April 2019 - Bicycles Create Change

30/04/201907/05/2019

Anzac Day: Queensland Imperial Cycle Corps

This week, Australia and New Zealand commemorated ANZAC day. ANZAC stands for Australian and New Zealand Army Corps.

ANZAC Day is a national annual public holiday honoring the first major military action fought by Australian and New Zealand forces during the First World War.

On this blog last year, we looked at the Fitzpatricks’ (2011) book ‘The bicycle in wartime’ which is an impressively well researched and detailed account of how bicycles feature in the military. The year before, we looked at The Australian Cycling Corps and what kinds of bikes were used in World War 1.

This year, I saw an Instagram photo of the Queensland Imperial Cycle Corps. It was uploaded by Space4Cycling Brisbane. Here is what was uploaded:

Anzac Day: The Queensland Imperial Cycle Corps. Bicycles Create Change.com. 30th April, 2019.

Our illustration of the Queensland Imperial Cycle Corps prior to their departure for South Africa in the steamer Templemore has a special interest for all Australians. The cycle corps here depicted consists of 51 men, commanded by Lieutenant Wynyard Joss, who has an able second in Lieutenant Koch ; these two gentlemen are to be seen in the foreground. The photograph was taken on the wharf, the troopship Templemore making a befitting background.

Apart from the interest attached to the fact that this is the first military cycle corps established in Australia, it is interesting to note that, the whole corps is mounted upon Massey-Harris bicycles.

Previous to the selection of a wheel for the contingent the bicycles were subjected to very severe tests, through which the Massey-Harris came with flying colours. The purchase of Masseys for the Queensland soldiers is justified by the fact that the Victorian Government have used this machine with much success in the hard service of postal work.

Content from: The Sydney Mail and New South Wales Advertiser, Sat 23 March 1901, covering the Departure of Australian Imperial Troops for South Africa (the Boer War)].

So what happened to the Queensland Cyclist Corps?

After I saw that post, I wanted to know what became of the cyclist section once they left Australia on the Templemore. So, I went searching online and I found the following details on the Anglo Boer website. It was interesting to read the recount of Lieutenant Joss of the 5th Queensland (Cyclist Corps) engagement with the enemy at the end of this article. Below is the article in full:

This contingent, 500 strong, with a cyclist section, was commanded by Lieutenant Colonel J F Flewell-Smith. They sailed on the Templemore on 6th March 1901, and arrived in South Africa in the beginning of April. They at once took the field.

The appendix to the despatch of 8th July 1901 shows that the 5th QIB (strength in May about 340, with 361 horses) took the place of the 4th in the column of General Plumer—a body which did very fine service in practically all parts of the seat of war.

The work of Plumer’s column during the time the 5th Queensland were with him has already been briefly sketched under the 6th New Zealand Contingent. The 5th Queensland took their full share of that work, and quite their full share of the captures. On 15th June Lieutenant Halse was severely wounded in the difficult country about Piet Retief.

On 15th August 2 men were killed and several wounded at Kopjesfontein, in the Orange River Colony. In September the column was doing good work in the southeast of that country, and was constantly in touch with the enemy.

At a drift on the Caledon River on 27th September there was a sharp fight, in which this contingent had Lieutenants A E Pooley and L E Caskey and 2 men killed, and several wounded. Lieutenant Pooley had served as a sergeant with the 4th contingent.

The corps was present at the hard-fought engagement known as Onverwachte, in the south-east of the Transvaal, on 4th January 1902, when they suffered very severely,—about 12 being killed and 20 wounded, the latter including Captain H R Carter and Lieutenant Higginson, both severely wounded.

According to the Press Association correspondent with General Plumer, Lieutenant Joss of the 5th Queensland (Cyclist Corps) did a smart piece of work in the Warmbaths district soon after the corps took the field. When riding with despatches, and accompanied by only 10 men, he captured 9 Boers with 3 waggons.

Some details of the regiment were with a convoy which was fiercely attacked on the Bethel Road on 25th May 1901. The detachment lost 1 killed and 5 wounded.

26/04/201907/05/2019

Six Day Brisbane Final

On the weekend I went to the Anna Mears Velodrome for the Six Day Series Final Brisbane.

OMG.

It was AWESOME!

I’ve never been to Six Day cycling event before. I was there at the invitation of World Bicycle Relief (Australia). It was my pleasure to help them out for the event. Not only was I supporting a good cause, but I got to watch some incredible racing, meet my favourite inter/national cyclists, chat with some big-wigs and mingle with cycling-mad punters all night! Horray!

