Different spokes for different folks: experiences with cycling and the bicycle from the perspective of variably-housed cyclists in Vancouver

IF 8 2区 医学 Q1 HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM Qualitative Research in Sport Exercise and Health Pub Date : 2022-01-13 DOI:10.1080/2159676X.2021.2019099
Jeanette Steinmann, B. Wilson
{"title":"Different spokes for different folks: experiences with cycling and the bicycle from the perspective of variably-housed cyclists in Vancouver","authors":"Jeanette Steinmann, B. Wilson","doi":"10.1080/2159676X.2021.2019099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Bicycling is celebrated for being sustainable, healthy, and economical, and it has become popularised among urbanites in many cities. Literature on mobility and urban development tends to reflect these values, as do policies on transportation and sustainability in cities like Vancouver – where the bicycle’s role as a sustainable leisure activity and commuting strategy is commonly promoted. Often unrecognised in this literature and in policy are the many people experiencing homelessness, who sometimes cycle as their only transportation option, and who may ride bicycles for reasons that do not fit neatly in a leisure-commuter dichotomy. Responding to this gap, the study reported in this paper was concerned with discovering what cycling means to variably-housed people who ride bicycles in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside neighbourhood, and how these meanings align (or do not align) with common depictions of cycling and cyclists in existing research and policy. Drawing from a set of in-depth (and sometimes ‘ride-along’) interviews, results indicated that participants cycled for a variety of reasons, including for informal work (recycling) and for personal mobility when walking proved difficult. Interviewees focused on the value of the bicycle for personal mobility and as a health aid, while expressing little attachment to their bicycles due to theft. By focusing on cycling-related practices and identities that exist outside the leisure-commuter dichotomy and with unique relationships with this dichotomy, this study informs literature concerning cycling and (in)equity, while highlighting the need for policy developments that account for the range of cycling identities.","PeriodicalId":48542,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research in Sport Exercise and Health","volume":"14 1","pages":"880 - 899"},"PeriodicalIF":8.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Research in Sport Exercise and Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2021.2019099","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

ABSTRACT Bicycling is celebrated for being sustainable, healthy, and economical, and it has become popularised among urbanites in many cities. Literature on mobility and urban development tends to reflect these values, as do policies on transportation and sustainability in cities like Vancouver – where the bicycle’s role as a sustainable leisure activity and commuting strategy is commonly promoted. Often unrecognised in this literature and in policy are the many people experiencing homelessness, who sometimes cycle as their only transportation option, and who may ride bicycles for reasons that do not fit neatly in a leisure-commuter dichotomy. Responding to this gap, the study reported in this paper was concerned with discovering what cycling means to variably-housed people who ride bicycles in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside neighbourhood, and how these meanings align (or do not align) with common depictions of cycling and cyclists in existing research and policy. Drawing from a set of in-depth (and sometimes ‘ride-along’) interviews, results indicated that participants cycled for a variety of reasons, including for informal work (recycling) and for personal mobility when walking proved difficult. Interviewees focused on the value of the bicycle for personal mobility and as a health aid, while expressing little attachment to their bicycles due to theft. By focusing on cycling-related practices and identities that exist outside the leisure-commuter dichotomy and with unique relationships with this dichotomy, this study informs literature concerning cycling and (in)equity, while highlighting the need for policy developments that account for the range of cycling identities.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同的人,不同的辐条:从温哥华不同住房的骑自行车者的角度来看,骑自行车和自行车的经历
摘要:骑自行车以其可持续、健康和经济而闻名,它在许多城市的城市居民中流行起来。关于流动性和城市发展的文献往往反映了这些价值观,温哥华等城市的交通和可持续发展政策也是如此——在温哥华,自行车作为一种可持续的休闲活动和通勤策略的作用得到了普遍推广。在这篇文献和政策中,许多无家可归的人往往没有得到承认,他们有时骑自行车是唯一的交通选择,他们可能会因为不符合休闲通勤二分法的原因而骑自行车。为了应对这一差距,本文报道的这项研究致力于发现骑自行车对温哥华市中心东区骑自行车的不同居住人群意味着什么,以及这些含义如何与现有研究和政策中对骑自行车和骑自行车者的常见描述一致(或不一致)。根据一系列深入(有时是“骑行”)的采访,结果表明,参与者骑行的原因多种多样,包括非正式工作(回收)和行走困难时的个人行动能力。受访者关注的是自行车对个人行动能力和健康援助的价值,而对被盗自行车几乎没有表示依恋。通过关注存在于休闲通勤二分法之外的自行车相关实践和身份,以及与这种二分法的独特关系,本研究为有关自行车和(在)公平的文献提供了信息,同时强调了制定政策以解释自行车身份范围的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
10.20%
发文量
36
期刊最新文献
Stories of acceptance and resistance: illness identity construction in athletes (mis)diagnosed with a personality disorder ‘I’m not the police’: practical strategies for sport coach mentors to develop trust and trustworthiness Building bridges: a Qualitative exploration of the athlete – guide partnership in high-performance parasport You wouldn’t let your phone run out of battery: an interpretative phenomenological analysis of male professional football coaches’ well-being Whiteness, Canadian university athletic administration, and anti-racism leadership: ‘A bunch of white haired, white dudes in the back rooms’
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1