关于行人的斗争:定义20世纪60年代和70年代的步行问题

Tiina Männistö-Funk
{"title":"关于行人的斗争:定义20世纪60年代和70年代的步行问题","authors":"Tiina Männistö-Funk","doi":"10.1177/00225266231163080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper considers the negotiations around walking in Finland in the 1960s and 1970s as a symbolic struggle. Quickly changing urban environment and high traffic fatality numbers brought pedestrians into the focus of public discussions during this era. Two major groups making claims over pedestrians were the traffic safety organisation Talja and its successor Liikenneturva as well as the traffic policy association Enemmistö. Traffic safety actors highlighted pedestrians’ responsibility as a traffic mode among others, but also framed them as reckless and weak. Traffic policy activists used pedestrians as a lens to the unfairness of the car-centred traffic system and urban environment. Both tried to steer away from the simple antagonism between cars and pedestrians, but with little success. Whereas pedestrians were difficult to govern, due to their non-vehicle flexibility, they were also difficult to advocate for. The struggle ended in a compromise that rendered pedestrians invisible.","PeriodicalId":336494,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Transport History","volume":"67 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The struggle over pedestrians: Defining the problems of walking in the 1960s and 1970s\",\"authors\":\"Tiina Männistö-Funk\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00225266231163080\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper considers the negotiations around walking in Finland in the 1960s and 1970s as a symbolic struggle. Quickly changing urban environment and high traffic fatality numbers brought pedestrians into the focus of public discussions during this era. Two major groups making claims over pedestrians were the traffic safety organisation Talja and its successor Liikenneturva as well as the traffic policy association Enemmistö. Traffic safety actors highlighted pedestrians’ responsibility as a traffic mode among others, but also framed them as reckless and weak. Traffic policy activists used pedestrians as a lens to the unfairness of the car-centred traffic system and urban environment. Both tried to steer away from the simple antagonism between cars and pedestrians, but with little success. Whereas pedestrians were difficult to govern, due to their non-vehicle flexibility, they were also difficult to advocate for. The struggle ended in a compromise that rendered pedestrians invisible.\",\"PeriodicalId\":336494,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Transport History\",\"volume\":\"67 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Transport History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00225266231163080\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Transport History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00225266231163080","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文认为,20世纪60年代和70年代芬兰围绕步行的谈判是一场象征性的斗争。在这个时代,快速变化的城市环境和高交通死亡率使行人成为公众讨论的焦点。对行人提出索赔的两个主要团体是交通安全组织Talja及其后继组织liikenturva以及交通政策协会Enemmistö。交通安全行为者强调行人作为一种交通方式的责任,但也将他们视为鲁莽和软弱。交通政策积极分子将行人作为以汽车为中心的交通系统和城市环境的不公平的镜头。两人都试图避开汽车和行人之间的简单对抗,但收效甚微。然而,由于行人的非车辆灵活性,他们很难管理,也很难提倡。这场斗争最终达成了一项妥协,让行人看不见了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The struggle over pedestrians: Defining the problems of walking in the 1960s and 1970s
This paper considers the negotiations around walking in Finland in the 1960s and 1970s as a symbolic struggle. Quickly changing urban environment and high traffic fatality numbers brought pedestrians into the focus of public discussions during this era. Two major groups making claims over pedestrians were the traffic safety organisation Talja and its successor Liikenneturva as well as the traffic policy association Enemmistö. Traffic safety actors highlighted pedestrians’ responsibility as a traffic mode among others, but also framed them as reckless and weak. Traffic policy activists used pedestrians as a lens to the unfairness of the car-centred traffic system and urban environment. Both tried to steer away from the simple antagonism between cars and pedestrians, but with little success. Whereas pedestrians were difficult to govern, due to their non-vehicle flexibility, they were also difficult to advocate for. The struggle ended in a compromise that rendered pedestrians invisible.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Working around exclusive infrastructure – African workers and their families navigating race and gender on Rhodesia Railways, 1945–1964 Skotovoz, pripiski and the “law of labour settlement”: Transportation planning and management in the USSR Corrigendum to “The road corvée: The persistence of the use of unpaid labour for road maintenance in nineteenth and twentieth century Estonia” Transport history: a niche moving toward the mainstream? Book Review: Motion in Maps. Maps in Motion. Mapping Stories and Movement through Time by Zef Segal and Bram Vannieuwenhuyze
×
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