pressure to be consolidated. At the same time, the Federal Government points to high levels of investment in infrastructure, security and economic stability. The Bundestag is still debating the draft budget; it will not be finally adopted on 11 September 2026. The Federal Government and that Federal Ministry of Finance present the draft as an investment and consolidation budget.
This is precisely why the cutbacks to cycling infrastructure seem contradictory. Compared with major road, rail or bridge projects, cycling often requires modest investment, yet can have a tangible impact on everyday life: greater road safety, improved accessibility, less noise and a more attractive link to the rail network. This is not about pitting different modes of transport against one another. An efficient transport system needs roads, rail, public transport, walking and cycling.
But the bicycle must no longer be treated as if it were merely a supplementary, niche issue. For commuters, families, apprentices, older people and sport-oriented everyday cyclists, it is an integral part of modern mobility. Reliable support for cycling also provides planning certainty for local authorities, planning consultancies, tradespeople and the cycling industry.
The better decision would be a targeted expansion
The criticism of the cut is justified because it ignores the fundamental conflict of objectives: Germany expects more cycling, yet is investing less in the infrastructure needed to support it. Anyone who takes this demand seriously should not only maintain funding but also specifically increase it.
Three areas would be prioritised: safe and uninterrupted connections for everyday use, cycle paths along high-risk main roads, and secure parking facilities at railway stations. In addition, there is a need for simpler funding procedures and greater support for local authorities in planning and implementation. Money alone does not build a cycle path. However, without sufficient funding that can be planned for the long term, many projects will also come to nothing.
The planned cut is therefore not just the wrong signal. It risks further widening the gap between the desire for more cycling and the reality on the roads. For a mode of transport that makes comparatively efficient use of space, energy and public funds, increasing funding would be the more sustainable decision.
Matthias Borchers
Editor