Hi All

I've pasted below, in case anyone's interested, a relatively short (and
subjective, apologies to paper presenters who feel I've mis-represented
them!) summary of the recent 'Cycling and the Social Sciences' symposium,
held at Lancaster University. It's been done for the newsletter of our local
cycling campaign, Dynamo.

This is the kind of thing I'd intended (and perhaps promised?!) to circulate
as a press release, following the event. But, almost 3 months on, it seems a
little late for that now. Nonetheless, I hope it might be a pleasureable
reminder to at least a few people.

Best wishes

Dave


Explorations in cycling

The last two days of June saw around 35 people who like to think about
cycling gather under the banner of 'Cycling and the Social Sciences', at the
Centre for Mobilities Research, Lancaster University. There's a growing
number of social scientists with a research interest in cycling dotted
around the country, and it seemed sensible to organise an event to bring
them together, along with transport professionals and cycling activists, and
thereby strengthen the profile of academic work into cycling. Given the
clear relevance of cycling to a whole range of current concerns - about
congestion, pollution, sustainability, climate change, quality-of-life,
health and disease - the time certainly seems right to push for the
policy-relevance of research into cycling.

The first day, June 29th, saw nine speakers present findings from their
research into a diverse and fascinating mix of cycle-related topics.
Nicholas Oddy, a design historian at the Glasgow School of Art, explored the
reasons behind the stability of the bicycle's appearance through the first
third of the twentieth century. Falling prices and mass uptake of the
bicycle by the working class contributed, during that era, to a decline in
the previously high status of the bicycle, and a climate hostile to
innovation in the cycling industry. Moving to the present day,
ex-Lancastrian Peter Cox, of the University College of Chester, considered
the velomobile, and particularly how the velomobile confuses our ordinary,
taken for granted understandings of what a cycle is. Peter stressed the
need, if the social acceptability and uptake of emerging cycle technologies
like the velomobile is to grow, to think outside of conventional meanings of
what is a cycle, what is a car, and what lies in-between.

Another old Dynamite, Paul Rosen from the University of York, reminded the
audience that it is not just the provision of infrastructure such as cycle
paths and lanes which gets people on their bikes, but also the active
promotion and increased visibility of such facilities. Paul argued that the
Sustrans network has been such a success not only because an extensive
cycle-friendly infrastructure was so obviously wanted, but also because the
organisation has worked very hard to develop a sense of ownership of that
infrastructure among local communities, and also advertised the existence of
the infrastructure much further afield. Mark McGuinness from Bath Spa
University College concentrated in his talk on a specific aspect of the
Sustrans network. Mark demonstrated, and praised, the importance of
community art along Sustrans routes. Using, like most of the other speakers,
lots of great photos, he noted how much of this art is very accessible;
people don't just look at it, but can sit on it, touch it, even - in the
case of a drinking fountain - be literally refreshed by it.

The middle of the day was comprised of three papers of direct relevance to
anyone attempting to increase cycling levels. First, Tim Ryley from the
Transport Research Institute at Napier University discussed an ongoing
Edinburgh based study seeking to identify the population segments most
likely to cycle. Partly because they are less likely to have access to a
car, it seems that students are the group with the highest propensity to
cycle. His findings also suggest that greater barriers to cycling exist
among women than men, and that, with the current media obsession with
obesity, future promotion efforts might usefully stress how cycling is a
healthy form of exercise. Second, John Parkin of the Bolton Institute
presented findings from his study into the various factors which influence a
person's propensity to cycle to work. The results of his study suggest that
the perceived risk of cycling is not as great a barrier as is sometimes
argued; less obvious factors, such as either knowing or not knowing other
people who cycle to work, are also significant. Third, Tim Jones from Oxford
Brookes University presented work-in-progress, an examination of household
travel behaviour adjacent to the National Cycle Network, and in particular
the Network's role in encouraging utility cycling. The findings of this
study will clearly demand scrutiny by anyone either positive or sceptical
about the Network's capacity to get people to use their bikes for travelling
to work, school and the shops, and not just to get out into the countryside
on a sunny Sunday.

A prize for one of the more bizarre titles of an academic paper must go to
Ben Fincham of Cardiff University, with 'I heard the other day that somebody
is riding a single speed free wheel bike with no brakes, so there's crazy
people out there': Reflections on a study into the bicycle messenger
industry in the UK. Ben described his time as a bike messenger, exploring
the lifestyles - both on and off the bike - of this in many ways
sub-cultural cycling group. The bicycle messenger industry is low paid,
non-unionised and dangerous, but - in contrast to what might therefore be
expected - many messengers are highly educated and espouse progressive
politics, actively embrace and live up to their deviant reputation, love the
lifestyle which comes with their work, and some even travel the world to
participate in bike messenger gatherings and competitions. And Justin
Spinney, of the University of London, spoke about his research - a study of
racing cyclists, which included riding with, and interviewing, cyclists as
they climbed the awesome and legendary Mount Ventoux. Justin's research
reveals how talking to cyclists as they are actually cycling enables a much
keener awareness of the performance of cycling as actively accomplished
through the coming-together, in a specific context, of the person and the
technology of the bicycle. He plans to extend this novel methodology in
order to gain fresh understandings of utility cycling.

In addition to the papers, the day was characterised by plenty of
stimulating discussion and debate. Does it make sense, for example, to
distinguish between 'leisure' and 'utility' cycling? How do we seek to
improve our understandings of cycling when, as the papers made so apparent,
cycling is many things at the same time: for some a way of life, for others
a cheap mode of transport, and for still more a vehicle to an occasional
day-out? How does, and how should, policy engage with these
actually-existing cycling worlds? Exploring such questions, generating
others, and contributing to the development of an exciting and productive
agenda for future research into cycling are among the tasks which the
Cycling and Society Research Group, formed the following day, has set
itself. One of the main aims of this group is to raise the profile and
status of research into cycling within the UK social sciences, and thus
perhaps also to raise the status of cycling itself, as well as to contribute
to better cycling policy.

More details of the event, together with some of the papers presented, can
be found at
http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/sociology/events/cycling/cycling%20workshop.htm

The next meeting of the Cycling and Society Research Group, this time at
Cardiff University, is planned for Easter 2005. Anyone keen to be learn more
about the Group can subscribe to a new email discussion list by going to
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/CYCLING-AND-SOCIETY.html

Dave Horton