The Anna Meares Velodrome is the perfect stadium for this kind of event. I was stoked to see some of the world’s best track cyclists in live action – especially how they whiz so confidently around the 48-degree velodrome banks – eck!

There are excellent views and seating all around the outside of the track as well as a walk tunnel that went under the velodrome and let you into the centre. Inside the velodrome, there was a bar, a few trade exhibitions, the DJ stage, the podium/race ramp, and activities on one side, and the athletes compound on the other.

As support of the riders and in the spirit of the event, I wore my recycled bicycle parts and inner-tube outfit. This outfit includes a cog steampunk-style hat, a bodice of inner tubes interwoven across the front, a bike chain chandelier belted skirt and a necklace of made of inner tubes and BMX parts. A genuine (be)spoke outfit! (*aw dad!*). It was the perfect thing to wear. Lots of people stopped to ask about it and see the details. It was lovely to see how much people appreciated the effort, materials and appropriacy of the outfit for the event.

The music and light show was an unexpected bonus. The DJ played a continuous stream of banging beats supported by impressive party-style lighting. The whole overall effect was like being in the ultimate sports-and-dance club = a very exciting party atmosphere. People were even dancing. Beers, Beats and Bikes!

The place was packed each day. There were families, couples, groups of friends and kids galore. I talked to people who had come diligently every day and others who had no idea what the event was but had been given a ticket so came along to check it out. Everyone agreed it was a wonderful format to experience cycling. The atmosphere as electric, the races were so close you couldn’t help but be affected by the environment, excitement and energy of the action.

I also had the chance to chat with a few of my favorite Aussie cyclists like Amy Cure and Olympian Shane Perkins. Considering they had just finished racing and had much to do (and lots of people to talk to), I was impressed that they still made time to come into the crowd and mingle, have a chat and hang out with some of their fans after racing. What true champs!

The race formats included various scratch and points races including Madison, Elimination, Derny Racing, Women’s Omnium, 200m Time Trials and Kirin. Some of the formats like the Madison were new to me, but after I understood what it entailed (see video below), the racing took on a whole new intensity.

Cyclists like Mark Cavendish, Bradley Wiggins and Australian superstars Callum Scotson and nine-time World Champion Cameron Meyer (who won the Six Day London event in 2017) have competed at the European Six Day Series.

I had a brilliant time and will definitely go again.

A huge thank you to Dagmar, Ali, Scott and World Bicycle Relief for the opportunity to go to this event and for making my time there so enjoyable.

22/04/201927/04/2019

More space. Bicycle Politics: Review Essay. (4 of 4)

Here is the fourth and last in the US bicycle politics review essay series written by Dr Jennifer Bonham. This review detailed three key texts. The first post outlined the socio-political context to set the scene. The second post reviewed the book ‘Pedal Power: The quiet rise of the bicycle in American public life’ while the last post focused on Zack Furness’ ‘One Less Car: Bicycling and the Politics of Automobility’. This post looks at Jeff Mapes’ Pedaling Revolution: How Cyclists are Changing American Cities’ which rounds off a very comprehensive and informed discussion about the history and activities of bicycle politics in the USA. This book in an especially valuable inclusion to this discussion given that according to Dr Bonham ‘it comes the closest to conjuring a culture of cycling which values diverse mobilities’ of all the books reviewed. A massive thank you to Dr Bonham for sharing her research, thoughts and passion. Enjoy! NG.

Mapes, J. (2009). Pedaling revolution: How cyclists are changing American cities. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University Press.

More Space

Jeff Mapes’ Pedaling Revolution: How Cyclists are Changing American Cities targets a general readership as he traces changes in the status and popularity of cycling in the United States. A senior political reporter with The Oregonian, Mapes’ sympathy for bicycling is informed by debates over the livability of American cities, health and the built environment, and the costs of suburbanization and automobile-oriented transport systems. Mapes does not explicitly challenge fundamental notions of technological progress or dominant values of individualism and materialism. Rather, he argues, automobile-oriented transport systems bring a range of problems—suburban sprawl, affordability, exclusion and constraint— that will worsen into the future. His analysis is concerned with the formal political institutions—parliament, elected and appointed officials in all spheres of government, legislation, funding arrangements—he believes are essential to increasing bicycle use.

