Category: Education

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.

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

1. Pedestrians, public transport users, scooter riders, roller bladers and so forth could be included along with cycling.
2. 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.
3. 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).
4. This timeline reflects research into everyday cycling in English-speaking countries.
5. 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).
6. 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/
7. Michel de Certeau, The Practice of Everyday Life (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984).

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 included here are not part of the original publication.