THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF TRANSPORT: CYCLING IN HOBART

By Tony Goodfellow1

A Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the

Degree of B.A. with Honours

In the School of Sociology and Social Work

University of Tasmania

1 Anthony.c.goodfellow@gmail.com

Acknowledgements

I hope that all the people who have contributed to the study will consider this thesis a

satisfactory return on their investment.

For their support and patience I wish to thank my supervisor Professor Adrian

Franklin, the School of Sociology and Social Work, Miss Lee, friends, flatmates and

family.

When I first arrived in Hobart I had two things, a backpack full of clothes and a light-

blue Moscow Malvern Star 1982. She disappeared a year ago. Who ever is riding my

bike this thesis is for you.

2

- Table of Contents -

Recommendations 4 Chapter One: Overview 7

Introduction ................................................................................................................ 7 Cycling in Australia and Hobart ................................................................................. 9 Brief History of Transport .......................................................................................... 9 Infrastructure in Hobart ............................................................................................ 13 Cycle Commuting and Recreation ........................................................................... 13

Chapter two: Theoretical Overview 16 Mobility .................................................................................................................... 16 The Interaction Order ............................................................................................... 19 Interactive Behaviour – car/bike hybrids ................................................................. 21 Culture ...................................................................................................................... 22

Chapter Three: Methodology and Methods 26 Approach and method .............................................................................................. 26 Data collection .......................................................................................................... 26 Participant Characteristics ........................................................................................ 27 Ethical Issues ............................................................................................................ 29

Chapter Four: Results 30 Norms of interaction ................................................................................................. 31 Mobile Interactions .................................................................................................. 32 Playful Behaviour ..................................................................................................... 34 Road Rage ............................................................................................................... 35 The Road Warrior ..................................................................................................... 37 Vagabond ................................................................................................................. 41 Vagabond Hybrid ..................................................................................................... 43 Symbols of Nationality ............................................................................................. 44

Chapter Five: Discussion and Conclusion 46 Chapter Six: Recommendations 49 Bibliography 51 Appendix 1 - Participant Recruitment Advertisement 57 Appendix 2 - Participant Information Sheet 59 Appendix 3 - Participant consent Form 62 Appendix 4 - Participant Demographic Information Sheet 65 Appendix 5 - Interview Schedule 67

3

Recommendations

There should be protective laws for cyclists and pedestrians

Motorists pose uneven risks to cyclists. In Holland traffic laws give special

consideration to cyclists (Pucher and Buehle, 2008: 26). If an accident occurs,

motorists are legally responsible with the burden of guilt on them and not the cyclist.

This will create an increased normative passing distance around riders from other road

users.

The enforcement of general traffic laws is applied equally to cyclists and

motorists

This will have two effects, legitimate cycling making drivers less hostile and

potentially less risks for cyclists and it will stop risky behaviour of cyclists.

Infrastructure for bikes

Any increase in cycling commuters will increase the cycling/motorists interactions

possibly leading to increase in fatalities and injuries. Cyclists should be separated

from motorists and pedestrians. Infrastructure would increase cycling numbers and

lesson disturbances to motorists. The needs of motorists must be considered as well,

the driver hostility is not misguided it has been created though the architecture of the

city.

Educational programs should highlight the bikes role in Australian history and

the need for civility on the road

4

As was shown the bicycle played an important part in the history of Australia yet

many people feel it is un-Australian. Any attempt to popularise cycling needs to

include this. This would help legitimate cycling as a mode of transport. In addition

cyclists’ defensive behaviour is seen as arrogant when it could be purposefully done

to increase safety. Motorists need to learn the reasons why cyclists need to ride

defensively.

5

Driving is a spectacular form of amnesia. Everything is to be

discovered, everything to be obliterated.

Jean Baudrillard (b. 1929), French semiologist. "Vanishing Point," America (1986,

trans. 1988).)

The machine has got to be accepted, but it is probably better to accept

it rather as one accepts a drug—that is, grudgingly and suspiciously.

Like a drug, the machine is useful, dangerous, and habit-forming. The

oftener one surrenders to it the tighter its grip becomes. You have only

to look about you at this moment to realize with what sinister speed

the machine is getting us into its power. To begin with, there is the

frightful debauchery of taste that has already been effected by a

century of mechanization…. But in addition to this there is a tendency

for the mechanization of the world to proceed as it were automatically,

whether we want it or not. This is due to the fact that in modem

Western man the faculty of mechanical invention has been fed and

stimulated till it has reached almost the status of an instinct. People

invent new machines and improve existing ones almost unconsciously,

rather as a somnambulist will go on working in his sleep.

George Orwell (2001: 196-197) - The Road to Wigan Pier, published 1937

6

Chapter One: Overview

Introduction

The purpose of this thesis is to contribute to an understanding of mobility in the city

of Hobart and understand how mobility is socially produced. This is shown through

an analysis of cycling. The research identifies barriers in adopting cycling as mode of

mobility for both commuting and recreation in public spaces and offers policy

recommendations.

Mobility in Australia has largely been realised through the car. Australia has one of

the highest levels of car commuting, yet at the same time, some of the lowest levels of

cycling commuting in the world (Pucher and Buehle, 2008). In light of concerns

regarding obesity, peak oil, climate change, traffic congestion, accessibility, liveable

cities and recession there is currently debate around alternatives to the motorcar (CPF

2008). The bicycle is only one alternative to the motorcar as a means of transport, this

study focuses on the bike because it can show both an existing mode illustrating larger

patterns of movement and an potential alterative mobility to existing modes of

transport. This thesis explores how such a shift can be conceived especially when the

car has been central to the socio-historical development of the architecture of cities

and culture (Urry 2004).

Cycling in Hobart is examined in this paper through: an analysis of peoples lived

experience and attitudes relating to cycling, including cyclists, car drivers, bus

operators and pedestrians. This is considered with theories of mobility, interaction and

culture. It is proposed that the extrinsic factors relating to other forms of mobility

namely motorised transport largely shapes the practice of cycling. Some theorists

7

have argued that there is a system of mobility that affords and enables motorised

transport that exerts a character of domination excluding alternatives to the car (Urry

2004). An understanding of this system of transport is used to explore how cycling is

excluded from the mobility order and how the character of domination is asserted

through the relationship between different forms of mobility and the spatial ordering

of place.

There has not been a study of this kind that links a systems analysis of mobility

exploring how mobility is produced and how that is experienced in Australia. The

research questions are:

o How is cycling socially constructed in Hobart?

o How is cycling experienced in Hobart?

Hobart is the capital city of Tasmania; compared with other capital cities it has the

second lowest average rainfall and lowest population. Although Hobart has a hilly

topography this does not necessarily correlate with cycling frequency. To dispel the

notion that topography is the dominant correlative variable in choice of transport the

European Commission recently published a pamphlet - Cycling: the way ahead for

towns and cities (Dekoster and Schollaert, 2000). Environmental conditions such as

steep gradients 6% to 8 % showed to have a dissuasive affect proving to be

impractical for cyclists (Dekoster and Schollaert, 2000: 11). However, case studies in

the pamphlet focus exclusively on hilly towns such as Ferrara that has a reported

cycling rate of 31%. Trodeinheim in Norway that had the velo-conference has a

reported cycling rate of 8% (Dekoster and Schollaert, 2000:28). The town has

introduced cycling lifts in order to lower the dissuasive effects of topography. Hills

are obviously dissuasive but there are other dissuasive factors the question is what are

these.

The three levels of government the Commonwealth, the State government of

Tasmania and the local Councils of Hobart, Glenorchy and Clarence have all

indicated that cycling commuters should increase and cycling for recreation should be

8

encouraged. The Hobart council recently published a report called ‘2025 Vision’,

which outlines aims of the council, one aim is to make Hobart ‘highly accessible

through efficient transport options’ in addition, it also states that there is a need for

cycling infrastructure (Hobart Council 2008). The Hobart council has also accepted

the plan for a Principal Bicycle Network. In addition, all levels of government have

been participation in The Australian National Cycling Strategy 2005-2010. The

strategies aim is to have more cycling and safer cycling (Austroads 2005). The

government discourse is in favour of more cycling both for recreation and

commuting.

Cycling in Australia and Hobart

I will begin with a description narrative of the history of cycling in Australia using

secondary source material, followed by a profile of cycling today. The history of the

bicycle technology along side other forms of transport must be understood in order to

provide a context to attitudes of cycling and travel behaviour.

Brief History of Transport

The history of cycling in Australia has three distinct phases, each based around new

technology that came from Europe namely the velocipede, the ordinary and the safety

bicycle. Innovations in effective human powered self propelled technology begun in

1817 when a German Baron combined two in-line wheels and a steering mechanism,

creating the velocipede. The 18th century saw many new innovations and experiments

in cycle technology seeing the invention of the ‘ordinary’, where the cyclists is seated

above a 90 cm diameter wheel with a smaller back wheel for balance, then

culminating in the ‘safety’ bike, invented in England, consisting of elements of

modern bicycles including diamond frame, similar sized wheels and rear wheel

sprocket driven by a chain (Hudson 2006). This technology eventually made its way

to Australia. There was a succession of popularity first with the velocipede which was

9

short lived then the ordinary which was finally eclipsed by the ‘safety’ bike which

saw a continued mass popularity for several decades.

The velocipede was first introduced in Australia in 1867 and the popularity lasted for

a decade (Fitzpatrick 1980: 32). In 1869 the first velocipede race was conducted in

Melbourne at the Melbourne Cricket Ground (MCG) (Hess 1999: 4). The race had

both female and male competitors which was highly controversial at the time. The

same year football was allowed to be played onto the MCG. Within less than a decade

another cycle innovation arrived in Australia the Ordinary. The ordinary first

appeared in Australia in 1875 and within a few years there were bike clubs, journals

and local manufacturing dedicated to the machine especially in Melbourne

(Fitzpatrick 1980). Enthusiasts in Hobart formed the Tasmanian Club in 1880, in

1886 there was a race in Hobart between the Hobart and Melbourne clubs (Bolger

1973: 183).