Mapes introduces his book with a description of the different people to be observed riding bicycles in North American cities today. As he challenges cycling stereotypes, he is also quite aware this latest turn to bicycling may be short lived, just one more crest in a series of highs and lows that reach from the nineteenth to the twenty-first centuries. The bright moments for “everyday” cycling in the United States have occurred under “not so everyday” conditions. The 1940s boom came with wartime petrol rationing and the 1970s boom amid the fuel shortages of the oil crisis. But Mapes traces threads from the 1970s to the present day as he identifies the people (bike advocates, bureaucrats, industry representatives, politicians), maps the legislation (ISTEA), and describes the ideas and programs (e.g. Safe Routes to School) he believes have enabled a recent resurgence in cycling.

Once he has positioned the United States on the brink of change, Mapes turns his attention to the Netherlands for a glimpse of what the future might hold. He provides a detailed description of the infrastructure, road rules, etiquette, legislation, and funding arrangements in place in the Netherlands. Mapes emphasizes the importance of the Dutch government’s political will in re-orienting the transport system to accommodate all modes of transport (not just the automobile) and, in contrast to Wray, he explains this re-orientation largely in terms of the 1970s oil crisis.

Mapes, like Wray, discusses the various roles played by bike advocates, advocacy groups, activist events and sympathetic politicians in developing a culture of cycling in U.S. cities. The discussion is rich with examples as he takes readers on a cycling tour of three U.S. cities: the university town of Davis, California; Portland, Oregon; and New York. Combining tour with commentary, Mapes describes the streets he cycles along and uses buildings, landmarks, and pieces of infrastructure as entry points into the network of people, organizations, events and opportunities he argues have been instrumental in the development of local cycling cultures. The “bicycle tour” through these cities is particularly useful as it situates cycling within the broader context of debates about public space, sub/urbanization, urban planning and transport. In doing this, Mapes draws back from the car versus bike dichotomy bringing into view myriad elements, actions and relations that make up the urban landscape and shape mobility practices today.

Mapes’ cycling advocacy is keen but measured. In the final chapters, he focuses on the three issues he clearly considers to be at the heart of livable cities: cyclist safety, health, and children’s independent mobility. He presents a useful summary of the contrasting views of “cyclist safety” from prominent U.S. cycling activists—including John Forester’s “vehicular cycling,” Randy Neufield’s traffic calming approach and Anne Lusk’s segregated bikeways—and discusses their implications for transport infrastructure, public space and the conduct of the journey by bike.

These debates currently reverberate in developed and developing countries across the globe. As Mapes places the bicycle within a broader sub/urban context, he presents research into the health benefits of cycling alongside discussions between geographers, planners, transport, and health researchers on the role of the built environment in facilitating— or not—active modes of travel. Finally, Mapes examines the decline of cycling in children’s everyday mobility in the United States and discusses the competing concerns over sedentary lifestyles, children‘s independent mobility and parental responsibilities.

Pedaling Revolution is not explicit in its theoretical underpinnings nor does it problematize the power relations through which bicycles/bicycling/ bicyclists have been marginalized in contemporary American culture. Further, Mapes’ discussion of bicycle culture tends to be overshadowed by the role he attributes to politicians and bureaucrats in bringing about change. But what is crucially important about Pedaling Revolution is that it places cycling within a broader spatial and mobility context than either Wray or Furness allow. In doing this, Mapes comes closest to conjuring a culture of cycling which values diverse mobilities.

Centering Cycling?

Each of these books advocates for cycling as they explore its position in the United States and reflect on bringing about change. They are important in their efforts to persuade a broader audience—beyond the committed cyclist—of the benefits of public investment in cycling; demonstrating alternative (more or less radical) ways of being in the world; providing insights into how cycling advocates and sympathizers have intervened in decision-making processes; the rich and detailed examples of the individuals, groups, places, and processes that have been pivotal in fostering change—and the pitfalls to be overcome.

However, their efforts to centre cycling within their respective analyses meet with mixed success. As Wray and Furness introduce cycling through a dichotomous relation with the automobile, the bicycle is immediately “de-centered” and, despite demonstrating alternative futures the struggle for change remains daunting. Their political strategy is to “grow” cycling cultures outward into the broader population so that an increasing number of people come into the “fold” of cycling. Arguably, Mapes retains cycling at the centre of the analysis through reference to broader spatial and mobility contexts. In doing this, his strategy is to foster general conditions which value cycling—a culture which welcomes bicycling without demanding mass participation or positioning cyclists as victims needing concessions or protests.

