Ingenious Victorian cyclewear for women

This blog post comes from an email I recently received from fellow PhDer Janis. Janis’s research investigates the heritage of Queensland’s Woollen Textile Manufacturing industry, so she has a particularly keen eye for stories about fabrics and textiles. So when she saw this fabric-and-bike-related content, she sent it over to me. This content about the ingenious cyclewear Victorian women invented to navigate social mores, comes from a 2018 Guardian article by sociologist Dr Kat Jungnickel. Thanks so much for sending this through Janis!

Kat Jungnickel was researching modern-day cycling and in her interviews, people (especially women) kept mentioning the role that clothing had on cycling identity, participation and enjoyment. So she started to investigate a very particular period of UK clothing design innovation for women’s cyclewear from 1895 to 1899.

Kat has since turned her research into a book called Bikes and Bloomers. Her book and website are well worth checking out.

Dr Kat Jungnickel is a senior lecturer in sociology at Goldsmiths, University of London. More about her research, including re-creations of convertible costumes and free sewing patterns inspired by the patents, is available at her website and in Bikes & Bloomers: Victorian Women Inventors and their Extraordinary Cycle Wear, out now through Goldsmiths Press.

In her article below, Kat explains how patents by female inventors from the 1890s reveal the creative ways women made their body mobile through clothing.

Ingenious Victorian cyclewear for women

Much has been written about the bicycle’s role as a vehicle of women’s liberation. But far less is known about another critical technology women used to forge new mobile and public lives – cyclewear. I have been studying what Victorian women wore when they started cycling. Researching how early cyclists made their bodies mobile through clothing reveals much about the social and physical barriers they were navigating and brings to light fascinating tales of ingenious inventions.

Cycling was incredibly popular for middle- and upper-class women and men in the late 19th century, and women had to deal with distinct social and sartorial challenges. Cycling exaggerated the irrationality of women’s conventional fashions more than any other physical activity. Heavy, layered petticoats and long skirts caught in spokes and around pedals. Newspapers regularly published gruesome accounts of women dying or becoming disfigured in cycling crashes due to their clothing.

Fortunately, little was going to stop women riding and they rose to these challenges in a plethora of ways. Some took to wearing “rational” dress, such as replacing skirts with bloomers. While this was safer and more comfortable for cycling, dress reform was controversial. It was not unusual for onlookers who felt threatened by the sight of progressive “New Women” to hurl insults, sticks and stones. Other women adopted site-specific strategies to minimise harassment, such as cycling in conventional fashions in town and changing into more radical garments for “proper riding”.

Some pioneering women came up with even more inventive strategies. Remarkably, some Victorians not only imagined, designed, made and wore radical new forms of cyclewear but also patented their inventions. The mid-1890s marked a boom in cycling and also in patenting, and not only for men. Cycling’s “dress problem” was so mobilising for women that cyclewear inventions became a primary vehicle for women’s entry into the world of patenting.

The patents for convertible cyclewear are particularly striking. These garments aimed ambitiously for respectability and practicality. Inventors concealed converting technologies inside skirts, including pulley-systems, gathering cords, button and loop mechanisms and more, that enabled wearers to switch between modal identities when required.

Alice Bygrave, a dressmaker from Brixton, lodged a UK patent in 1895 for “Improvements in Ladies’ Cycling Skirts”. She aimed to “provide a skirt proper for wear when either on or off the machine”. Her parents owned a watch- and clock-making shop in Chelsea and her brother and sister-in-law were professional cyclists. Her invention brings all of these influences together in an ingenious skirt with a dual pulley system sewn in the front and rear seams that adjusts height according to the needs of the wearer. Bygrave also patented her invention in Canada, Switzerland and America, and it was manufactured and distributed by Jaeger. It was a hit and was sold throughout the UK and America. It even made its way to Australia.

Julia Gill, a court dressmaker from north London, registered her convertible cycling skirt in 1895. Her aim was to “provide a suitable combination costume for lady cyclists, so that they have a safe riding garment combined with an ordinary walking costume”. This deceptively ordinary A-line skirt gathers up to the waist via a series of concealed rings and cord into what Gill called a “semi-skirt”. The lower flounce, when made from similar material to the jacket, creates a stylish double peplum. The inventor also recommended combining the skirt with some rather splendid “fluted or vertical frilled trowsers”.

