Invading automobilityContesting urban cycle space from above and below

Katja LeyendeckerPhD research

Northumbria University Newcastle

NEXT EXITRGS Midterm 2016

Newcastle17 March 2016

#rgsmidterm

Structure of presentation

1. My research and aim2. Urban environment and people3. Method: think aloud + follow up4. Challenging perceptions

#rgsmidterm

Credit @amsterdamize

Credit @amsterdamize

1. My research and aimsMoral frameworkSpatial, social and environmental justice (Lefebvre, Jacobs, Harvey, Soja, etc…)

Theoretical frameworkSocio-ecological model: person, society and environment

+ politics, see Jensen model:

MethodologyCity comparison, Germany and UKLargely qualitative methods

Main difference in the citiesCycling levels and protected cyclewaysPolicy and road environment (above)People’s perception (below)

#rgsmidterm

2. Urban environment and peoplePeople typically know the benefits of cyclingPeople cycle when• their local environments are supportive• it is designed into the urban fabric

Key ingredient Protected cycleways on main roads ie on direct routes (Pooley, Pucher)

ButPeople’s view can be fast/ snap, static/engrained, habitualPeople ‘support’ perceived status quo and social normPeople’s view can be irrational People may have fear / anxiety of changePeople find it hard to imagine (spatial) change

Recent cycleway schemes saw backlash(Sadik-Khan)

#rgsmidterm

3. Method: think aloud + follow up1. Film the road environment2. Recruit a small number of participants3. Screen the street representation(s) to the participants 4. Use think-aloud method to gain insights (Ericsson, Someren)

• Product testing tool• Catches early reactions, 1st impressions• To reveal thought processes

• What people (don’t) notice, ie dangers, perceived dangers, subjective safety, level of comfort, ease and difficulty

• Compare to comments made about the unfamiliar environment

5. Consider follow up / in depth

#rgsmidterm

 Backlash        an

d think-aloud interviews

What is (behind) backlash?

How can backlash be managed, or prevented?

Why?

If we knew the a

nswers to the qu

estions, decision

-

makers, neolibera

l ones in particul

ar, would be more at 

ease when prop

osing transport t

ransition projects

.

4. Challenging perceptions#rgsmidterm

Thanks for listening

ContactEmail katja.leyendecker@northumbria.ac.ukBlog https://katsdekker.wordpress.com/Twitter @katsdekker

#rgsmidterm

ReferencesEricsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol Analysis: verbal reports as data - Please think aloud. Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Harvey, D. (2008). The right to the city. New left review, NLR53, 23-40

Jacobs, J. (1993). The Death and Life of Great American Cities: Vintage Books.

Jensen, O. B. (2013). Staging mobilities: Routledge.

Lefebvre, H., & Nicholson-Smith, D. (1991). The production of space. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Someren, M. W., Barnard, Y. F., & Sandberg, J. A. C. (1994). The Think Aloud method: A practcal guide to modelling cognitive processes. London: Academic Press Ltd.

Pooley, C. G., Jones, T., Tight, M., Horton, D., Scheldeman, G., Mullen, C., . . . Strano, E. (2013). Promoting Walking and Cycling : New Perspectives on Sustainable Travel. Bristol: Policy Press.

Pucher, J. R., & Buehler, R. (2012). City cycling: MIT Press.

Sadik-Khan, J., & Solomonow, S. (2016). Streetfight: Handbook for an Urban Revolution by Viking, an imprint of Penguin Publishing Group.

Soja, E. W. (2010). Seeking spatial justice. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

#rgsmidterm

AbstractInvading automobility – contesting urban cycle space from above and below

Cities are constantly changing and reinventing themselves, through policy, planning and engineering, undergoing transitions, envisaging new fortunes and futures. Yet transport spaces, city roads and streets, have stayed devoted to the private car, even when urban space comes at a premium. Reimaging city life with ‘less car’ in it, remains a continual challenge. What is needed to discontinue traditional transport thinking and disrupt the car-oriented trend of automobility(1)? Cycling, as such, is a disruptor of the system of automobility. As an opposing force, velomobility(2) claims its own space, rules and demands its own logic. My PhD research takes place in two cities, one with high cycling levels (Bremen, Germany), and the other with low levels of cycling (NewcastleGateshead, UK). The purpose of the research is to bring together both top-down decision-making and bottom-up street use and perception. It will examine people’s observations about their natural street environment as well as confront them with unfamiliar environments. The exploration will be achieved by combining mobile space visualisation and interview techniques. The car entered the urban arena about a century ago – only very recently in evolutionary terms. Just how deep does automobility run in homo urbanus? The presentation brings together theories on urban space, and raises methodological questions of conducting an effective investigation into the disruption of automobility.

Keywords: Space perception, city cycling, urban transition, transport policy

Urry, J. (2004). The ‘System’ of Automobility. Theory, Culture & Society, 21(4-5), 25-39. doi: 10.1177/0263276404046059Koglin, T. (2014). Vélomobility and the politics of transport planning. GeoJournal, 80, 569-586. doi: 10.1007/s10708-014-9565-7

#rgsmidterm