According to today’s Swedish daily, Svenska Dagbladet, a new report from the Swedish Royal College of Technology, KTH, supports an earlier proposal that three national authorities receive grants of SEK 500 million (about 50 million Euros) per year over a period of years to get Swedes to cycle more instead of driving their cars. The report reflects the sad state of sustainable development in Sweden. Firstly it identifies that business as usual, even given a good dose of technology optimism will absolutely fail to meet goals. Secondly it is just another haphazard shot in the dark from the country that announced the goal to break oil dependency by 2015 and convinced many that Sweden was leading sustainable development only to deliver nothing since the announcement over two years ago except a poorly written final document published and circulated for comments.

The KTH Climate report, commissioned by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, states that Sweden will not reach its goals of an 85% reduction in Carbon Dioxide emissions by 2050 merely through increased use of renewable fuels and introduction of more efficient technology. This even taking into account breaking current trends of increased travel and road transport. What is needed, says the report, are behavioral changes.These include working from home, planning cities to increase the level of local service, increased use of rail transport, and holidaying locally.

Jonas Åkerman, one of the authors, sees increased cycle traffic as one area of major potential. The Swedish Road Administration, the Swedish Rail Administration and Nutek - the Swedish Agency for Economic and Regional Growth agree. Even the Swedish Government cites cycling as a preferred strategy to reach environmental goals.

A couple of reasons why all the albeit good intentioned and minutely calculated thinking appears so ludicrous: firstly, Sweden is a very cold country, the roads and cycle paths are slippery the whole of the winter season. Studded winter tyres or equivalent are mandatory on cars. Cycling in the snow and ice is dangerous and no fun except for the most hardened enthusiasts. Secondly, spending all that government money is really only going to pay wages for planning, information and advertising professionals and the building of cycle paths. All aimed at appealing to the good nature of folks to get on their bikes more.

All this appealing to good folks' nature with a 50 million Euro budget per year pales in comparison to the advertising budget Volvo targets towards Chinese and other workers – including in Volvo’s home country Sweden - to get them to abandon their bikes to drive a Volvo instead.

Can the Swedish approaches really be taken seriously? The largest Swedish export is motor vehicles, among them Saab and Volvo. Can they really expect, regardless of the amount of money they spend on persuasion, their own people to abandon their cars and cycle, going back to conditions of the early 50s? This at the same time as the economy is kept afloat by car sales to the very nations that are abandoning cycling? Can Sweden be seen as a nation leading sustainable development? Sadly, I think not. True innovation, bold political and social moves are needed for a nation to be seen as believable when they set targets and strategies for sustainable development. The question is, which one dares to be first?