Mary and Sarah Pease, sisters from Yorkshire, submitted their patent for an “Improved Skirt, available also as a Cape for Lady Cyclists” in 1896. As the name suggests, this is two garments in one – a full cycling skirt and a cape. The wide waistband doubles as a fashionable high ruché collar. This garment is one of the more radical designs of the period because the skirt completely comes away from the body. Cyclists wanting to ride in bloomers could wear it as a cape or use the gathering ribbon to secure it to handlebars, safe in the knowledge they could swiftly replace the skirt should the need arise.

Henrietta Müller, a women’s right’s activist from Maidenhead, registered her convertible cycling patent in 1896. Unusually, the inventor addressed an entire three-piece suit – a tailored jacket, an A-line skirt that can be raised in height via loops sewn into the hem that catch at buttons at the waistband, and an all-in-one undergarment combining a blouse and bloomer. Müller was committed to the idea of progress for women, and not content with trying to fix one element when she could see problems with the entire system. She was acutely aware of the politics and practicalities of pockets for newly independent mobile women. As a result, this cycling suit features five pockets, and Müller encouraged users to add more.

These inventions are just some of the fascinating ways early female cyclists responded to challenges to their freedom of movement. Through new radical garments and their differently clad bodies they pushed against established forms of gendered citizenship and the stigma of urban harassment. Claiming their designs through patenting was not only a practical way of sharing and distributing ideas; it was also a political act.

These stories add much-needed layers and textures to cycling histories because they depict women as critically engaged creative citizens actively driving social and technical change. Importantly, they remind us that not all inventions are told through loud or heroic narratives. These inventors put in an awful lot of work to not be seen. They were successful in many ways, yet the nature of their deliberately concealed designs combined with gender norms of the time means they have been hidden in history – we have yet to find any examples in museums.

As such, they raise questions: what else don’t we know about? How can we look for other inventions hidden in plain sight? And if we learn more about a wider range of contributors to cycling’s past, might it change how we think about and inhabit the present?

13/11/201915/11/2019

Remembrance Day 2019: Lest we forget the cyclist soldiers

November 11th is Remembrance Day. Along with many others around the world, each year on this day Australians observe one minute’s silence at 11 am in memory of those who died or suffered in all wars and armed conflicts. Here is a guest blog post by UK former professional cyclist (postman) and now freelance writer Trevor Ward. This article was first published in The Guardian. In this account, Trevor provides an often unknown UK historical context to the tens of thousands who signed up and served in dedicated cycling units during 20th-century conflicts. Many thanks to Trevor for his research and insights tracing British bicycle use and cycling soldiers through the wars right up to the start of modern-day MTB. Lest we forget. NG.

My regular bike ride takes me past a couple of village war memorials, but to the best of my knowledge, none of the names engraved in the stone was ever a member of Britain’s specialist cycling corps.

Tens of thousands of “cyclist soldiers” signed up to serve during both world wars and other conflicts. Recruitment posters in Britain on the eve of war declared: “Are you fond of cycling? If so, why not cycle for the King? Bad teeth no bar.”

Other countries – notably Italy and Germany – also had dedicated cycling units. In fact, the world’s last surviving cycling regiment was disbanded by the Swiss Army only 10 years ago.

The origins of cycling soldiers can be traced back to the second Boer war in South Africa at the end of the 19th century. Historian Colin Stevens, who curates an online museum dedicated to vintage and military bicycles, says:

Remember that the messenger pigeon was one of the most advanced communication methods of the time so this was a logical step, especially as automobiles and motorcycles were still far and few between. And did not require the constant care and feeding that horses did.”

The cyclist soldiers weren’t merely confined to scouting and messenger duties. Plenty of them saw frontline action. When a Boer position was attacked, “a cyclist or two would be with the leading rank,” according to Jim Fitzpatrick, author of The Bicycle In Wartime. “By the end of the war, Lord Kitchener was asking for several more cyclist battalions,” says Fitzpatrick.

And during the early weeks of the first world war, before the fighting became trench-bound in northern France, several cycling units were involved in daring raids on German ammunition wagons, according to breathless reports in the weekly “military cyclists’ journal”, Cycling.

As an example of what the cycling corps could achieve, Fitzpatrick quotes the case of the 2nd Anzac cyclist battalion – comprised mainly of New Zealanders – that earned 72 medals despite suffering 59 fatalities during its 32 months fighting on the western front. It was also honoured by the town of Epernay for its role in repelling a German attack.

