Bicycles have become established in Costa Rica as a means of transportation, recreation, and work tool. However, bicycle theft has become a persistent crime that discourages active mobility, affects public safety, and directly undermines decarbonization and public health efforts.
This analysis, developed by the Metro y Medio Foundation, cross-references official data from the Judicial Investigation Agency (OIJ) with a territorial and socioeconomic reading to understand what is happening, where it is happening, and why.
The magnitude of the problem: national figures (2020–2025)
Between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2025, 28,055 bicycles were reported stolen in Costa Rica
1. Annual average: 4,676 bicycles
2. Daily average: 12.8 thefts per day
The most critical year was 2020, with 5,557 thefts, followed by 2022 with 5,422. From 2023 onwards, there was a sustained reduction, closing 2025 with 3,088 cases, representing a drop of nearly 44% from the peak in 2020.
BICYCLE THEFT.
Important: the OIJ counts stolen items, not reports. A single event may include several bicycles.
Where does bicycle theft occur most often?
Analysis by province (2020–2025 cumulative)
1. San José: 6,161 thefts
2. Alajuela: 5,507 thefts
3. Puntarenas: 4,218 thefts
4. Limón: 3,656 thefts
5. Guanacaste: 3,435 thefts
These five provinces account for more than 80% of the national total.
BICYCLE THEFT
The pattern is clear:
1. High urban density
2. Road connectivity
3. Commercial, tourist, and port areas
4. Greater use of bicycles for daily transportation or recreation
Canton with the highest incidence
The most affected cantons are not always the most populated, but rather those that combine active mobility + criminal opportunity:
1. Alajuela: 1,986
2. San José: 1,947
3. Puntarenas: 1,529
4. Liberia: 1,515
5. Pococí: 1,218
6. Cartago: 1,071
7. Pérez Zeledón: 882
8. Heredia: 832
Liberia stands out, where the weight of tourism, bicycle rentals, and short trips generate an attractive secondary market for theft.
Why are bicycles stolen?
1. Lack of secure infrastructure
1. Absence of supervised bicycle parking
2. Inadequate anchors
3. Improvised spaces in urban centers
2. Active informal market
1. Resale without traceability
2. Digital platforms and informal trade
3. Poor oversight of second-hand sales
3. Low perceived risk
1. Crime seen as “minor”
2. Low probability of recovery
3. Low number of reports compared to actual volume
4. Socioeconomic factors
Cross-referencing data from INEC, the cantons with the highest theft rates coincide with:
1. Increased labor informality
2. Youth unemployment
3. Areas with tourism or migration pressure
This does not justify crime, but it helps to understand its structural persistence.
Real impact: beyond theft
Bicycle theft is not just a material loss:
- It discourages the use of clean transportation
- It increases dependence on cars
- It raises public health costs
- It affects workers who depend on bicycles
- It weakens sustainable mobility policies
Every stolen bicycle is one less person cycling and a silent setback for urban sustainability.
What can be done?
From the state and local governments
National bicycle registry (similar to vehicles)
Mandatory secure bicycle parking at businesses
Integrate bicycle theft into county security plans
Lighting and video surveillance at critical points
From companies and businesses
Parking with certified anchors
Group insurance for cyclists
Incentives for safe mobility
From citizens
Use of certified locks (double anchoring)
Photographic and serial number registration
Always report theft, even if it seems useless
Conclusion: safety is also mobility
Costa Rica cannot aspire to real sustainable mobility if it does not protect those who choose clean and active means of transport.
From the Metro y Medio Foundation, this call is clear:
Protecting bicycles means protecting the city, health, and the future.
Official source
Judicial Investigation Agency (OIJ) – Criminal Analysis Unit
Request 131-OPO/UAC/S-2026, January 2026
Own study with requested data.