Dr Jennifer Bonham is a senior lecturer in the School of Social Sciences, University of Adelaide. She has a background in human geography specializing in urbanization and cultural practices of travel. Her research focuses on devalued mobilities as it explores the complex relationship between bodies, spaces, practices, and meanings of travel. Her current research explores the gendering of cycling. Jennifer’s work is informed by a concern for equitable and ecologically sustainable cities.

Contact details: School of Social Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5005, Australia. jennifer.bonham@adelaide.edu.au

This excerpt is from: Bonham, J. (2011). Bicycle politics: Review essay. Transfers, 1(1), 137. doi:10.3167/trans.2011.010110.

Images and hyperlinks included here are not part of the original publication.

17/04/201926/04/2019

Less Cars. Bicycle Politics: Review Essay. (3 of 4)

Welcome back to this third post in a series of four taken from Dr Jennifer Bonham’s Bicycle Politics Review Essay IDEAS IN MOTION: ON THE BIKE. In the first post, Dr Bonham provided the background and context for the three bicycle politics books she reviews. The second post reviewed the book ‘Pedal Power: The quiet rise of the bicycle in American public life’. In this post, she reviews Zack Furness’s ‘One Less Car: Bicycling and the Politics of Automobility’. This book is a personal favourite of mine. I have a copy on my desk and I love that this book is a reiteration of Furness’s PhD Dissertation. It was also the first time I saw the term BIKETIVISM. Books like this one keep me motivated in my own community bicycle PhD research. If you get a chance, read this book. It is comprehensive, thought-provoking, full of interesting bike facts and is incredibly well-researched. A must read for any cyclist! Thanks again to Dr Bonham. Enjoy! NG.

Furness, Z. (2010). One less car: Bicycling and the politics of automobility. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Less Cars

Zack Furness is an assistant professor in cultural studies at Columbia College, Chicago. His book One Less Car: Bicycling and the Politics of Automobility is a revised version of his Ph.D. dissertation and it is impressive in its scope and detail. Furness carves out a place for
cycling both in the formation of automobility, which he locates in the late
nineteenth century, and as a point of resistance to it. The bicycle, he argues,
played a central role in a series of cultural transformations in “mobility,
technology, and space” (16). These transformations included the construction of a “mobile subjectivity,” the development of a meaning system around personal transportation and the disciplining of bodies and environment to long-distance, independent mobility (17).

These transformations, according to Furness, were key components in the new “system of automobility.”9 Following from this, the automobile did not initiate cultural transformations; rather, the automobile itself “made sense” because these transformations had already taken place. Furness acknowledges cycling was not alone in bringing about some of these changes but he regards it as a proto-type of automoblity so that “automobiles provided an almost logical solution to the culture of mobility forged by cyclists and the bicycle industry” (45).

Having argued that cycling played a key role in the formation of automobility, the substantive chapters of One Less Car operate as point and counterpoint to the automobile norm. In Chapter Three, Furness discusses the early twentieth century growth in automobile ownership, legislative changes regarding conduct on the streets, and the modification of public space to facilitate motor vehicle movement. These changes are explained in terms of the automobile-industrial complex, which facilitated production and consumption on a massive scale. The discussion then turns to cycling as a point of resistance to this complex. Furness locates the emergence of U.S. cycle activism in the 1960s/1970s and places cycling organizations, advocacy groups and activism at the centre of challenges to the automobile that run through to the present day. Like Wray, he explores the role of different political actors and actions in creating alternative mobility cultures, illustrating the case with a detailed and multi-layered account of Critical Mass.10

Moving to contemporary society, Furness is particularly concerned with the mechanisms by which cycling is devalued in relation to the automobile and focuses on specific cultural products—film, television shows, road- safety pedagogy and news reporting—for the way they have created and maintained automobile norms. Bike riding characters in films such as Pee- wee’s Big Adventure and television shows like Get a Life infantilize and emasculate cyclists while road-safety “documentaries” effectively prepare child-bicyclists to become adult-motorists. In terms of news reporting, he argues, cycling has been represented favorably in times of crisis—the war effort and petrol rationing—but more recently power relations have been turned on their head as motorists are positioned as victims of the inept or elitist behavior of cyclists.

Less Cars. Bicycle Politics: Review Essay. 3 of 4. Bicycles Create Change.com. 17th April, 2019. — Image: Contra Texts

As a counterpoint to these negative representations, the remaining chapters offer thick descriptions of cycling sub-cultures in the U.S. These chapters are the real strength of One Less Car, offering insights into an aspect of U.S. cycling that, until recently, has been overlooked. They examine the linkages within specific sub-cultural groups between bicycling, environmentalism, community development and anti-consumption. These include the “Do it Yourself/Do It Ourselves” ethos of the punk musicians who have embraced bicycling, bike messengers and mutant bike clubs.