The safety bike - lighter, cheaper and easier to ride than the ordinary – quickly filled a

functional niche in mobility for both genders after its arrival in 1887. Hobart transport

was met by horses, horse driven vehicles and walking until these new technologies

were introduced in the 1890’s. American and English manufactures exported to

Australia that begun competing with a local Australian cycle industry including an

attempt at cycle manufacture in Hobart by 1896 (Fitzpatrick 1980 32). The Australian

historian Jim Fitzpatrick has documented the technologies role in Australian society

noting that “As the 1890’s progressed a cycling craze swept Australia” which no

doubt included Tasmanians there were road races like the one in 1904 in Glenorchy

(figure 1).

Figure 1 Bike race in Glenorchy 1904

10

Archives Office of Tasmania

The rise of the bicycles popularity was tempered however the introduction of the

bicycle coincided with that of the trams in 1883 and the motorcar in 1898. Hobart had

a tram system averaging 4000 passengers a day after one year of operation (Petrow

2002: 52) seeing a corresponding rise in low density living around the transit routes.

This reflects a romanticism of rural living (Newman and Kenworthy 1989: 93), the

Hobart mayor stated in 1910 that the tram service would ‘enable people working in

the city to live in the pure air of the country’ (Petrow 2002: 57). Motorised buses were

introduced to Hobart in 1905 which extended the transit routes of trams. The

movement away from the city continued and accelerated with use of the motorcar.

The cities low density, public transport and the rise of individual forms of motorised

transport led to a decline in those choosing a bicycle except for recreation or sport. By

the end of the depression the cycling craze was over and it was time for the car.

Through the 20th century the car has progressively become the most popular form of

transport and at the same time cities have become shaped by the car. In 1921 there

was an estimated one motorcar per 45 persons in Australia, in 1947 there were 7.8 and

11

by 1999 the figure is 1.6 people (ABS 2001). Car ownership, per capita, in 1923 was

the third highest in the world (Fitzpatrick 1980: 221). The trend toward cars is evident

in Hobart, Fig 2 and surroundings (Hobart city, Glenorchy, Kingston, Clarence) from

1976 to 2006 car commuting has increased from 66% to 81%, public transport has

decreased from 25% to 6% while the bicycle almost negligible increase from 0.30%

to 1.1% (although it must be noted that the census is conducted in winter which may

be a lower median trend).

Figure 2 Mode of transport to work in Hobart from 1976-2006

Travel to work in Hobart, 1976-2006

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006

Date

Per

cen

t o

f W

ork

forc

e

Public Transport

Car (Passenger and Driver)

Bicycle

12

Infrastructure in Hobart

Since the bikes inception in Tasmania cyclists had to compete with other forms of

transport using either the footpath or roads having no dedicated infrastructure. In

1970, there was a major revision of transportation in Greater Hobart (Department of

Public Works, 1970) which primarily focuses on car infrastructure, there is no

reference to cycling or walking, which is surprising because 7% of people walked to

work in 1976. When the Tasman Bridge was constructed in 1964 there was no

provision for cyclists. The historical car preference is reflected in current government

policies, culture (which is explored below in more depth) and infrastructure. The

Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources (DIER) has no policy for cycling

infrastructure. However, Greater Hobart local councils (Hobart, Glenorchy, Kingston,

Clarence) have begun independent cycling plans that are informally coordinated by

CyclingSouth. Recently there was a 10.5 km off-road cycle path constructed from

Hobart city to Moonah and in 2008 an on-road cycle path on Argyle Street running

for 400m was constructed (the first infrastructure of its kind in Hobart).

Cycle Commuting and Recreation

Mobility with a bicycle can be realised for commuting and leisure. The table below

displays cycle commuting and recreational cycling. Data has been combined from two

Australia wide surveys conducted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics the 2005–06

Multi-Purpose Household Survey (MPHS) and the 2006 Australian census. The

survey has "cycle as recreation, includes all forms of recreational cycling" (off-road,

on-road and competitive cycling) "at least once in the last 12 months", this had the 4th

most highest frequency for physical activities measured after walking, aerobics and

swimming. The consumption bikes sales during 2002-2006 were above 1 million for

each year when cars have never reached 1 million for any year (Cycling Promotion

Fund, 2006: 2). For the same period the ratio of adult to children bikes is 1.66, the

popularity of the types of adult bikes, in descending order, is mountain bikes, road

bikes then hybrids (Cycling Promotion Fund, 2006: 1). There is no data available for

the Australian population on bike ownership however inferring from the data bicycle

13

ownership is significantly higher than commuters where there is a population of

potential cycling commuters, especially when more than 1 million Australian drivers

have less than 5km to work (ABS 2006).

Table 1 Leisure and Commuter cyclists by age and gender as of 2006.

Commuter (%)

Leisure (%)

Total 1.6 6.3Men 8.8Woman 3.9

15 – 17 Yrs - 5.918–24 Yrs 1.6 5.825–34 Yrs 1.7 7.935–44 Yrs 1.4 9.545–54 Yrs 2 7.055–64 Yrs 0.9 5.2

65 and over - 1.7

Figure 3 Leisure and Commuter cyclists by age as of 2006.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

15 – 17Yrs

18–24 Yrs 25–34 Yrs 35–44 Yrs 45–54 Yrs 55–64 Yrs 65 andover

Commuter (%)

Leisure (%)

14

In 2006 cycle commuting accounted for 1.1% of the Australian population which is

the least popular recorded mode however for recreation cycling accounts for 6% of

the population. Cycle commuting is a minority among those that cycle. There is large

difference between males and females who ride for commuting and recreation. In

2006 out of the total population of cycling commuters to work 81.7% was male and

18.3% was female (Mees, et al. 2007: 13). There is a gender and also an age

difference which is similar in other English speaking countries namely America and

the United Kingdom but is inverted in Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands

(Horton 2006: 45). The gender and age difference between cyclists and non-cyclists

has been correlated to risks either real or perceived from motorcars (Garrard 2003:

214).

In terms of fatalities there were 142 cyclists in 1950, in 2000 there were 31 and in

2003 there were 26 (Australian transport safety Bureau 2004). The fatalities of

cyclists has had an 82% decrease between 1950 and 2003. Cars are a major hazard to

cyclists. In Victoria over 12 (1987-1999) years cars had 87% (n= 24773) collision

with vehicles accounted for 87% of the total amount of accidents and fatalities on

Victorian roads (VicRoads 2006).

15

Chapter two: Theoretical Overview

The previous chapter showed the historical context for transport in Hobart and briefly

outlined a profile of cycling. This chapter explains how the notion of mobility (mainly

from Cresswell, Urry and Sheller) and other theoretical contributions on consumption

can be used in understanding how mobility is produced through materiality, culture

and the interaction with other modes of transport.

Mobility

Before analysing the use of the bike, it is important to first understand the term

mobility and its role in this analysis. In the context of this essay the term ‘mobility’

refers to movement as a socially produced act as produced movement (Cresswell

2002: 20). Tim Cresswell a human geographer from the University of London and

editor of the journal Mobilities has focused attention to the question of mobility

(2008). According to Cresswell (2006) mobility involves power and culture:

16

Mobilities are “caused to happen” (or prevented from happening), linked

to social relations (citizen mobilities, alien mobilities etc), contextualized

within understandings of dominant institutions (particularly the “nation”)

and embedded in forms of consciousness (as an element in arguments

about “social justice” for instance).

An element of this mobility is that it requires interconnectedness in society and that

the production of mobility corresponds to “relative immobility of others” (Cresswell

2002, Urry and Sheller 2006). Cresswell argues that “Mobility involves both material

practice and meaning and it is important to consider both side by side” which this

essay attempts to achieve.

The Right to Movement, Speed, Time

Movement and mobility has recently been given much attention in the social sciences.

John Urry and Mimi Sheller (2006) from Lancaster University have been proponents

of the mobility paradigm. They argue that mobility is a major element of modernity.

Urry and Sheller (2000: 742) argue that the right of movement has led to larger

structural transformations related to modernity:

Mobility is as constitutive of modernity as is urbanity, that civil

societies of the West are societies of ‘automobility’…

The right to move has largely been met by the automobile in England, Australia and

America (Pucher and Buehle, 2008). These countries have interdependencies that

have seemingly ‘locked in’ the car as a mode of mobility (Urry 2004). The

preferential mode of mobility the automobile has created a social order that favours

cars and created conflicts of forms of mobility, forms that also embody free access to

space. The preference for cars shows that access to space for one comes at cost (e.g.

environment and health) and leads to immobility (through traffic congestion and

limits other forms of mobility such as cycling).

Systems

17

The third theory outlined by Urry and Sheller is the notion that mobilities involve

systems that are “neither perfectly ordered nor archaic” (2006: 217). There are

systems which are emergent in time. Urry and Sheller (2006: 217) argue that practices

can become fixed or “path dependant” such as the use of the car:

Dynamic systems possess emergent properties. They develop over time so that

national economies, corporations, and households are locked into stable `path-

dependent' practices…But systems can also change through the accumulation of

small repetitions reaching a `tipping point'

This means that processes are constantly forming and dissolving “path dependant”

systems. Therefore there is a need to understand mobility from a systems framework.

Automobility

Urry (2004) describes how transport has been dominated by particular forms of

technology. He argues that automobility is met through technology. Automobility is

used in this sense because it combines ‘auto’ the normative notions of self with

objects and technologies that have the capacity for movement. Furthermore, he argues

that automobility is the “assemblage of specific human activities, machines, roads,

buildings, signs and cultures of mobility.” (Urry 2004: 26) Social processes have

made technology a requisite for mobility, particularly but not exclusively, motorised

forms of transport. Automobility is the realization of the expectation of autonomous

movement through the networks of human created pathways such as roads.

Automobility System

As already discussed, automobility can be conceived as being made possible through

and maintained by a system. Movement happens in space and time and this can be

conceived as an emergent phenomena of an automobility system. Urry (2004)

describes this system of spatial mobility being dominated by a particular form of

technology - the car. This essay will outline the system of automobility in order to

understand how cycling is socially constructed in Hobart. Urry (2004: 25-26) has

18

outlined a system of automobility domination (see also Latimer and Munro 2006: 33).

