Paul,
My research came out of a need as a policy engaged advocate and to do some appropriate science. There was a gap (and there remain gaps) to fill in this area. All those big words you use are exactly what has happened. I have to say the original paper was written in about 6,000 words. Frankly I am absolutely flabergasted at the enormous number of additional words it has generated in discussion forums and the media. Some of these words have been well informed. Others have been extremely ill informed and highly opinionated. And of course it goes without saying that the media is a beast that is hard to tame....
Dr John Parkin
Reader in Transport Engineering and Planning
Department of the Built Environment
The University of Bolton
Deane Road, Bolton, BL3 5AB, UK
Tel 01204 903027 Fax 01204 399074 mob 07903 523 017
www.bolton.ac.uk/staff/jp10
________________________________
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list on behalf of Paul Rosen
Sent: Tue 22/09/2009 8:43 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Passing distances to cycle traffic with and without cycle lanes
Dave and everybody else,
Stepping back a little from the immediate issues you raise, I think your
piece raises some interesting points about how to define
valid/legitimate research questions, and the relationship of science (in
its broadest sense) to policy. This seems to me to go back to the
thorny question of to what extent scientists are responsible for the
uses to which their research is put, as well as what perspectives and
which stakeholders etc should be taken into account in designing
research (especially given the need to show user engagement when
applying for research funding). Given that cycling is such a complex
and sometimes contradictory research field these are important questions
for cycling researchers to grapple with when designing projects. That
said, I'm not sure there are easy answers, but it's good to see John's
research is perhaps sparking some methodological/epistemological debates
for this list to grapple with, as well as practical ones. Any comments,
anyone?
Paul
Dave du Feu wrote:
> I am concerned (though not surprised) at the message being given by
> the publicity around this interesting research. I have prepared a
> paper outlining my concerns, which you can find at...
>
> http://www.spokes.org.uk/modules.php?op=modload&name=DownloadsPlus&file=index&req=viewdownload&cid=20&orderby=dateD
>
> [or find it at www.spokes.org.uk in downloads - technical]
>
> Dave du Feu
> Spokes, the Lothian Cycle Campaign
>
>
>
> 2009/9/10 Parkin, John <[log in to unmask]>:
>
>> With apologies for cross-posting.
>>
>> The Times ran an article and editorial today on the different passing distances to cycle traffic with and without cycle lanes based on the work of Ciaran Meyers and myself.
>>
>> The Radio has picked it up and there may be something on Radio 4 "pm" programme, and Radio five live drive time.
>>
>>
>>
>> Dr John Parkin
>> Reader in Transport Engineering and Planning
>> Department of the Built Environment
>> The University of Bolton
>> Deane Road, Bolton, BL3 5AB, UK
>> Tel 01204 903027 Fax 01204 399074 mob 07903 523 017
>> www.bolton.ac.uk/staff/jp10
>>
>>
>
>
|