{"title":"Towards a history of transit etiquette: the development of orderly boarding practices in Tokyo","authors":"Christoph Schimkowsky","doi":"10.1080/17450101.2024.2348654","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This article is a call for the historical study of transit etiquette: the behavioural expectations that guide the mundane conduct of transport users. It identifies the formation of contemporary protocols of transit etiquette as a productive line of scholarly inquiry by taking the transformation of (de)boarding behaviours in Tokyo between the 1880s and the 1960s as a case study. Zooming in on urban railways in the Japanese capital, it describes the processes through which (de)boarding practices grew more elaborate in character and more narrowly defined in terms of the spatio-temporal location at which they could be legitimately exercised. It examines three groups of factors that contributed to this process: “software” and “hardware” interventions in transport operations as well as their broader historic context. Simultaneously, it cautions against linear narratives of consistent improvement by stressing the contradictions of this process. The article contributes to mobility studies by calling attention to the malleability and socio-technical construction of the norms that guide mundane mobility practices. It provides a provisional template for subsequent historical accounts of transit etiquette, and argues that such studies can empower research on mobilities and transport to contribute to wider debates about (in)civility and the organisation of urban life.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51457,"journal":{"name":"Mobilities","volume":"20 1","pages":"Pages 89-106"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mobilities","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/org/science/article/pii/S1745010124000213","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This article is a call for the historical study of transit etiquette: the behavioural expectations that guide the mundane conduct of transport users. It identifies the formation of contemporary protocols of transit etiquette as a productive line of scholarly inquiry by taking the transformation of (de)boarding behaviours in Tokyo between the 1880s and the 1960s as a case study. Zooming in on urban railways in the Japanese capital, it describes the processes through which (de)boarding practices grew more elaborate in character and more narrowly defined in terms of the spatio-temporal location at which they could be legitimately exercised. It examines three groups of factors that contributed to this process: “software” and “hardware” interventions in transport operations as well as their broader historic context. Simultaneously, it cautions against linear narratives of consistent improvement by stressing the contradictions of this process. The article contributes to mobility studies by calling attention to the malleability and socio-technical construction of the norms that guide mundane mobility practices. It provides a provisional template for subsequent historical accounts of transit etiquette, and argues that such studies can empower research on mobilities and transport to contribute to wider debates about (in)civility and the organisation of urban life.
期刊介绍:
Mobilities examines both the large-scale movements of people, objects, capital, and information across the world, as well as more local processes of daily transportation, movement through public and private spaces, and the travel of material things in everyday life. Recent developments in transportation and communications infrastructures, along with new social and cultural practices of mobility, present new challenges for the coordination and governance of mobilities and for the protection of mobility rights and access. This has elicited many new research methods and theories relevant for understanding the connections between diverse mobilities and immobilities.