The elements that sustain and characterise the system include:

o The manufactured object and with it processes of manufacturing such as

Fordism.

o A major place for individual consumption which has sign values such as speed

and freedom.

o A Complex social and technical linkages which including the materialities

such as road infrastructure and town design, oil extraction and refinery,

functional services for cars eg car sales, repairs, hotels etc. advertising and

marketing. The complex includes all the relational elements that make

automobile use possible (for example see Bohm et al. 2006: 5).

o A form of private mobility which depends on public space excluding other

mobilities such as cycling and walking.

o A culture of mobility where the car is seen as being part of the good life

reinforced by literature and artists.

These components of the domination of automobility taken together reproduce and

maintain an ordered social reality that favours cars. A system is defined by the

process of exclusion (Latimer and Munro in Bohm: 38). If the system of automobility

is dominated by the car then it operates at the exclusion of other forms of transport

such as walking, cycling, public transport, rail and water transport. This practice of

exclusion and resistance will be analysed in this essay through culture, materiality of

the place and nature of interactions. The systems theory of automobility will be tested

to see if cars are preferred mode of mobility, in order to test this proposition the

interaction between cyclists and cars and the role of culture will be analysed.

The Interaction Order

19

Bikes are a nuisance for cars and cars are a risk for the cyclist. Describing the uneven

power relations especially the power of the car Adorno (quoted in Urry 2004: 29)

wrote in 1942: ‘And which driver is not tempted, merely by the power of the engine,

to wipe out the vermin of the street, pedestrians, children and cyclists?’ It is this

interaction that Adorno writes of that is only possible because of an interaction order

that has been socially constructed, agency is with humans but the materiality of the

place and the differences in mobility defines the relationship.

The theory of the interaction order by the influential American sociologist Ervin

Goffman (1983:5) shows that normality or trust is possible only from orderliness that

is “predicted on a large base of shared cognitive presuppositions, if not normative

ones, and self restrained restraints”. This theory is one that is from micro-sociology

however the interaction order, I argue, can be used to understand the system of car

dominance. According to Goffman (1983:11), the interaction order incorporates

systems of enabling conventions that is not entirely determined but largely influenced

by the social structure. This notion links with the automobility because it can show

how automobility interacts with alternative modes of mobility.

The American sociologist Philip Manning (1992: 1) has argued that Goffman “tried to

develop a general theory of face-to-face interaction, a theory that could be used to

interpret a social exchange, whether it took place in a bar or a boardroom” (1992: 1).

The unit of analysis from his theory is interaction between people, the transfer of

information, communication in some way, in other words a social interaction or what

Goffman calls an encounter. The theory places Goffman in a micro-sociological

perspective where he seeks to understand patterns of behaviour and interactions

objectively (Williams 1998: 152). This micro-sociological perspective, Goffman

argues, is one way of understanding social norms and institutions (Goffman 1983: 7).

The interaction order can include laws, situations and norms.

The dominance of automobility rests on the social construction of an interaction order

that excludes other modes of mobility, Goffman writes that an interaction order is

based on a paradox (1983:5):

20

There are deeper questions regarding the interaction order…what

is desirable order from the perspective of some can be sensed as

exclusion and repression from the point of view of others.

Exclusion and repression from the system of automobility is a result of, in part, of the

creation of a normalized car culture. This normalisation may lead to the ghettoisation

of alternative forms of mobility such as bicycle, which would be evident in

interactions, and the behaviour of cyclists and non-cyclists.

Interactive Behaviour – car/bike hybrids

Interactive behaviour can be from the banal such as the driver locking eyes with the

cyclists (Walker and Brosnan: 2007) to the violent such as road rage (Lupton 1999).

Some authors have argued that the relationship of the human body and self with cars

and the material systems they depend on creates new subjectivities. This relationship

has been described as a driver-car assemblage (Dant 2004), cyborg (Lupton 1999: 59)

and hybrid (Urry 2004: 29). Lupton argues that ‘road rage’ comes from the hybrid

subjectivities when:

The car may invoke powerful aggressive feelings because of its very power, its

capacity for speed and mobility and its sexualized meanings and its phallic nature as

a thrusting, potent extension of the self. Once we “get going” while driving and

develop a momentum and rhythm of speed it seems like an imposition to have to stop

or slow down.” (Lupton 1999: 63)

These feelings may be imposed by the car on humans or may be an expectation which

has been fostered by images from advertising that portray unrestrained movement,

what ever the case interaction between other forms of mobility can be meaning

making and is context dependant.

The interaction between a cyclist and a driver is uneven. Cyclists maintain their

human form unlike drivers who have an enclosed personal space. This means the

framed interaction between the driver and cyclists is contingent on the form of

mobility, the cyclist has to interact with a “cyborg”:

21

…for the non-car-user roads are simply full of moving, dangerous iron

cages. There is no reciprocity of the eye and no look is returned from the

‘ghost in the machine’.

However studies show that an invisible look is returned, drivers have been found

using eye tracking technology to invariably always when a met with a cyclists look at

the face (Walker and Brosnan: 2007).

In other words when there could be an interaction order of automobility, a unique

interaction order which is formed creating risks for riders from both the infrastructure

and driving behaviour. The interaction order is one factor that dialectically informs

the shape of the forms of non-car mobility.

Goffman (1983:6) also elaborates on the internalized norms and inactivity of

individuals:

Perhaps behind a willingness to accept the way things are ordered is the brutal fact of

one’s place in the social structure and the real or imagined cost of allowing oneself to

be singled out as a malcontent.

If there is a system of dominance relating to automobility, the alternative modes of

mobility can be conceived as mobile vagabonds spatially, culturally, politically (a

concept that is discussed below).

Culture

The idea of culture will now be introduced to understand the meanings associated

with practice of cycling. Culture can be used to understand what values, meaning and

symbols are made around the practice of forms of mobility that both enables and

inhibits the practice of cycling.

The work of Ann Swindler the American Sociologists is fruitful in understanding how

the structures or in this case a system of automobility can influence culture. Firstly

22

she defines culture as symbolic vehicles of meaning that people use to experience and

express meaning which include art, daily ritual. These symbols are the means with

which sharing behaviour and views take place. She argues that culture plays a casual

role in Individuals action by the “publicly available symbolic forms” facilitating some

actions while impeding others (Swindler 1986: 273).

She introduces two concepts settled and unsettled periods where culture interacts with

social structures. Depending on the observer a culture can be settled where some

forms of actions are discouraged and unsettled periods where forms of actions are in

transition, for a settled culture she writes (1986: 284):

….culture appears to shape action only in that the cultural

repertoire limits the available range of strategies of action. Such

"settled cultures" are nonetheless constraining. Although

internally diverse and often contradictory, they provide the ritual

traditions that regulate ordinary patterns of authority and

cooperation, and they so define common sense that alternative

ways of organizing action seem unimaginable, or at least

implausible.

In times of unsettled culture some cultural assumptions are challenged and new forms

of action can emerge, therefore a new cultural system emerges. The argument in this

essay is that currently there could be a systems change and that new assemblages are

being formed. Common sense notions are challenged, which could mean new forms

of behaviour such as currently unconceivable acts like “children playing in the street,

cyclists on major highways, or older people crossing the road” (Latimer and Munro

2006: 47) being imagined or practiced. The unsettling of a cultural system may be

evident in the symbols associated with bicycles.

Symbols: Sustainable

In a study undertaken by Horton (2006) from Lancaster University it was shown that

some cyclists were motivated to ride as of a reaction to the car. Horton’s analysis of

23

the UK cyclists indicates that the emergence of cycling in the 1970’s was largely in

opposition to the car. Horton argues that the bike has not been problematised by

environmentalists, because cycling is an environmentally benign technology. This has

placed the bike as a major icon and symbol for “sustainability” (Horton, 2006: 46).

Riding the bicycle becomes an embodiment of an environmental discourse. The

cyclists, both as an actual fact and in discourse is the embodiment of a distinctive

lifestyle in opposition to the “reproduction and recognition of a car centric society”.

Horton argues (2006: 46) that bicycle communicates opposition to cars:

In the culture of contemporary British environmentalism at least, the

bicycle is constructed continuously as green transport and contrasted

to the polluting, un-green car.

Ironically, symbolic opposition may be a cause for some to ride but also a cause for

other not to ride because the bicycle is becoming politicised. The association of

morality and mobility have been shown to be weaker in Denmark and the Netherlands

that have per capita more people cycling (Horton, 2006: 52). In addition, the choice of

mobility in these countries is based on more instrumental considerations such as

weather and distance for individuals.

Holland

Holland shows the importance of symbols associated with the bike. The bicycle has

been a symbol of nation, utility, freedom and modernity.

In a survey of the historical adoption of the bicycle in Europe “while geographical

conditions did play a role in the popularity of the bicycle, the most important factor in

their view was what they called the ‘image of the bicycle’.” (Ebert 2004: 349). The

image of the bike or the use symbols are nation, utility, freedom and modernity. Ebert

argues the importance of the historical development of symbols associated with the

bicycle in order for there to be policy decisions that favour infrastructure and laws

that encourage cycling. Early representations of the bicycle associate the technology

with skiing or flying (Ebert 2004) linking the technology to a national identity and

freedom. The success of the bike argues Ebert (2004: 435) “in the Netherlands thus

24

reflects the particular social and cultural developments in that society and the specific

cultural and symbolic meaning with which this object has been endowed in that

context.” If Ebert’s thesis is correct, then one would expect that in Australia cycling

does not have the same cultural and symbolic meanings that Holland has and that

cycling may have symbols appropriate to its historical exclusion from being a form of

mobility.

Cox (2005) notes the tendency to frame cycling as a technology, so basing

distinctions on cycle types rather than cycling’s social dynamics. He suggests four

conceptual categories, namely play, active pastime, transport, and sport. Holland has

largely emphasised cycling as a utility or transport in the discourses of organisations

and government. This dynamic narrative might help explain why cycling has been

chosen as a mode of mobility in Holland and not in other countries. It also explains

why simple and inexpensive bikes are used in Holland (Pucher and Buehler 2008: 2).

