Update on research direction and design

1. an ecology of cyclingprotected cycleways: power, politics and public perception
Katja Leyendecker
PhD researcher
Northumbria University
EE-ABE
PGR CONFERENCE 2016

2. Why bother with cycling?
Cycling is…
• Good for the environment
• Good for personal health and wellbeing
• Good for the local economy
• Good for community and neighbourhoods
• Good for the individual’s pocket
• Good for public purse
Cycling addresses big needs of today:
climate change / carbon emission reduction
public health / obesity
environmental sustainability
social, economic and environmental justice

3. What cycling?
Photocredit
right@amsterdamize
left@carltonreid

4. Socio-ecological model
Barton & Grant (2006)

5. What’s needed?
No city in Europe or North America has achieved high level of
cycling without an extensive network of well-integrated bike
lanes and paths that provide separation from motor vehicle
traffic. […] Separate cycling facilities are a crucial first step
towards increasing cycling and making it socially inclusive.
Pucher & Buehler (2012:351)
It is clear from our research that most non-cyclists and
recreational cyclists will only consider cycling regularly if they are
segregated from [motor vehicle] traffic
Pooley et al (2013:176)

6. Why has it not happened?
Academia highlights the stranded system
Some select voices:
• Dominant: socio-technical system of
automobility (Urry, 2005)
• Over decades, we have been concentrating on
the individual too much and ‘forgot’ systemic
issues (Spotswood et al, 2015)
• Dynamics of neoliberal politics (Harvey, 2005)

7. My research

8. Framework
Jensen (2013)

9. Operationalised framework
Jensen (2013)
Investigation I
Document assessment
Discourse of
transport policies
Investigation III
Interviews with
street users
Investigation II
Street
observations
and assessment
of secondary
datasets

10. Investigation I
Document analysis of relevant current policy
NewcastleGateshead, UK
Local Plan (2015)
Local Transport Plan (2010)
Bremen, Germany
Transport plan
(Verkehrsentwicklungsplan) (2014)

11. Investigation II
Observation and interrogation of secondary datasets
NewcastleGateshead Bremen
___________________________________________________________________
Population 490,000 550,000
Density person/km 2,000 1,700
Source: Wikipedia
Map source: openstreetmap.org

12. Investigation III
Stage 1
15 min think-aloud (Ericsson &
Simon, 1993)
Commentary on videos showing
typical cycling infrastructure
• NewcastleGateshead
• Bremen
• Copenhagen/Amsterdam
>Transcribe
>> Analyse for themes/narratives
Interviews
Stage 2
45 min semi-structured
Uncover structural stories
(Freudendal-Pedersen, 2009)
Challenge perceptions
>Transcribe
>> Analyse for themes/narratives

13. Putting it back together
Jensen (2013)
Investigation I
Document assessment
Discourse of
transport policies
Investigation III
Interviews with
street users
Investigation II
Street
observations
and assessment
of secondary
datasets

14. Putting it back together
Jensen (2013)
Investigation I
Document assessment
Discourse of
transport policies
Investigation III
Interviews with
street users
Investigation II
Street
observations
and assessment
of secondary
datasets

15. Thank you
Email
katja.leyendecker@northumbria.ac.uk
Blog
https://katsdekker.wordpress.com/
Twitter
@katsdekker

16. References
• Barton, H., & Grant, M. (2006). A health map for the local human habitat.
Journal of The Royal Society for the Promotion of Health, 126(6), 252-253.
doi:10.1177/1466424006070466
• Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol Analysis: verbal reports as
data - Please think aloud. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
• Freudendal-Pedersen, M. (2009). Mobility in daily life: between freedom
and unfreedom. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
• Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
• Jensen, O. B. (2013). Staging mobilities: Routledge.
• Pooley, C. G. et al. (2013). Promoting Walking and Cycling : New
Perspectives on Sustainable Travel. Bristol: Policy Press.
• Pucher, J. R., & Buehler, R. (2012). City cycling: MIT Press.
• Spotswood, F. et al. (2015). Analysing cycling as a social practice: An
empirical grounding for behaviour change. Transportation Research Part F:
Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 29, 22-33. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2014.12.001
• Urry, J. (2005). The Systems of Mobility. Cahiers Internationaux de
Sociologie, 118, 23-35.

17. Northumbria University webpage
Comparing urban space perception in two cities, Newcastle, UK, and Bremen, Germany – in particular regard
to cycling infrastructure
The lack of infrastructure and the associated safety concerns are cited as the main reason for people abstaining
from cycling for utility and transport in urban areas in the UK (for example, Pooley et al, 2013, Pucher &
Buehler 2012). It is argued that, to increase cycling numbers, the urban environment will have to be adapted to
be more conducive and inviting to cycling. By comparing two cities in different European countries and
focussing on how non-cycling or occasionally-cycling users perceive cycling spaces, this research will contribute
to the debates surrounding how urban traffic spaces are viewed, conceptualised and negotiated.
By gaining more knowledge about the public’s perception of urban cycling space it is possible to inform policy
and decision-making processes.
Research Supervisors
• Dr Seraphim Alvanides
• Prof Ruth Dalton
Key Publications
Conference involvement at RGS conferences, Cycling and Society conference, Newcastle’s Active City Cycle City,
Women and Cycling Forum (Scotland, and England)
https://www.northumbria.ac.uk/study-at-northumbria/our-students/student-profiles/l/katja-leyendecker/