Campaigning for more cyclist battalions to be formed in 1908, Captain A. H. Trapmann tried to convince a military panel of the merits of soldiers on bikes:

The cyclist does not suffer from sore feet, nor does his mount ever get out of condition. The longer a campaign lasts the fitter the cyclist becomes. When on the move the cyclist offers a much smaller and at the same time more difficult target to hit than even the infantryman. He can ride behind hedges with body bent low and remain invisible…It may also perhaps be of interest to note that the great majority of cyclists are practically teetotallers.”

After the first world war, Britain disbanded its specialist cycling battalions, partly because of the difficulties of riders steering and firing their rifles at the same time, and also because the bicycle had proved useless at transporting heavy loads such as machine guns. A 1932 history of the London Cyclist Battalion noted that though “it was the ambition of every hardy cyclist to get posted to the Gun Section … only the hardiest enjoyed it.”

The Germans and Italians, however, commissioned extensive studies into the effectiveness of their cyclist-soldiers. As a result, German Radfahrtruppen were involved in the blitzkriegs of world war two – “several hundred thousand, right behind the Stukas and Panzers,” according to Fitzpatrick – while units of cyclists riding folding Bianchi bicycles with optional machine gun mounts were added to Italy’s elite regiments of Bersaglieri (marksmen).

In Britain, though, soldiers on bikes were largely limited to home defence duties, until BSA designed its folding “Airborne” bike for paratroopers jumping from gliders. However, by the time of the D-day landings, much larger gliders – big enough to accommodate jeeps – had been produced, so instead the “airborne” bikes were carried by infantry soldiers arriving by sea.

According to Stevens: Going down the ramp of a landing craft carrying a rifle or Bren Gun, a heavy ruck sack, ammunition and a bicycle was very difficult and some soldiers drowned when they fell into the water and could not get rid of their load. Even once they were on shore, cyclists quickly ran into the problem of flat tires due to the broken glass, shell fragments etc. that littered the roads.”

Despite such shortcomings, the legacy of military bikes lives on in today’s designs. A modern, US version of the BSA Airborne, the Montague Paratrooper Tactical Folding Mountain Bike, was used during the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. A civilian version – still in camouflage colour but minus the gun rack – is available for $725.

A folding bike co-designed by French Army lieutenant Henry Gérard in 1893 became the first mass-produced bike of its type when Peugeot won the contract to supply it to the French, Russian and Romanian armies.

And the 1912 model designed by Bianchi for Italian troops is widely regarded as the forefather of modern mountain bikes, thanks to its slightly smaller wheels, rear suspension and front shock absorbers.

This article written by Trevor Ward was first published in The Guardian.

08/10/201921/10/2019

Brisbane Climate Action Rally Review

Last month, Leki and I joined 350,000 Australians nation-wide – and millions of people in over 150 countries worldwide – who hit the streets to rally for #ClimateAction. In Australia, there were mass rallies in 8 capital cities as well as 104 other centres. This day of action is known as ‘the student strikes for climate action’ and is led by Swedish Teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg.

My fav climate rally moment was Ariel Ehler’s solo protest in Chinchilla – what a champ!

8-year old Luca, who I had the pleasure of working with recently on a project, also went to the Climate Rally. I asked her if she could a guest blog post about what the event was like – and luckily she said yes. So here it is!

Thanks so much to Luca for putting this together!

Here is a few photos I took from the rally. See Luca’s review below.

Luca’s review of the Climate Action Rally (Brisbane).

On the weekend I went to the Climate Strike with my family.

We all made posters and marched in the city to fight climate change.

While we were marching we did lots of chants about global warming and saw some great posters that others had made.

My favourite said “It’s getting hot in here so take off all your coals”.

At the march I saw lots of people of all different ages. There were many kids there as well as adults.

At the beginning of the march we listened to talking and started a chant.

Then we started walking through the city. There were about 30,000 people at the protest.

I found the protest fun and exciting but my favourite part was marching around Brisbane.

Luca.

Here is more info about the biggest climate mobilisation in Australia’s history.

Australian Strikers call on Governments to commit to:

No new coal, oil and gas projects, including the Adani mine.
100% renewable energy generation & exports by 2030
Fund a just transition & job creation for all fossil-fuel industry workers & communities.

Image: WinterChristine
Image: @courtwhip
Image: @rev_a_johnson

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.

22/02/201908/03/2019

Wheels of change: bicycles fight air pollution in Brazil

This blog prides itself on sharing the grassroots stories, events and experiences of local and international community cyclists. Around the world, cyclists are grappling with many issues – and this story from JP hit a particular nerve in drawing attention to the issue of air pollution. The article republished here was an open letter written by San Paulo local bicycle activist JP Amaral for Global Call to Climate Action at the end of last year. Recently, I reported on Areli Carreón who is the first ever Latin American Bicycle Mayor (Mexico City) because it is important to hear more from our concerned and proactive Latin American cycling brothers and sisters. A big thanks to JP for sharing his thoughts, research and insights with us. We applaud your work and are sending you much support from down under!