However, it must be noted that Holland has had strong land use planning legislation

that stoped suburban sprawl that is typical in most American, Australian and English

cities (Horton 2006: 48). This example can be used to contrast with the symbols found

in this research.

Another example of the symbols attached to cycling was shown in a study undertaken

by Ger et al. (1998) in the city of Copenhagen. Copenhagen has 39% of trips by

bicycles. Ger et al. (1998) found from in-depth interviews that like the car there are

sexual symbols associated with cycling. This differs from cars in that it is domination

not of mastery of ones machine but of ones body and nature it is not the embodiment

by technologies but embodiment of technology. Lastly riding a bike is considered

politically correct in Denmark because of its perceived environment (less noise than a

car) and ecological (less pollution) benefits.

25

Chapter Three: Methodology and Methods

This chapter discusses the methods used in this research and methodological issues.

Approach and method

The study is based on the epistemology of social constructionism using the qualitative

method of in-depth interviews. As already discussed I will address how the form

mobility namely cycling is socially produced and how this is experienced through

theories of interaction, culture and mobility so the method is partly deductive. The

stated meanings, attitudes and behaviour can be accessed using qualitative methods

which the quantitative method cannot access (Ezzy 2006: 33). The unit of analysis for

this study is culture and interactions.

Data collection

The data in this research was collected using in-depth interviews and ethnographical

techniques. This stratagem is useful because it allows complexity between individual's

meanings and flexibility for questioning (Clair and Wasserman 2008). Interviews

ranged from 20 minutes to 60 minutes. The interview process consisted of two parts.

The first part of the interview included the completion of a demographic information

sheet (Appendix 2) which included social variables such as age, gender and bike use.

The second part was the in-depth interview. The interviews were conducted with

26

semi-structured interviews with the aid of an interview guide (Appendix 5) conducted

in a conversational tone allowing discussion of new topics. The interviews were tape

recorded and transcribed using an analogue transcription machine. After transcription

the demographic information and interview was assigned a number and a fictitious

name to maintain confidentiality. The data was then thematically analysed based on

the conceptual codes and inductive codes.

Sampling selection and recruitment

At the beginning of the research I used the techniques of ethnography by finding

informants of cycling and participant observation in order to orient myself in the

subject matter and guidance in sampling. This was not part of the formal study so it is

not included in the methodology. The key informants, someone close to the social

phenomenon being studied (Babbie 2005: 191), for cyclists were found at bicycle

shops. These informants informed me of groups to interview relating to conflicts over

space such as bus operators – which I pursued.

In terms of participant observation I participated in a group bike ride through Hobart

called ‘Critical Mass’ (now Convenience Mass) which resulted in contacts that were

followed up for interviews. Participants both cyclists and non-cyclists were also

recruited through snowball sampling, advertising at bicycle repair shops (Appendix

1), and through liaising with Metro Tasmania. The interviews were conducted at

convenient places for participants including homes, cafes, the metro office and pubs.

In addition, I conducted interviews with representatives of Hobart City Council,

Glenorchy City Council and Cycling South.

Participant Characteristics

The participants for this study included cyclists, car drivers, walkers, bus drivers and

users of public transport (see table 2). There were 22 interviews conducted which

included both male (n = 16) and females (n = 6) and an age range from 18-50+. For

those that cycled they include commuting (n = 2) recreational (n = 12) and both (n =

6). In the demographic information sheet work and suburb were collected but it is not

27

displayed in the table because of the need to maintain confidentiality of participants.

There were three students and four bus operators interviewed. The table shows a

column labelled bike use where R represents regular rider, O Occasional Rider and N

represents non rider.

Table 2 Participant Information

28

Ethical Issues

This research was given ethical approval by the Social Sciences Human Research

Ethics Committee. The approval was given after the consent form and study

advertisement was changed. Following the ethical principals of social science

research, confidentiality, informed consent, and participants’ protection from harm

was maintained (Habibis 2006: 62). Participants were given a participant information

Name Birth Age Gender Education WorkBike Owner

Bike use Bike use

Primary Private Mode

Bill Aus 18-29 M Apprenticeship Carpenter - FT Y O Recreation Car

Anne Aus 18-29 F Apprenticeship Hair dresser N N - Car

Amelia Aus 18-29 F Apprenticeship Hair dresser / Student Y N - Car

Dianna Aus 30-39 F Bachelor Admin Y R Both Bike

Pam Aus 18-29 F Year 12 Waiters Y O Recreation Walking

Bob Aus 18-29 M Bachelor Customer Service N O RecreationPublic Transport

Isaac UK 50+ M Diploma Musician Y R Both Bike

Richard UK 30-39 M Post Graduate Bookseller Y R Commuting Walking

Justin Aus 18-29 M Apprenticeship Dispense Technician Y O RecreationPublic Transport

Dave Aus 18-29 M Year 10 Government N N - Car

Damian Aus 40-49 M Post Graduate Teacher Y R Both Bike

Mark Aus 30-39 M year 12 Bus Operator N N - Car

Tom Aus 30-39 M year 10 Bus Operator Y O Recreation Car

Lucia Aus 50+ F Tafe Bus Operator Y O Recreation Car

Gregory Aus 50+ M Tafe Bus Operator Y O Recreation -

Lawrence Aus 18-29 M Bachelor Bicycle Retail Y R Both Bike

Joyce Aus 18-29 F Post Graduate Office Administrator Y R Commuting Bike

Ray Aus 30-39 M Tafe Student Y R Commuting Bike

Steven Aus 30-39 M Apprenticeship Student Y O Recreation Car

Neal Aus 18-29 M Bachelor Orchard Labourer Y R Both Bike

Allen Aus 30-39 M Post Graduate Teacher Y O Recreation Car

John Aus 18-29 M Post Graduate IT Technician Y R Both Bike

29

sheet, that outlined the study and the participatory nature of the interview, and asked

to complete an ethics consent form (Appendix 2 and 3).

Chapter Four: Results

This chapter has the results of the study. It begins with a discussion of motorists

attitudes relating to the norms of mobility, and then presents the interactions and

attitudes of motorists with cyclists, finishing with reported hostility by motorists. The

second part looks at interaction by cyclists with motorists, and how cyclists are legally

and spatially like vagabonds. This chapter will show how the extrusion of cycling

30

mobility is realised through interactions with motorists showing how the system of

automobility operates at a local level.

Norms of interaction

The motor car represents, for some, individual space and unconstrained movement

which has the expectation of speed. The motor cars mobility is only constrained by

space and friction. The bike and other modes of mobility can cause friction for the

operation of the mobility of motorcars. The motorcars movement can be constrained

by a cyclist when an interaction takes place between the road users. Also the

individuality that the car affords, the private space is described by Dave as being its

major attraction. However the freedom this has a paradox being free yet constrained,

mobility with resistance is described:

To me its, I don’t drive much because of the traffic, but its convenient for

me, its peaceful, I can listen to my music, I can sit in the car myself, I can

enjoy the trips, smoke, I can do what ever I want and not worry about people

complaining or anything like that. It's my own little world in the car.

Justin associates speed with a national identity. He describes the difference between

moving with car and a bike, he begins with the car:

Speed…style…its all aesthetics. Its part of your ego…its part of being

Australian…Speed is a big thing. The general view of everyone, you can ride

a bike but you’re a bit of a pansy. If you drive a really fast car then every one

stares at you as you drive down the road.

Amelia describes why she drives and how she is relaxed while driving a car,

compared to cycling:

You are more relaxed when you in a car, even though there are more rules -

I’m more confident in the car than I’m on a bike. You can get in your car and

listen to you music, have a cigarette. You can’t smoke when you're on a bike.

You can chill. I love driving and I love having a car. You get in your car and

31

you can turn the music on and scream shit. You can. Your in you own

confined space and own little world so I yabber [talk] to my self a lot. You

can take the dog, you can take passengers. It's more enjoyable, more social

because I don’t ride a bike with friends. I don’t have a group of friends to get

on a bike with.

However the subjectivity of “chill” and “relaxed” is challenged when she meets a

cyclists:

They get in the road. I drive because I don’t have enough time and there is

nothing more annoying than being stuck on the road with a cyclist because

I’m trying to go fast.

The freedom of the bikes mobility annoys Anne:

Yeah, it kinda pisses me off when your sitting in the car, a couple of car

lengths back and they can just ride past and go right to the front, infront of

everyone else.

The car embodies unconstrained movement; however there are encounters with

cyclists that create friction between the two modes.

Mobile Interactions

The interaction order between cyclists and motorists can be discerned when the two

have an encounter. This section shows the interaction from the perspective of

motorists, pedestrians and bus operators and how they respond to cyclists on the road.

The encounters range from passing the each other on the road, hand signals,

32

collisions, playful behaviour. A common theme is “road rage” related when a cyclist

slows down a motorist.

Bicycles are frequently referred to negatively by drivers because they do not adhere to

the road rules and that they are a nuisance. There are particular places that cause

conflicts more Allen a driver describes one location:

Taroona used to be pretty bad, but they put the bike lane way beside the road

you still get your idiots who tend to ride beside each other. I mean most of

them don’t do it in peak hour. Chanel highway, the road to Kingston, and

sandy bay road they tend to do it a bit [riding two abreast]. And you get

frustrated and other drivers get frustrated. Not particularly big groups it

might be a group of two or a group of ten of them. You say fuck, get off the

mate, I’m trying to drive here.

The frustration is repeated by Amelia, the frustration of the encounter led to her

screaming:

Sometimes I scream: “get out of the way”. They can’t hear me. I wait until its

safe so I can pass so I can get away from them. I don’t like driving near

them. They are fragile. If something does happen you’re more likely to kill

them or cause serious injury.

The fragile state of cyclist and the closeness of death is a recurring theme in

interviews.