Furness also explores the important role of community bike projects within disadvantaged localities as they provide places for people to gather and access resources and knowledge that is usually unavailable. He examines the role that specific projects have played in supplying bikes to people within their own local communities and, with a more critical eye, the place of such projects in developing countries as they assist in creating alternative global networks.

Furness also examines the more problematic aspects of cycling sub-culture—the pervasive sexism of cycling in the U.S. and the assumptions that underpin bicycle projects in developing countries. Furness finishes the book with a brief review of the shift of bike manufacturing out of the U.S. to low-wage countries and contemplates the potential of the industry to once again provide employment in the U.S.

Furness attempts to place the bicycle at the centre of the analysis but, like Wray, he re-inscribes the bicycle/automobile dichotomy and despite paying careful attention to one set of cultural transformations he ignores others. Furness does not draw attention to the micro-political processes through which decisions about the material formation of cars and bikes have been (and continue to be) made. Nor does he relate the bicycle or the automobile to broader discussions in the late nineteenth century about the spatialization of activities and the development of cities, which included the urban industrial economy; urban efficiency, sub/urbanization and public health. Although Furness examines contestation within the various cultural transformations he describes, there is an air of finality in these transformations that offers little hope of change.

Finally, as Furness identifies bicycle activism as the key point of resistance to the automobile in the anti-freeway protests of the 1960s/1970s, he overlooks the efforts of local communities, built environment professionals, politicians, and academics in questioning freeway planning.

Notes

10. Critical Mass is a regularly staged bike ride in cities around the world that brings cyclists together in a blend of political statement and celebration of cyclists.

Contact details: School of Social Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5005, Australia. jennifer.bonham@adelaide.edu.au

This excerpt is from: Bonham, J. (2011). Bicycle politics: Review Essay. Transfers, 1(1), 137. doi:10.3167/trans.2011.010110.

Images and hyperlinks included here are not part of the original publication.

12/04/201926/04/2019

Pedal Power. Bicycle Politics: Review Essay. (2 of 4)

Welcome back to this second post in a series of four taken from Dr Jennifer Bonham’s Bicycle Politics Review Essay IDEAS IN MOTION: ON THE BIKE. In the last post, Dr Bonham (Uni of Adelaide) provided an introduction and background for this essay and established the histo-politico-social context. This post reviews the first (of three) American books on Bicycle Politics. Thanks again to Dr Bonham. If you have not yet read this book, check out this review and see if you want to head to your local library for more. Enjoy! NG.

Wray, J. H. (2008). Pedal power: The quiet rise of the bicycle in American public life. Boulder, CA: Paradigm Publishers.

Pedal Power

J. Harry Wray’s Pedal Power: The Quiet Rise of the Bicycle in American Public Life is an immensely readable account of the nascent shift toward bike friendliness in the United States. Wray has written both a cycling advocacy text and, as a professor of politics at De Paul University in Chicago, an accessible introductory text for students taking courses in culture and politics. Each chapter offers an entry point into discussions about the nature of politics, political theory, the mechanisms that foster particular meanings and values over others, and the processes of political struggle and change.

The early chapters of Pedal Power establish the background for the pivotal third chapter after which the discussion turns to the development of a bicycle culture and the process of creating political change. Wray opens his case with a “bicycle view” strategy—that of the touring cyclist— to contrast the embodied experiences and social interactions enabled through cycling and car driving. He uses a familiar set of concepts in making this comparison: the surface of the road reverberating through the body; muscles responding to topography; elements assailing the flesh.

Further, the fact of sitting “on” a bike and “in” a car facilitates different types of relations with co-travelers (those who walk, ride, drive (passenger) alongside), “by-standers” (those not going anywhere—for the moment), and other species and things. Wray links these different experiences of mobility to different political positions arguing the bicyclist tends to a more progressive (and preferable) politics as the cyclist is always located within his/her context whereas driving tends to isolate and insulate motorists from their environment.