As government Ministers, city mayors and civil society from all over the globe head for the World Health Organisation’s first ever international conference on air pollution and health at the end of this month (30 October to 1 November 2018), one must wonder how big a problem the quality of the air we breathe has become.

I used to believe poor air quality was a major barrier to cycling in our urban centers and couldn’t understand the reason for my respiratory problems in my hometown São Paulo, where air pollution levels are 60% above the WHO’s safety limits and responsible for 6,421 deaths each year.

However, as I started cycling, the health benefits were immediate, especially for my respiratory system.

Now, after 10 years working on sustainable urban mobility, being co-founder of Bike Anjo, a large national network of volunteers promoting cycling as a means of transport in Brazil, and an active member of the international Bicycle Mayor Network, I understand that the health benefits of cycling and walking outweigh the harm from inhaling air loaded with traffic fumes.

This is a message we always try to get across to the people we help in learning to cycle or tracing their daily routes. Moreover, research studies have shown that car drivers in heavy traffic inhale more pollution.

The biggest metropolitan area in South America (population: 21.2 million), São Paulo is notorious for its traffic; a recent study found that São Paulo inhabitants spent 86 hours on average in 2017 stuck in traffic (or 22% of total drive time), putting it in the top five cities for traffic congestion.

In this city, cars and motorcycles are a much-desired escape from long, arduous journeys on public transport, especially for the poor living on the outskirts who commute every day into the city centre.

Over the past decade, Federal government incentives to the car industry have brought down the price of cars, making them significantly more accessible. It is not surprising then that the main source of air pollution in São Paulo – as in several world cities – is the vehicular fleet, accounting for 80% of total air pollutants.

Despite this unfavourable scenario, cycling has been growing in popularity in recent years: we’ve gone from 100,000 bike trips a day in 2007 to 300,000 trips a day in 2012, and a recent study by the Secretary of Transport estimated over 1 million bike trips a day in São Paulo.

Investments in cycling infrastructure and a series of incentives, such as 400 km of new bike lanes and bike paths, new bike sharing systems and banning car traffic in some of the city’s busiest streets on Sundays have contributed to this culture change. Surfing on this trend, Bike Anjo expanded its network of volunteers, helping “paulistanos” explore safe cycling routes and cycle with more confidence.

This year, our successful Bike to Work campaign has highlighted the health benefits of cycling, focusing on two women who agreed to ride their bikes to work for an entire month for the first time, whilst having their health monitored by doctors.

Having experienced so many physical and mental health benefits from this challenging experiment, they both decided to continue their daily bicycling commutes. We hope that this experience, featured on national television, has encouraged many Brazilians to do the same.

While behaviour change campaigns such as this one can make a difference, a long lasting change in transport culture must be underpinned by robust public policies that are conducive to active mobility. At the federal level, a progressive piece of policy framework was proposed as the “National Urban Mobility Act”, in 2012, putting forward active mobility as the prioritized mode of transport in Brazilian cities.

However, the national plan implementation depends entirely on the formulation of municipal urban mobility plans, which are either non existent or at early stages of implementation in most of Brazil’s municipalities. Through working with civil society actors, Bike Anjo and the Brazilian Cyclists’ Union (UCB) have been trying to assist municipalities in getting their plans off the paper and into action.

The gaps are numerous; from policy design to implementation, from federal to municipal level, and importantly, the tendency of treating issues in silos.

Health policies rarely engage in dialogue with mobility policies, despite existing evidence that reducing air pollution in urban centres through clean, sustainable transport results in better public health outcomes and significant savings in government expenditures.

Air pollution is now responsible for over 7 million premature deaths per year, globally. The urgency of reducing such mortality rates, coupled with that of mitigating the impacts of climate change, leaves us with no more time to tolerate carbon emissions from fossil fueled transport.

The latest UN scientific report has warned we may have only 12 years to limit climate change catastrophe if global warming exceeds 1.5C, singling out the transport sector as the fastest growing contributor to climate emissions

This first global WHO conference on health and air pollution is a unique occasion where national leaders from different sectors facing similar local challenges can meet and exchange experiences, learn from civil society and ultimately commit to agreed targets to meet the WHO’s air quality guidelines by 2030, matching the needs of reducing carbon emissions.