A bus operator describes how the materiality creates friction between buses and

cyclists:

I can understand that because the infrastructure isn’t in place for both to co-

exist happily and you’ve got the problem of us coming to the left hand side

and constantly stoping. Down sandy bay road channel highway you can

literally pass a cyclist at upper sandy bay and pass them another dozen times

33

before you get to Taroona – the same cyclists. It can slow you down but its

more dangerous for the cyclist.

The two modes are conflicting for space. The passengers of buses sometimes get

angry at cyclists when they obstruct the bus. Justin states that he uses the bus daily to

and from work and cyclists are a major problem, he describes the situation:

I’ve thrown things a couple of time, yelled. Generally, as you’re being held

up for like ten minutes when you're going down the road and I’m in my little

metro bus. The windows are down, its full of bogans in the back anyway so

you might as well yell out “get the fuck of the road” that kind of shit. I

chucked some thing at them while I was waiting for a bus with a group of

mates, the whole mob mentality. As soon as they join the Olympics its like

cycle fast and everyone loves them, it’s a little bit hypocritical.

Another interaction is described by a bus operator, where both cyclist and driver

communicate with hand signals:

I have had interactions, where cyclists or myself have said thanks for moving

out of the way, you give them a wave or they’ll wave to you as they go past,

a lot of cyclists know that you’ve made the effort. Especially if you’re stuck

in a spot where you have no choice like the channel highway

There are many different types of interaction this case was a civil gesture sometimes

motorists have playful encounters with cyclists.

Playful Behaviour

The behaviour of play has been described by some road motorists. This performative

act is conducted in a humours way where the cyclists are the subject of the action.

Amelia describes how she is on a motor bike with her friend:

34

I’ve been on a motor bike with Anne and we were down at bridge way and

she rode past on a motor bike and touches cyclists and pinch them on the

bum when they are pedalling.

Another interaction is reported by Allen:

…my sister used to put the windscreen wiper sprayer turned to the side and

drive past and spray them. She pulled up at the lights and she realised there

was a whole crew of them and they came up with their water bottles and

sprayed them in the window.

Tom relates an incident that although is not in Hobart reflects behaviour regarding

attitudes to cyclists, although a lethal object is thrown one has to laugh:

On this journey at Elizabeth town on the midland highway I had a, I kid you not, a full desktop computer thrown at me with a speed differential of about 6o k an hour or so, so that was pretty hairy. That was a bit of wooo. Screaming around the corner and woo out came a computer, it missed me by a couple of metres because at that speed its hard to aim, it was like wow that was a lethal object, but I kind of chuckled that was a pretty funny thing to throw out a window.

These interactions although playful describe a situation where the driver is in power

on the road.

Road Rage

The interaction with cyclists can be frustrating for some drivers. Most of the

respondents were positive about cyclists but some showed overt hostility. Steven

describes that the cyclists he dislikes are ‘Only ones that get in the way, you get three

of them and the take up the whole damn lane, what the fuck! I get a bit frustrated and

feel like giving them a bit of a nudge or something but you know it’s just annoying

35

isn’t it?’ The cyborg subjectivities are misguided because the conflict has been

created by the interaction order that exists and the positions of forms of mobility.

Allen described how cyclists should have dedicated infrastructure to insure that the

movement of cars is not impeded by cyclists, that he has witnessed illegal behaviour

and has been slowed down by cyclists many times. He then in an ironic way explains

how he feels about some cyclists when they do slow him down:

…sometimes they got in my way and I think fuck mate. I just want to open

the door and KA BANG or throw a stick in the wheels that would be pretty

funny [laugh]. I've said things to them like “piss in the gutter and swim”. I

thought that was pretty funny. I haven't really had any conflict physically or

anything. My cousin had some one leaning on his car and he said “get you

f’en hands off my car or I’m gonna” and they put their hands off pretty

quick.

I have acted verbally aggressively to them like “get the fuck of this road you

fuck wits” like I say “piss in the gutter and swim” or just …yeah.. yell at

them through the car. Shake my hands or head but I have never came in

contact with them. I have thought about it before but I just kept on driving.

You know. If they said “pull over” I would pull over and give them what for.

[laugh] but I never came across that.

I’ve thought about chucking things in the spokes of the wheel. Making them

KO themselves. That would be pretty funny to see. Also I would like to film

it and chuck it into funniest home videos. I’m sure you would get a lot of

other copy cats out their doing that shit. And I suppose someone in this world

has done that before a few times.

Cyclists are perceived as a hazard that constrains the mobility of the respondent.

Although in an ironic tone the power relationship between cyclist and motorist is

evident.

The car affords a motorist power over the life of a cyclists, a fact not very far away

from some peoples consciousness, the same ‘power of the engine’ discussed by

36

Adorno (quoted in Urry 2004: 29). This same ironic violence is repeated by the

Australian author Birmingham (2007) who reported an encounter with a cyclist who

blocks the road, he then continues describing how he wanted to kill him: ‘How much

did I regret not getting that anti-personnel Metal Storm pod installed when I had the

car serviced last time?’ A similar sentiment is echoed by Gregory who talks of his

partners changed subjectivities when she sees a cyclist: ‘My wife is a pretty sedate

person but every time she sees a cyclists she wants to kill them. She thinks their

arrogant pigs, it pisses her off if she sees them riding side-by-side.’ Although

Birmingham uses humor these two examples show how angry some motorists are.

This anger is repeated in the interviews. The materiality of the places have been

created without considering the bicycle now with cycling commuters there are

conflicts from mobility. The closeness of mobility and death is similar to the futurist’s

celebration of speed and violence of the motorcar (Kurt 2004).

The Road Warrior

The cyclists’ behaviour on the road can be explained by the mobile interaction order.

The interaction order is one in which it favours motorists in terms of risks; the

behaviour perceived as arrogance by some motorists has been described as a

necessary precaution for safely. One respondent describes this defensive driving as

being a “road warrior”. This notion is illustrated by Damian:

I tend to, I make sure that the person behind me knows I’m there. I try and

put myself as a car, so I take up a fair bit of the road. If a car comes up

37

behind me I don’t get out of their way unless its safe for me to do so.

Otherwise I make sure they are stuck behind me. I’m an aggressive bike

rider.

Lawrence explains that riding safely on the road necessitates breaking the law:

The reality is that your on a little bit of metal and rubber and your up against

1 tonne vehicle that travels at 60 k an hour through the city, so you have to

take it into your own hands a bit, some times that does involve breaking the

rules and stuff and running the occasional red light to get ahead of cars and

stuff like that. I mean you’re doing things like that; it not only gets you in a

safe position and gets you out of people’s way.

A road warrior rides aggressively asserting their right on the road and also breaking

rules to maximise their own safety. Neal describes how he has changed the way he

rides, being a road warrior because of dangerous motorists:

I often get worked up and I try and look big and take up a lane so people

don’t try and sneak past, I’ve gotta worry if people try to sneak past in the

same lane, there not making that commitment so they’ve got that space if

something goes wrong then they don’t push me. That’s only the last year I’ve

been doing that. Riding around Hobart I’m sick of cars not giving me enough

space so I’ve decided that I’m going to ride fast enough so I’m not going to

hold people up to much and dominate the lane and say “this is mine.”

It was indicated that many drivers are angry at cyclists for riding in the middle of the

road and that the behaviour is arrogant, however Isaac explains how the lesson to ride

like a road warrior can be painfully learnt describing an accident involving a car door:

Yep, some body open a car door in my face…broke my wrist. I was doing

about 15km/hr, somebody just flung the car door open and I had no chance of

missing it and I just run into it. The car was going down the outside and I just

fell onto the road and I could hear the cars breaking, and I knew why,

because I was on the bloody road. I wasn’t frightened it all happens to fast to

be frightened. I was just thinking “fuck I hope this doesn’t hurt – what ever’s

gonna hit me, shit I hope this’s not gonna hurt.” That’s the only one where I

38

have really hurt my self in the last few years. I’ve taken quite a few spills on

bikes in me time. But that’s the most serious one.

Cars have real risks for cyclists. These are a small selection of incidents reported by

cyclists.

The risks of cycling relating to cars are evident, Richard explains another incident this

time when a car came to close to him and caused him to be thrown off his bike:

So, I was riding home from sandy bay to Salamanca, on a Saturday to the

markets, and I decided I was going to use my bicycles to get some vegies and

go for a nice morning ride it was a nice sunny day and it must have been

around lunch time, I guess, I had ridden to the markets put my stuff in the

back, I was riding back through Sandy bay, heading toward Taroona way at

the intersection near Coles and I was coming up to the traffic lights, and a car

stoped at the traffic lights at the inside lane. I was riding close to the gutter

not even taking much of the lane and a car cut right in front of me, just ahead

of the lights in the left hand lane, didn’t actually collide with me but cut so

close that…and I wasn’t aware that he was coming. All of a sudden I had a

car within 30cm….the car came out of nowhere. My instant reaction was to

swerve and slam on brakes and because I was travelling on at a speed I just

went over the handlebars onto the tarmac. I was obviously pretty jolted, I hit

my head, took a chunk out of my helmet, I hit my chin and my check, one

half of my body came in contact – my shoulder and my knee, so I was pretty

battered. I was shaken as I hit the tarmac and by the time I recovered my

senses a little bit and I was looking up around me the car is still at stoped at

the lights some passers by came and helped me get up and another guy

helped me stand up and they were all pretty concerned saying “are you all

right? Are you all right?” Before I really recovered my senses or could even

think to look at the car to get the number plate for cutting me off like that he

had just gone. He didn’t hit me but caused the accident I would have collided

if I didn’t take the action of slamming my brakes and swerving. He just drove

off.

Damian a regular rider describes an incident the same day when the interview took

place where he nearly had an accident:

39

The woman, who opened the car door this morning, didn’t think. It was a

narrow St. and I was probably not giving myself enough room I should have

been out in the middle of the road and I wasn’t and she just opened the door,

it was so close. If there was oncoming traffic it would have been a close

thing. The other day a bus driver nearly hit me with his mirror because I was

on the motorway and he just wanted to get past me, he was going faster, but

the mirror just brushed my shoulder so they just don’t think. They think they

should be able to go faster than you, any one in a car just doesn’t see bikes.