Clearly, the bicycle and the motorcar will enable different experiences and interactions but Wray misses a number of opportunities by simplifying the argument into a bicycle versus car dichotomy. It works toward fixing differences between cars and bikes and smoothes over the processes through which bodies, machines, materials, spaces, and concepts have been, and continue to be, wrought together. Further, it limits our view of other ways of getting around and the diversity of experiences and interactions these enable. To illustrate this point, we could assemble cycling (racing, utility, etc.), walking (jogging, running), taking the tram, bus or train, riding a scooter, wheelchair or sled, skateboarding, being a passenger in a car, driving a truck, taxi or automobile, rickshaw cycling, parcour and rollerblading. We could then question the apparatuses through which these particular categories have been created, or excised, from the mass of human experience and bracketed into discrete sets of mobility. Picking apart these categories (the practices, emotions, concepts, materials and interactions they entail) is a political tactic through which we would scramble our existing categories, create new ones and challenge the valuing or prioritization of any one set of practices over another. The point Wray makes in contrasting bicycling and driving is to challenge the privilege accorded to motoring practices. However, he also re-inscribes the car/bike hierarchy as he seeks to value the very characteristics through which cycling has been devalued.

The second and third chapters contrast the politics and culture of bike riding in the Netherlands and the United States. Wray explains bicycle culture in the Netherlands in terms of a sense of shared responsibility and a political pragmatism that was brought to bear on the 1960s/1970s backlash against the motor vehicle. This explanation prepares the ground for a discussion of cycling and motoring in relation to the core American values of individualism and materialism. He is specifically concerned with whether and how cycling and motoring foster and extend each of these values. The “myth” of individualism, and its strong links to materialism, are explained as the outcome of the country’s Protestant roots, (initial) fluid class system and the stories Americans tell about their long frontier history. This individualism was transformed through the process of industrialization where it was reconstituted as “personal product choices” (61).

It is within this context that the motor vehicle figures as a symbol and mechanism for the further elaboration of consumption and individualism. The motorcar represents the U.S.’s extreme form of individualism— isolation and separation. Writing in the lead-up to the 2008 election campaign, Wray argues that growing disillusionment and discontent in the United States provides fertile ground for alternative cultural norms. The bicycle is a symbol of that alternative. Importantly, Wray links the bicycle to both a “tamer” form of individualism and community cohesion. Rather than the bicycle being a “private” means of transport, Wray emphasizes the particular social interactions it enables thereby making a powerful challenge to the traditional public/private transport dichotomy.

The second half of Pedal Power is devoted to challenging current cultural norms, the mechanisms by which participation in everyday cycling is being encouraged and the role of different players working inside and outside formal political processes to revalue the bicycle. Wray devotes a chapter each to the role of: individual cyclists and advocates who provide alternative ways of seeing and being in the world; bike advocacy groups which reinforce each other as they lobby for funding and legislative changes from the national through to the local scale; bicycle activism that engages the wider citizenry in bicycle politics by encouraging participation in myriad bike-related activities; and sympathetic politicians who can influence legislation and funding decisions to further the interests of cycling. These chapters are alive with detail as Wray offers numerous examples of the people, groups, activities, and legislative changes he believes are facilitating a culture of bicycle use and political change.

Contact details: School of Social Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5005, Australia. jennifer.bonham@adelaide.edu.au

This excerpt is from: Bonham, J. (2011). Bicycle politics: Review essay. Transfers, 1(1), 137. doi:10.3167/trans.2011.010110.

Images included here are not part of the original publication.

08/04/201926/04/2019

The Solution of Cycling. Bicycle Politics: Review Essay. (1 of 4)

Work on my community bicycle PhD research project requires me to read a lot of academic literature on bikes. Whilst it is my immense pleasure, there is always more to read. Recently, I came across a review essay by Dr Jennifer Bonham (University of Adelaide) that summarised and appraised three key (and popular) American ‘bicycle politics’ books. This essay a very interesting read as it identifies critical histo-politico-social aspects of bicycling from each of the books in an accessible, succinct and thoughtful way. Woohoo! What a gift! So here is Dr Bonham’s full essay IDEAS IN MOTION: ON THE BIKE as a series of four blog posts. This first post covers the intro and background, followed by three more – one post each reviewing, in turn, the three bicycle books below. A massive thank you to Jennifer for her analytical synthesis explaining why riding a bike is a political act. Enjoy! NG.

Wray, J. H. (2008). Pedal power: The quiet rise of the bicycle in American public life. Boulder, CA: Paradigm Publishers.
Furness, Z. (2010). One less car: Bicycling and the politics of automobility. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Mapes, J. (2009). Pedaling revolution: How cyclists are changing American cities. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University Press.