Clean, renewable energy, electric vehicles, the elimination of fossil fuels subsidies, smarter urban planning, and better public transport infrastructure are some of the choices policy makers can make to avoid countless preventable deaths, drastically improve air quality and health, and contribute towards a safer climate.

At the conference, I plan to highlight how cycling can play a major role in transforming mobility around the world. Given the convenience, health benefits and affordability of bicycles, they could provide a far greater proportion of sustainable urban transport, helping reduce not only air pollution, but energy use and CO2 emissions worldwide.

Active mobility is often underestimated, but if you think about it, bicycles could be the ultimate icon of sustainable transport. As the far right takes power in countries across the planet, including most recently Brazil, city level solutions offer real hope and the best bet for change.

About the author
JP Amaral is an active member of the international Bicycle Mayor Network initiated by Amsterdam based social enterprise BYCS, and co-founder of the Bike Anjo Network (bikeanjo.org), currently coordinating the “Bicycle in the Plans” project. He has a bachelor degree on Environmental Management at the University of São Paulo and has been working in sustainable urban mobility since 2008. He is certified as an auditor on the BYPAD methodology – Bicycle Planning Audit, and is the Bicycle Mayor of São Paulo. He is also fellow member of the Red Bull Amaphyko network for social entrepreneurs and of the German Chancellor Fellowship program for tomorrow’s leaders from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, working with international cooperation towards cycling promotion, especially between Brazil and Europe.

Bike Anjo (Bike Angels) is a network of voluntary cyclists who engage people to use bicycles as a mean of transforming cities – from teaching how to ride a bicycle to identifying safe cycling routes for São Paulo inhabitants and building national campaigns.

The Bicycle Mayor Network is a global network of changemakers – initiated by Amsterdam based social enterprise BYCS – that radically accelerates cycling progress in cities worldwide. The individual use the power of their network to influence politics and the broader public to start cycling. Bicycle mayors transform cities, cities transform the world.

19/11/201828/11/2018

Nao’s Reflections on bicycles, Brisbane and networking

This touching guest post comes from Bicycle Create Change’s Research Assistant Nao Kamakura. Nao has recently completed her residency with BBC and is currently traveling Australia, then home to Japan. Here, Nao reflects on her time as a new international student in Brisbane and how hard it was to meet locals. Nao found a commonality with others when riding her bike and this post recounts some of the memorable times she had – thanks to her bike. We can all relate to moments in this post. Thanks for sharing Nao – happy travels and enjoy your rides! NG.

Nao's Reflections on bicycles, aBrisbane and networking. Bicycles Create Change.com. 19th Nov, 2018. — Nao on a bike ride in Brisbane. August, 2018.

Nao’s Reflections on bicycles, Brisbane and networking

Today, I would like to write about my bicycle experience in Brisbane.

Ever since I first came to Brisbane, I have always looked for authentic opportunities to meet new people, make some local friends and build my network. This is because I came to Brisbane alone and didn’t know anyone.

Bicycles helped me communicate with new people

When I first started as Nina’s researcher, I went to a networking event held in the city. Of course, I didn’t know anyone.

Some people are very good at communicating with new people, but unfortunately, I am not that kind of person.

My mind was always fighting – I want to go to this event, but I really don’t want to go!! In addition, I was still worried about my English speaking skill.

So I was a bit nervous.

In my mind, I felt a little bit of panic, things like “With whom should I talk to first?” or “What should I talk about?”.

Then, one person came late and he said “Sorry I’m late and sweaty – it’s because I came by bicycle”

Chaaaance.

I told him that I was a research assistant for a Griffith academic and I was investigating mountain biking.

That was how I could start a conversation with him – about bicycles. It was as easy as that.

Coincidently, he had just finished his PhD at the same University and he told me all about his research. This kind of communication was very interesting for me. But it was only made possible because of bicycles.

This small bicycle conversation led me to build an interesting network.

Evenso, at this early stage, I still didn’t have a special interest in bicycles – yet.

Nao's Reflections on bicycles, Brisbane and networking. Bicycles Create Change.com. 19th Nov, 2018. — Image: Freepic

In the workplace – ‘the bicycle girl’

A few weeks later, I bought a bicycle.

To finish my studies, I had to do a workplace intership. I wanted to use the bike to get to there because my student concession travel card had expired. Basically, I just wanted to save money.

It was 6km from my home to the company. The road included some slopes and hills, so it was not easy for me to ride the bike for the first few weeks.