These incidents show cycling can be a dangerous activity and that cyclists have

changed their behaviour to compensate for the risks.

The perception of risks on the road has been a primary dissuasive factor for people to

choose cycling. While some choose to ride like a road warrior others choose to ride on

the footpath. Lucia describes how her choice for cycling on the footpath is because of

risks from cars:

I’m to frightened on a road, I know how unsafe it is on a road and how is

easy it is to be hit. You’re pretty vulnerable on the road and I’m not a good

enough rider. I’m not confident enough. The other month I went from west

Hobart to North Hobart and I every time I got to a street I would get off and

wheel it across the road [laughs]…

The risks of riding also influenced Pam's decision not to ride:

I don’t find it very safe to ride because I don’t like riding around cars. I also

don’t like riding on the footpath because you have to watch out for

pedestrians. It’s a safety thing. When you're on a busy road cars have to go

around you and stuff. And you feel a bit delicate.

Joyce wears a helmet but also has other precautions to keep her safe on the

road:

Luckily I haven't had any accidents with cars, I keep meaning to put some

bright tape or fluoro ribbon on the back of my backpack which is black and if

40

I’m wearing black it’s not so great, but I always have bike lights at night time

though, but luckily no accidents.

Cyclists are invisible on the roads their size makes them harder to see but this can also

be a benefit for cyclists. The conceptual metaphor of the vagabond will now be

introduced.

Vagabond

The practice of cycling in Hobart is like being a vagabond. The cyclist has no

legitimised mobility because of the materiality of the place. However the cyclist has

freedom from within the mobility order. The cyclist is like a vagabond in terms of

space, the cyclist does not belong on the road or on the footpath, there is freedom to

use the footpath or road; spatially bikes have more access yet this freedom comes at

the risk of cars. Some cyclists describe how the mobility embodies speed; freedom in

terms of space and laws and there is a cycling community.

When Allen was asked what cycling was communicating he responded:

For me its not as much as about what I’m communicating but what I enjoy

about riding a bike in the city centre is the freedom because your lighter than

when your walking you can travel quicker, you can get from a to b speedily,

your not got the constrains of a car, a car slows you down in the city centre,

being on foot your free but being on a bike your free and your fast and your

in a bit of a grey area as well in terms of the regulations, you got the speed of

a car and but your not constrained by the traffic codes, you can park where

you want, you don’t necessarily obey red lights, and you don’t necessarily

have to worry about the consequences as much, so your in a bit of a margin.

People living in margins in society can often have a bit of freedom from that

and an extreme example are people that are homeless, there not bound by the

rules of society, fuck’n dire lifestyle but.

41

The freedom he describes is like that of some one who is homeless. The metaphor of

the vagabond is used because of the freedoms cycling affords cyclists both in terms of

its material practice and meanings (sometimes negative) associated with its form and

experience. Because of the nature of the meanings, culture and laws there is spatial

and legal freedoms associated with the practice of riding the bicycle.

Damian describes how he can do certain activities such as using cannabis that he

cannot do on other forms of transport:

…you can have a drink or two and get on your bike and ride home. I used to

ride in Melbourne on long night rides, have a few spliffs and off you go.

Your not attracting attention, even when I was riding motorbikes the police

were watching, if you got caught you could be in al sorts of trouble, whereas

on a bike your almost an invisible mover around society.

Amelia repeats the same ability the bicycle affords its users:

If your on your BMX you can be stoned, pissed your not supposed to be but

you can be what ever and you can get on their and go where you gotta go.

You can’t do that in a car unless you don’t remember doing it. [Laughs]

For Isaac riding is associated with freedom, especially relating to illegal behaviour

that can go unnoticed on a bike:

Absolutely, you can speak to people when your on a bike you can pass

comment, you can ride round wishing people happy New Year in July

[laughs]. You can have a few sherbets [beers in London slang] when your out

and about, with out fear of getting pulled up [by the police] and loosing your

license, which is what I do I go out and have a few sherbets when I'm riding

the bike.

So do you think freedom is associated with the bicycle?

Riding a bike is essentially is freedom, no numbers on it. It doesn’t carry

responsibility to other people, principally though to yourself, I mean no body

42

is going to do anything stupid like ride yourself into harms way, occasionally

I have done it by accident.

He continues discussing illegal behaviour relating to road rules:

I love riding a bike. I love the freedom of it. I like the way you can go

through the traffic lights on red and the way you can go up one way streets

the wrong way and the way you can ride up the footpath and you can ride

straight up to the front of Woolworths. I just feel free on a bike.

The bicycle for some is a means of mobility that has less legal and spatial restrictions

in relation to other modes of movement. I will describe the notion of hybridity and

how this contributes to the bikers' class as a vagabond

Vagabond Hybrid

The status of the cyclists as a user of public space is dependant on the materiality of

the place. In Hobart there is very little infrastructure for cyclists which results in

conflicts between different forms of mobility (car/bike, bike/ped, ped/bike). The

cyclists can legally use the footpath or the road; they are a pedestrian/vehicle hybrid.

The non-bike respondents have conflicting views where the cyclist should ride but

usually it depends on the context of the situation. For motorists the cyclist does not

belong on the road space because they are too slow and for the pedestrian the cyclist

does not belong on the off-road space because they are too fast. Bob, a pedestrian,

shows the ambiguity of the cyclist:

Well I keep to the sidewalk and I expect cyclists to keep to the side of the

road. I don’t like it when they ride on the sidewalk – they go at a faster

speed. They pose a potential danger if they ride on the sidewalk.

Again, Joyce a cyclist repeats the ambiguity of the class of cyclists:

If your riding your bike on the road they say “get off the road” and if your

riding your bike on the footpath pedestrians say “get off the footpath”.

43

The same ambiguity is shown by Amelia a driver who describes the

pedestrian/vehicle hybrid:

They are according to the road rules they are a vehicle but they are a

pedestrian. Walkers have foot paths; bike riders should have their own lanes.

So then cars don’t have to worry about them.

Allen a motorist describes how the cyclist does not belong on the road ‘Its a road for a

reason, it’s a road for a vehicle to drive on and I think that less accidents or less road

rage might be lessened if they weren’t on it.’ This is repeated by Dave ‘. If you can

pedal at 80k’s an hour then by all means go on the road but if you can’t do that, and

most people can’t, then why should you be on the road holding up the traffic.’

These ambiguities show that the cyclist is not regarded as a legitimate road user, the

freedoms discussed where a cyclist is invisible to the law also has the cost of being an

illegitimate road user explains driver's frustration.

Symbols of Nationality

The Symbols of cycling relating to nationality was a recurring theme. As already

discussed the bicycle has been used in Australia for more than a century yet forms of

cycling such as commuting was often contrasted with the driving with some

respondents, where cycling was foreign and the technology of the car and driving was

Australian. Mobility is the actuality of movement and these forms of movement have

meanings imposed, for example when Dave was asked if cycling was an Australian

thing to do, he responded:

No, its Americanised, for me its very Americanised, cycling been around for

a while but for me its never the way it is now, it was never new age and

wearing tight clothes with really expensive bikes and all the rest its all a

show I think.

44

Justin explains that commuting is an activity that is foreign to Australia and that

commuters themselves are foreign:

It seems to be more….ethnic groups. There is a lot of Australians that cycle

but they seem to do it more for recreation and use the bike track. You get

these young guys that seem to go really hard with it all from other countries.

They are more from different countries. It’s not an idea that’s really taken off

in Australia. Its more of something that’s been brought to us. I understand

that cycling is more convenient, driving through the city takes ages, if you

just ride straight through it doesn’t take long at all. But it seems we are a

country that drinks beer and have bbq’s, we don’t really do much sport

unless it’s AFL or cricket or that kinda stuff. Which includes the car, its built

into our society, the commodore, falcons. You are kinda judged by what

kinda car you drive and if you ride a bike every one thinks you’re a faggot.

They don’t belong anywhere there not the health nuts and their not the guys

who say “check out my engine”…

For Bob cars are more Australian:

I do think bicycle riding is Australian but I think cars are just more

Australian. A kids first car is a big thing, its almost like receding

development to ride a bike. When I think of cycling I think of it as a leisure

pursuit, [sings Bicycle Race by Queen] for some reason I think of Canadians

when I think of bicycles.

Cyclists have some cultural associations with some subcultures and status according

to Dave:

So, cyclists are new-age people or pretty people who think they are helping

the environment. There are also the people who want to be seen as a figure of

money because the bike their riding and clothes their wearing. Its just a

symbol of “I’m riding a push bike I’m helping the environment….my bikes

worth a million dollars - that sort of crap.

45

These are some of the responses relating directly to the cultural associations of

cycling. There were many people who associated cycling with health and the

environment.

Chapter Five: Discussion and Conclusion

This chapter directly answers the questions for this thesis. Culture, experience and

risks relating to cycling have largely related to and been a function of motorised

transport, especially the car. The mobilities of the car and bike have been socially

produced where the car has been favoured in terms of the materiality, the interaction

order and culture.

46

Culturally the car has been central to meanings relating to national identity and

mobility. The development of the infrastructure and town planning, such as the

Tasman Bridge, has been made for individual motorised transport creating mobility

for the car. The transport in Hobart has been shaped with the materialities of the

mobility of the car which reflects a historical culture. Engineers build according to

what should be done not how it should be done:

The work of engineers exemplifies the rational search for the best way

of attaining particular ends. But engineers rarely have the privilege of

selecting these ends. Indeed, once they do, they no longer act as

engineers” (Volti, 2006: 281).

The engineers that created the architecture of Hobart built it with the logic of

automobility. Any attempt to have policy relating to alternatives to the raison d'etre of

automobility - the personal motor – must take the historical effects of automobility

into consideration, which over time has informed and shaped the car culture and city

architecture.

The legacy that has been left from the built environment has produced an interaction

order that favours cars. This order exerts an extrusive force on other forms of mobility

such as the bicycle. Although there is government discourse relating to cycling the

experience of cyclists show that the practice of cycling is locally resisted and

experienced with risks. The gender imbalances in cycling commuters show that risks

from cars is a major dissuasive factor for those who can ride (Garrard 2003: 213). The

driver hostility was evident in some of the interviewees some showing extreme

frustration. The behaviour of drivers, showed here, ranges from benign acts of

courtesy and eye contact to violent acts and death wishes. These subjectivities are

cultural in origin.