Bicycle Politics: Review Essay. The Solution of Cycling. 1 of 4. Bicycles Create Change.com. 8th April, 2019. — Image: Golfian.com

Introduction: The Solution of Cycling

by Dr Jennifer Bonham (University of Adelaide).

Since the mid-1990s, bicycling has been identified as a solution to problems ranging from climate change and peak oil to urban livability, congestion and public health. A plethora of guidelines, strategies, policy statements, plans and behavior change programs have been produced— especially in industrialized countries—in an effort to encourage cycling. Despite many localities registering increases in cycling over the past decade, English-speaking countries such as Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and United States continue to have extremely low national rates of cycling. The benefits of cycling are widely accepted and barriers well documented but changes are slow, uneven, and often contested. The disjuncture between government rhetoric and commitment to bicycling (via legislation, funding, infrastructure) foregrounds the broader cultural and political context within which cycling is located.

Implementing pro-cycling1 policies is difficult in cultural contexts where bicycles/bicyclists are set in a hierarchical relation with automobiles/ motorists and the latter valued over the former. It is equally difficult to effect cultural change when decision makers fail to prioritize cycling on the political agenda. A key research problem has been to understand how the hierarchical relation between different travel practices has been established and reproduced. Often, this problem is approached by centering the automobile in the analysis:2 a tactic which positions the motor vehicle in a series of dichotomous relations with “other” travel practices—private/public, motorized/non-motorized, choice/captive.

Such dichotomous approaches have been widely criticized for re-creating rather than undermining established hierarchies.3 An alternative tactic involves unpicking the mechanisms through which these categories are produced and bodies are differentially valued. Recently the bike has been placed at the centre of the analysis in an effort to unsettle its persistent marginalization. However, this type of analysis will be limited if it simply reproduces the bicycle/automobile dichotomy.

Throughout the late twentieth century, “cyclists” and everyday practices of cycling have been constituted through concepts and research practices within the field of transport and positioned as problematic—in terms of safety, efficiency, orderliness. But the past 15 years4 have seen researchers from a range of disciplines—health, political science, geography, sociology, urban planning and transport—creating new “versions” of cycling.5 As they centre bicycling in their work and offer recommendations on “what is lacking” and “what should change” they also provide insights into the mechanisms by which cyclists have been explicitly excluded from or marginalized within public space, academic study and public policy. This literature is a fundamental part of political and cultural change not so much for the veracity of its claims but in re-constituting cycling as an object of study and opening the path to alternative ways of thinking about and practicing mobility.

From the early 2000s, there has been a steady growth in research into practices of cycling and cycling sub-cultures.6 Arguably, this ethnographically oriented work can be traced to Michel de Certeau’s seminal essay Walking in the City,7 which made apparent the historical and cultural specificity of contemporary travel practices. There has been a steady growth in research into particular travel/mobility practices and sub-cultural groups who identify through their mobility.8 The study of local cycling groups and cycling sub-cultures challenges hegemonic meanings, which devalue bicycling, and offers alternative mobility futures. They can also link bike riders to more mainstream values and beliefs thereby questioning their marginal status. The very practice of riding a bike and/ or being part of a cycling sub-culture is implicitly political as it challenges dominant forms of mobility. However, some individuals and sub-cultural groups are explicitly political as they use the subject position of cyclist as a means by which to resist exclusion and advocate for bike riding.

The books reviewed in this paper examine the bicycle culture-politics nexus in the context of the United States. They provide explanations for the marginalization of cycling but more particularly they are concerned with how to bring about change. Each author addresses culture and politics to different degrees, recognizing them as inextricably linked but emphasizing one or the other in their analyses. They draw upon research from health and environmental sciences, architecture, urban, and transport planning to support their arguments rather than reflecting on this knowledge as a fundamental part of contemporary culture or cultural change. Culture is discussed in terms of the sites through which meanings are attached to cycling—especially film and television, literature, advertising, and news reporting—and how these are being challenged through the bicycle cultures and everyday mobility practices that form part of a growing social movement in cycling.