At work, people noticed that I rode there and home each day.

Work colleagues started to talk to me about bicycles and riding.

I was surprised.

I wouldn’t have known what to talk about with these same colleagues if I didn’t have my bicycle. But now, people were starting a conversation with me and they wanted to keep talking about it!

Everyone recognised me as ‘the bicycle girl’.

This meant I had many conversations and met even more new people.

One time, a colleague invited me to join a bicycle event with her – and she also asked me to go to Fraser Island with her!

What a miracle! Lucky me!

Riding a bicycle helped my communication and confidence in this new work environment. It was a very special opportunity that I would not have experinced without a bike.

Out and about

As for getting used to riding a bicycle, I started to use my bike as ‘recreational equipment’.

I often went to the farmer’s markets near the city on my bike.

Cycling became my new hobby in Brisbane.

On the way to go to markets, I could see that Brisbane’s scenery is very, very beautiful.

Just riding along the riverside made me happy.

It was during this time that I realised the full attractiveness of bicycles.

This is just my personal opinion, but I REALLY love riding bikes now.

It puts me into a positive mindset.

When I sold my bicycle (because I had to move out), I was extremely sad….without my bicycle I felt naked!

This website’s title is ‘Bicycle Creates Change’ That is very true.

‘Change’ depends on the person. My bicycle helped me to communicate with people and that was a big change for me 🙂

Nao Kamakura

31/08/201805/09/2018

How many Australians participate in mountain biking?

In July, Nao Kamakura joined Bicycles Create Change as Research Assistant. Nao is investigating rates of participation in mountain biking, with a particular focus on rates of female participation. Below is Nao’s first post for BCC where she shares a few preliminary findings and thoughts.

How many Australians participate in mountain biking as a sport?

Brisbane City Council claims that “Mountain biking is one of the fastest growing recreational activities”.

But, how many people actually participate in mountain biking as a sport?

According to 2016 data from the Australian Government Australian Sports Commission, cycling is the 5th most popular sport in Australian for women (over 15 years) old and its total number of participants was 85,5231.

The total female population (for all ages) in Australia is 12.2 billion in 2016. Therefore, statistically, 7% of Australian women ride bicycles! This number includes both road cyclists and mountain bikers.

To participate in mountain bike competitions, riders need to register with Mountain Bike Australia (MTBA), which is the peak national organisation for mountain biking.

MTBA covers a number of off-road biking styles, including cross country, downhill, observed trials, cross-country marathon and cyclocross. Currently, MTBA has over 15,000 members and 175 affiliated clubs nationwide.

The number of female MTBA members in 2017 was 2,481 – and this gives provides our initial baseline for female participation and interest in the sport of mountain biking. However, these membership rates do not adequately signify actual participation rates.

Although MTBA registration offers membership in categories such as: race, non-riding, recreation, public liability, value-add, free trial, family and day licenses – it is important to keep in mind that are still a number of riders who are/have not registered with MTBA who mountain bike – and that their participation would not be represented in these rates.

Many riders are registered, but not all MTBers participate in competitions. In particular, these numbers do not include the account for many riders who enjoy mountain bike without participating in competitions.

The approach, definition and classification of mountain biking vary significantly between the individual states and territories. Such differences impact how data is analysed, where funding is allocated and how the sport is viewed (and represented) by each state’s governing body. This is an area that will be of concerted interest for the project I am working on.

Interestingly, Western Australia is the only state that has clear statistics on mountain bikers. The WA government published the WA Mountain Bike Strategy 2015-2020 to encourage more people to engage in mountain biking. The report clearly states that the number of women who mountain bike is 14,400.

However again, these results do not mean that each of those 14,400 riders engages with MTBA as a sport, but it does list that the top three reasons Western Australians ride mountain bikes is 1) for the outdoor experience, 2) for fitness, and 3) for socialising.

So initial investigations show mixed results about the rates of mountain biking registration and participation.

So far, my research has not yet confirmed the actual number of female mountain bikers in the whole of Australia – the rate is still unconfirmed.

One reason for this is that the definition of mountain biking is ambiguous.

Depending on what you read or what states/territory you are in, mountainbiking can be classified as a sport, as recreation, or as transport. This lack of consistency means that it can be difficult to compare data sets.

It is a challenge and a pleasure to be learning more about mountain biking in Australia – and I look forward to sharing more insights and findings as they arise.

I hope mountain biking is more recognised as a sport in the near future and that rates of participants will increase!