The car systems operation of extrusion is performed through the relationship between

forms of mobility. Bikes are a nuisance for cars and cars are a risk for the cyclist.

There is a constant threat of fatality by cars to the cyclists by fast moving cars or

people opening doors of parked cars.

47

The built environment and social norms shapes how cyclists and motorists interact. It

was shown that cyclists are a nuisance for motorists and bus operators; while cars and

buses can easily kill cyclists. These risks, as it was shown, dissuade some people from

riding and influence the behaviour of cyclists. The result of the materiality is a

paradox, some cyclists ride like a road warrior: riding like a motor car. The

externalities of cars risks are embodied in the cyclist’s helmets, lights and colourful

safety vests (Miller 2001: 12). There is overt hostility to cyclists by motorists which

according to some participants is because of a conflict over space. These attitudes also

reflect a car culture that has unrestrained movement from cyclists as a norm, this was

also the logic of the motorways which were made according to the flows of cars. The

interaction between cars and bikes is at best like a game of checkers at worst a game

of Russian roulette, where the cyclist the only loser.

Cycling in Hobart complies with government discourse yet there is minimal dedicated

cycling infrastructure. The mobility of the bike can be considered like a vagabond.

This accounts for the legal norms, behaviour, its freedom of movement, being

stigmatised and not being accounted for in infrastructure. It was shown that because

of the materiality cyclists are a vehicle/pedestrian hybrid. The ambiguity of the status

of a cyclist is reflected in driver hostility.

The car and the horse are “deeply embedded in…Australian culture” (Franklin

2006:217). However the bicycle has had a significant social history it represented a

“significant personal transport revolution” (Fitzpatrick 1980: 226). The social

construction of the bicycle is not only historical but it is reproduced through a system

of automobility that favours cars. The social phenomenon is bound with material

structures however the material structures are socially produced. The diverse meaning

relating to mobility shows a culture in transition. The bicycle has many cultural

symbols; un-Australian, environmental however, the culture relating to the practice of

mobility is widely varying. Motorists are adjusting to the bicycle as a form of

mobility.

Although cycling complies with government discourse the material structures reflects

a car culture. Motorists relate to a reality where their right to unfettered movement is a

norm. This norm is expressed in the architecture of the city which has been designed

48

to facilitate efficient movement of the motorcar not the bicycle. In addition there is

little material structures designed for cycling. Symbolically cycling is excluded from

the material reality, this explains to some degree why some motorists are so hostile to

cyclists, cyclists are more than a disturbance to the mobility of motorists, and cyclists

are an illegitimate disturbance. The perception that cyclists are “above the law” only

compounds the materials that cycling as an illegitimate form of mobility.

Chapter Six: Recommendations

There should be protective laws for cyclists and pedestrians

Motorists pose uneven risks to cyclists. In Holland traffic laws give special

consideration to cyclists (Pucher and Buehle, 2008: 26). If an accident occurs,

motorists are legally responsible with the burden of guilt on them and not the cyclist.

This will create an increased normative passing distance around riders from other road

users.

The enforcement of general traffic laws is applied equally to cyclists and

motorists

This will have two effects, legitimate cycling making drivers less hostile and

potentially less risks for cyclists and it will stop risky behaviour of cyclists.

Infrastructure for bikes

49

Any increase in cycling commuters will increase the cycling/motorists interactions

possibly leading to increase in fatalities and injuries. Cyclists should be separated

from motorists and pedestrians. Infrastructure would increase cycling numbers and

lesson disturbances to motorists. The needs of motorists must be considered as well,

the driver hostility is not misguided it has been created though the architecture of the

city.

Educational programs should highlight the bikes role in Australian history and

the need for civility on the road

As was shown the bicycle played an important part in the history of Australia yet

many people feel it is un-Australian. Any attempt to popularise cycling needs to

include this. This would help legitimate cycling as a mode of transport. In addition

cyclists’ defensive behaviour is seen as arrogant when it could be purposefully done

to increase safety. Motorists need to learn the reasons why cyclists need to ride

defensively.

50

Bibliography

Australian Bureau of Statistics (2001) ‘Year Book Australia 2001’ 1301.0

Aronson, Sidney (1952) ‘The Sociology of the Bicycle’ Social Forces 30 (3): 305-312

Australian Bureau of Statistics (2007) ‘Participation in Sports and Physical

Recreation, Australia 2005-06’ 417 7.0

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/0e5fa1cc95cd093c4a2568110007852b/9fd6

7668ee42a738ca2568a9001393ac!OpenDocument (2/5/2008).

Australian Bureau of Statistics (2006) ‘Environmental Issues: People’s Views

and Practices, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.’ 4602.0

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mediareleasesbyReleaseDate/DD0E6A0CF

F90D1BECA25722C007E358D?OpenDocument (2/5/2008).

Australian Transport Safety Bureau 2004 ‘Monograph 17: Cycle Safety’ Australian

Government

51

www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/safety/publications/2004/m17_cycle_safety.aspx

(2/5/2008).

Austroads (2005) ‘The Australian National Cycling Strategy 2005-2010’

http://www.austroads.com.au (2/5/2008).

Babbie, Earl (2005) The Basics of Social Science Research Belmont: Thomson

Wodsworth.

Birmingham, john (2007) ‘Peddling commuter anger’

blogs.brisbanetimes.com.au/bluntinstrument/archives/2007/10/has_is_it_ever.html

Bolger, Peter (1973) Hobart Town Canberra : Australian National University Press.

Bohm, Steffan, Campbell Jones, Chris Land and Mat Paterson (2006) ‘Part One

Conceptualising ‘Automobility’’ in Steffan Bohm, Campbell Jones, Chris Land, Mat

Paterson (ed.) Against Automobility Oxford: Blackwell Publishing: 3-16.

Clair, Jeffrey Michael and Jason Wasserman (2008) ‘Qualitative Methods’ George

Ritzer (ed.) Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology, Blackwell Publishing

Cresswell T (2001) ‘The Production of Mobilities’ New Formations Vol 43. pp 11-25

Cresswell Tim (2006) ‘The Right to Mobility: The Production of Mobility in the

Courtroom’ Antipode 38/4: 735-754.

Cresswell Tim (2008) ‘Understanding Mobility Holistically: the Case of Hurricane

Katrina’. In S Bergmann and T Sager (eds) The Ethics of Mobilities: Rethinking

Place, Exclusion, Freedom and Environment. (Ashgate, London)

Crotty, Michael (1998) The Foundations of Social Science Research Allen and

Unwin: Sydney.

Cycling Promotion Fund, 2006 ‘Bicycle Sales in Australia’

52

www.vote4cycling.com.au/cms/uploads/media/bike_sales_in_australia_july_06.pdf

(2/5/2008).

Cycling Promotion Fund, 2008 ‘Cycling to work on the increase’

www.cyclingpromotion.com.au/content/view/326/150 (2/5/2008).

Dant, Tim (2004) ‘The Driver-car’ Theory Culture and Society 21 (4-5): 61-79.

Dekoster and Schollaert (2000) Cycling: the way ahead for towns and cities European

Commission, Brussels.

Ebert, Anne-Katrin (2004) ‘Cycling towards the nation: the use of the bicycle in

Germany and the Netherlands, 1880-1940’ European Review of History 11(3): 347-

364.

Ezzy, Douglas (2006) ‘The Research Process’ in Maggie Walter (ed) Social Research

Methods: An Australian Perspective Melbourne: Oxford University Press: 29-51.

Fitzpatrick, Jim (1980) The Bicycle and the Bush: Man and Machine in Rural

Australia, Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Franklin, Adrian 2006 Animal Nation: The true story of Animals and Australia

Sydney: UNSW Press.

Ger, Guliz, Hal Wilhite, Bente Halkier, Jeppe Laessoe, Mirjam Godskesen and Inge

Ropke (1998) ‘Symbolic Meanings of High and Low Impact Consumption in

Different Cultures’ Working Paper for the Second European Science Foundation,

Lancaster University: Lancaster.

http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/sociology/esf/symbolicmeaning.htm (15/4/2008)

Goffman, Ervin (1975) Encounters: Two Studies in the Sociology of Interaction The

Bobbs-Merrill Company: Indianapolis.

53

Goffman, Ervin (1983) ‘The Interaction Order: American Sociological Association

1982 Presidential Address’ American Sociological Review 48(1): 1-17.

Hess, Rob (1998) ‘A Mania for Bicycles: The impact of Cycling on Australian Rules

Football’ Sporting Traditions 14(2): 3-13.

Hobart City Council 2008 ‘State of Environment Report’

http://www.hobartcity.com.au/HCC/STANDARD/STATE_OF_ENVIRONMENT_R

EPO.html (15/7/2008).

Hobart City Council (2008) ‘Principal Bicycle Network’

http://www.hobartcity.com.au/hccwr/_assets/main/lib60030/principal%20bicycle

%20network%20a3%20-%20aug%2007.pdf (2/5/2008).

Horton, Dave (2006) ‘Environmentalism and the bicycle’ Environmental Politics 15

(1): 41-58.

Hudson, William (2006). Myths and Milestones in Bicycle Evolution.

http://www.jimlangley.net/ride/bicyclehistorywh.html (15/7/2008).

Latimer, Johanna and Rolland Munro (2006) ‘Driving the Social’ in Steffan Bohm,

Campbell Jones, Chris Land, Mat Paterson (ed.) Against Automobility Oxford:

Blackwell Publishing: 32 – 54.

Lupton Debrah 1999 ‘Monsters in Metal Cacoons’ Body and society 5 (1): 57 -72.

Swidler, Ann (1986) ‘Symbols and Strategies’ American Sociological Review 51(2):

273-286.

Manning, Philip (1992) Erving Goffman and Modern Sociology Cambridge:

Polity Press.