Notes

Pedestrians, public transport users, scooter riders, roller bladers and so forth could be included along with cycling.
For example, James Flink, The Car Culture (Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1975); Peter Freund and George Martin, The Ecology of the Automobile (Montreal: Black Rose Books Ltd 1993); Mimi Sheller and John Urry, “The City and the Car,” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 24 no. 4 (2000): 737–757.
Feminists from Butler to Hekman have been at the forefront of this critique. Judith Butler, Gender Trouble (New York: Routledge, 1990); Susan Hekman, The Material of Knowledge: Feminist Disclosures (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2010).
This timeline reflects research into everyday cycling in English-speaking countries.
Borrowing Annemarie Mol’s theorization of different versions of reality, I want to suggest we do not have a single object (the cyclist) which is studied through a different lens by each discipline; rather we create the cyclist in different ways through the methodologies we use within each discipline. Annemarie Mol, The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice (Durham: Duke University Press, 2002).
The Ethnographies of Cycling workshop held at Lancaster University in 2009 included presentations from a number of researchers working in this area since the early 2000s. http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/centres/cemore/event/2982/
Michel de Certeau, The Practice of Everyday Life (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984).

Contact details: School of Social Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5005, Australia. jennifer.bonham@adelaide.edu.au

This excerpt is from: Bonham, J. (2011). Bicycle politics: Review essay. Transfers, 1(1), 137. doi:10.3167/trans.2011.010110.

Images included here are not part of the original publication.

04/04/201915/12/2019

PhD Researcher Intern Wanted

As part of my PhD research and work at Griffith University, I get a few opportunities to work on research projects. At the moment, I am at capacity and full workload so no new work for me. But one PhD researcher/ intern vacancy come across my desk this week I thought might be interesting for a few Brisbane-based PhD readers. Here it is. Good luck! NG.

Project details

Applications Close: 24th April 2019
Reference: APR – 849A
Payment: $3,000 per month stipend
Location: Spring Hill, Brisbane QLD (although travel may be required)
Duration: 4 months
Proposed start date: May/June 2019
Contract company: APR Intern

Project Background

Veterans, particularly younger veterans without Gold Cards, report significant challenges in accessing appropriate General Practice support, as well as medical specialists related to chronic medical conditions and surgical services. Finding medical specialists who understand the package of health issues faced by veterans can be a challenge. Finding medical specialists who are also willing to engage with the Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA) payment system, where healthcare is eligible for DVA funding, is a second and significant challenge.

Often, veterans report that they have attempted to navigate the complex civil healthcare system only to find their referred specialist is unwilling to provide services at DVA rates. This forces the veteran to return to their General Practitioner for a new referral, or in many cases, veterans drop out of the health system until their condition deteriorates where healthcare costs are known to escalate.

Research to be Conducted

In Phase 1 of the project, a series of questionnaires, surveys and feedback tools will be applied to the younger veteran target population. These questionnaires and surveys will be delivered through a combination of face-to-face, telephone and online survey instruments. Using a combination of Likert scale and open questions, these surveys will allow the team to refine the set of issues and barriers for the second Phase of the investigation.

In Phase 2 of the health project, the project team will combine the results of desktop research with the initial survey results attained in Phase 1 to further refine the areas of investigation. The Project Team will then interview and survey a number of health specialists to understand their attitudes to veteran healthcare and issues they see in providing care to this population.

Deep-dive interviews will also be conducted with younger veterans in this second phase of the project to better understand the summary issues and barriers identified through the surveys conducted in Phase 1.

Skills Required

We are looking for a PhD student with the following:

ESSENTIAL

Mixed method research experience, but particularly qualitative research
Strong experience in stakeholder engagement and communication

DESIRABLE

Health system understanding and experience

Expected Outcomes

This project will result in a clear understanding of the issues and barriers preventing ease of access to civil healthcare for younger veterans, as well as their attitudes toward access of both GP and medical specialist healthcare.

The results of this project will then allow a clear roadmap of strategies to address barriers to access, from both the provider side (health specialists), younger veterans and for funders (DVA).

We anticipate that the project will also involve recommendations and strategies around care coordination and case management, given the complexity of the civil healthcare system, and such strategies would also include their own engagement and communication strategies to increase the awareness of suitable services for younger veterans.

Additional Details

The intern will receive $3,000 per month of the internship, usually in the form of stipend payments.

It is expected that the intern will primarily undertake this research project during regular business hours, spending at least 80% of their time on-site with the industry partner. The intern will be expected to maintain contact with their academic mentor throughout the internship either through face-to-face or phone meetings as appropriate.

The intern and their academic mentor will have the opportunity to negotiate the project’s scope, milestones and timeline during the project planning stage.

We recommend that you liaise with the Graduate Research School (GRS) and/or Higher Degree Research (HDR) Placements Office at your university, prior to submitting an application, to validate your eligibility to participate in the APR.Intern program.