54

Mees, Paul, Eden Sorupia and John Stone (2008) ‘Travel to work in Australian capital

cities, 1976-2006: an analysis of census data’ Urban Policy and Research Vol 26 (3)

363-378.

www.abp.unimelb.edu.au/gamut/pdf/ travel-to-work .pdf (18/4/2008).

Miller, Daniel (2001) ‘Driven Societies’ in Daniel Miller (ed.) Car cultures Oxford:

Berg: 1-34.

Moser, Kurt (2003) ‘The Dark Side of 'Automobilism', 1900-30: Violence, war and

the motor car Journal of Transport History.

Newman, Peter and Jeffrey Kenworthy (1989) Cities and automobile dependence

Gower Technical, Sydney.

Petrow, Stefan (2002) ‘Servicing the city: water, street lighting, and trams in Hobart

1858 – 1914’ in Kathryn Evans and Ian Terry (ed.) Papers and proceedings of the

conference held by the professional Historians Association (Tasmania) publisher look

at library.

Orwell, George (2001) ‘The Road TO Wigan Pier’ in Peter Davison (ed.) Orwell’s

England Penguin Books: London: 51-216.

Pucher, John and Ralph Buehler (2008) 'Making cycling irresistible: lessons from The

Netherlands, Denmark and Germany', Transport Reviews 1-34.

Solomon R J (1976) Urbanisation: THe Evolution of an Austrtalina Capital’

Angus and Roberston.

Travers, Max (2006) ‘Qualitative Interviewing Methods’ in Maggie Walter (ed.)

Social Research Methods: An Australian Perspective Melbourne: Oxford University

Press: 29-51.

Tasmania. Archives Office, ‘Road race, cycles, 1904’

55

http://catalogue.statelibrary.tas.gov.au/covers/aot/ab713/view/AB713-1-9104.jpg

(18/8/2008)

Urry, John (2004) ‘The ‘System’ of Automobility’ Theory Culture Society 21 (4): 25

-39.

Urry, John and Mimi Sheller (2000) ‘The city and the car’ International Journal of

Urban and Regional Research 24(4): 737-757.

Urry, John and Mimi Sheller (2006) ‘The New Mobilities Paradigm’ Environment

and Planning 38: 207-226.

VicRoads (2006) ‘Bicyclist Casualty Accidents - All ages; Date range is 01/01/1987

to 31/12/2999.’ CrashStats.

http://crashstat1.roads.vic.gov.au/crashstats/crash.htm (18/7/2008).

Volti, Rudi (2006) Society and Technological Change fifth edition, Worth Publishers,

New York.

Walker, Ian and Mark Brosnan (2007) ‘Drivers’ gaze fixations during judgements

about a bicyclist’s intentions’ Transportation Research Part F 10: 90–98.

Williams, Robin (1998) ‘Ervin Goffman’ in Rob Stones (ed.) Key Sociological

Thinkers New York: New York University Press: 291-306.

Williams, Simon (1986) ‘Appraising Goffman’ The British Journal of Sociology

37(3): 348-369.

56

Appendix 1 - Participant Recruitment Advertisement

57

School of Sociology & Social Work

A Research Project Being conducted by Anthony C. Goodfellow, Honours Student, Faculty of Arts, School of Sociology &

Social Work, University of Tasmania.

Do you regularly cycle for work, recreation or commuting?

Or

Do you have strong feelings against cyclists?

If so we are interested in how you describe cycling and what cycling means to you. Your participation will be on a confidential basis and will consist of an interview discussion lasting approximately 30-45 minutes.

(Strictly over 18)

Please ContactAnthony C. Goodfellow (Honours Student)School of Sociology and social WorkUniversity of Tasmania

58

Private Bag 17, Hobart TAS 7001E-mail acg0@utas.edu.au

Appendix 2 - Participant Information Sheet

59

School of Sociology & Social Work

THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF TRANSPORT: CYCLING IN HOBART

A Research Project Being conducted by Anthony C. Goodfellow, in partial fulfilment of the requirements of an Honours

degree in the , Faculty of Arts, School of Sociology & Social Work, University of Tasmania.

PARTICIPANT INFORMATION SHEET

Aim of Research Project

The research will investigate how people feel about cycling in light of the City Councils aim to increase cycling as a means of transport. It is the aim of this research project to examine the meanings and the reasons behind an individual’s decision to cycle or not. The intention of this research is to understand cycling in society particularly as it poses an alternative to the car in light of high petrol prices and environmental concerns.

Your Participation in the Project

What Will I have to do?

What I would like to do is get a good understanding of what cycling means to you, how you experience cycling, the negative and positive things that inform your choice of cycling/not cycling and how biking interacts with other road users. In order to answer these questions we will have a taped discussion between 30-45 minutes. We are interested in your personal account and are enthusiastic for you to share your thoughts in the discussion.

Before we start the discussion we would like you to fill in a short survey providing us with a little information about yourself in order to help us understand the results of the research. This questionnaire does not require any information that can identify you.

Can I leave if I’m feeling overwhelmed?

60

It is quite understandable that doing an interview can be stressful, so we would like to emphasise that you are no way required to participate in the interview. The interview can be stopped at any time by you and you can refuse to answer specific questions at any time.

If after the discussion you feel the need to talk to someone about the way you feel, please contact the Senior Investigator who will assist you further (his contact detail are listed at the end of this information sheet.)

Usage of information

The information collected from the interview will be tape-recorded and transcribed by myself. The information will be held at a secure location at the University. Access to the information is restricted to the Senior Investigator and me.

We would like to emphasise the confidentiality of the interviews. As the information collected in the interviews will not be matched with your name, your confidentiality is guaranteed. The results of the interviews will be reported using a pseudonym and will be modified in order to protect confidentiality.

What are the Potential Benefits of this Project?

The information collected in this project will aid us to (i) understand the meanings people ascribe to transport and cycling (ii) understand how cyclists interact with other road users socially and how they interact with places and (iii) understand the cultural and physical barriers that prevent people cycling.

YOU ARE FREE TO WITHDRAW CONSENT AND TO DISCONTINUE PARTICIPATION IN THIS DISCUSSION AT ANY TIME. YOU MAY ALSO AT THIS TIME WITHDRAW ANY DATA THAT YOU HAVE SUPPLIED TO DATE

If you have any question about the study, you can contact the researcher or the Senior Investigator Professor Adrian Franklin Faculty of Arts School of Sociology & Social Work on telephone number (03) 6226 7241.

This study has been approved by the Social Sciences Human Research Ethics Committee. If you have concerns or complaints about the conduct of this study should contact the Executive Officer of the HREC (Tasmania) Network on (03) 6226 7479 or email human.ethics@utas.edu.au. The Executive Officer is the person nominated to receive complaints from research participants. You will need to quote [HREC project number: H10262].

61

With your permission a summary of the findings of the research and a letter of appreciation will be sent to you upon completion of this research project.

Appendix 3 - Participant consent Form

62

School of Sociology & Social Work

THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF TRANSPORT: CYCLING IN HOBART

A Research Project Being conducted by Anthony C. Goodfellow, Honours Student, Faculty of Arts, School of Sociology &

Social Work, University of Tasmania.

I have read and understood the information Sheet provided for this study. The nature and possible effects of the study have been explained to me.I understand that the study involves an interview which will take about 30 to 45 minutes and will be tape-recorded and transcribed.I understand that discussion of sensitive issues might create some stress for me.I understand that all research data will be treated as confidential.Any questions that I have asked have been answered to my satisfaction.I agree that any research data gathered for the study may be published provided that I cannot be identified as a participant. I agree to participate in this investigation and understand that I may withdraw at any time without prejudice. I understand that agreeing to participate, or deciding to withdraw at any time, will not affect any service I receive.

Name of Participant (Block Letters): Date Signature:

I have explained this project and the implications of participation in it to this volunteer and I believe that the consent is informed and that he/she understands the implications of participationName of investigatorSignature of investigator Date

Name of Researcher (Block Letters): Date Signature:

Contact Details:

63

(You can voluntarily supply a contact address or e-mail here in order to be supplied a copy of the summary of the findings and a letter of appreciation. This information is kept separate from the interview to ensure confidentiality.)

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

64

Appendix 4 - Participant Demographic Information Sheet

School of Sociology & Social Work

THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF TRANSPORT: CYCLING IN HOBART

65

A Research Project Being conducted by Anthony C. Goodfellow, Honours Student, Faculty of Arts, School of Sociology &

Social Work, University of Tasmania.

DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SHEET

Do you own a bike: Yes No

How often do you ride a bike?

Bike use: Non-rider: (never or twice in the past 2 years) Occasional rider: (more than four times a year but less than four times a month) Regular Rider: (four times a month – more)

Primary reason for bicycle: Commuting Recreation Both

Gender: Male Female

Age : 18 — 29 30 — 39 40 — 49 50 +

Individual Work status: Full Time Part Time No Work Student

Occupation: ………………………….

Education Level: Some schooling Upto Year 10 Upto Year 12

Apprenticeship Certificate or Diploma Tafe Bachelor postgraduate

Country of Birth: ………………………….

What suburb do you live in: ………………………….

66

Appendix 5 - Interview Schedule

67

School of Sociology & Social Work

THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF TRANSPORT: CYCLING IN HOBART

A Research Project Being conducted by Anthony C. Goodfellow, Honours Student, Faculty of Arts, School of Sociology &

Social Work, University of Tasmania.

INTERVIEW SCHEDULE

Hello, thank you for your attendance. My name is Anthony Goodfellow and I will be conducting the interview today.

o Basic Informationo Bike ownership, type of bikeo How utilise bicycle –commuting, recreationo When skill of cycling was learned

o Typologies of responseso Relationship with cars and riskso Reasons to cycleo Reasons not to cycle

o Symbols and cyclingo What images do you associate with cycling? eg. Healthy, Australian,

poor, environmentalists etc.o How do others regard you cyclingo

o Experiences of cyclists or with cyclistso Experience of space – city different or distance can travel?o Experience of Time – changed routine?o Experience of technology – the bicycle

68

o Association with other road users (interaction)Other road users associated with cycling

69