This chapter analyses the impact of the spatial dimension further and connect the spatial dimension to a form of rationalisation of transport planning that has been very influential in Swedish transport planning. The theoretical starting point for this chapter is threefold. First, the chapter builds on the production of space by Lefebvre. Second, the rationalisation of the social sciences (Marcuse and Flyvbjerg) is connected to the development of transport planning as a rational profession. Third, the concept of urban space wars is used to theorise on the effects of this kind of rationalisation (Bauman). Through this theorisation of space and transport planning an entity into the field of the marginalisation of cycling is developed. From that starting point the Swedish transport and urban planning system is analysed. Through the analysis and the connections to the theoretical framework of this chapter it is shown that Swedish transport and urban planning operate on very rational levels that marginalise cycling in many cities around Sweden. Moreover, it is shown that this rational planning has created urban spaces and infrastructures, which marginalise cycling in several ways and make it hard to use the bicycle for transport in everyday urban life in Sweden.
This book offers a critical examination of existing cycling structures and the current policy and practices used to promote cycling. An international range of contributors provide an interdisciplinary analysis of the complex cultural politics of infrastructural provision and interrogate the pervasive bias against cyclists in city planning and transport systems across the globe.
Infrastructural planning is revealed to be an intensely political act and its meaning variable according to larger political processes and contexts. The book also considers questions surrounding safety and risk, urban space wars and sustainable futures, connecting this to broader questions about citizenship and justice in contemporary cities.
This chapter concludes the volume and explains the issues that have been touched upon by the authors of the chapters of this book. It explains that it would be easy to assume the superiority of European cycle infrastructure provision and that generally, European cycle infrastructure has been presented as good or as much better than the infrastructure provided in countries like the United States of America, Canada or Australia. However, it is concluded that this volume has shown that also the bicycle infrastructure in countries like Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden or Austria also fails to fully recognise the bicyclists’ needs for active and daily mobility. Further, this opens a space for shared critique, rather than focusing on the search for a mythical universal best practice allows dialogue between perspectives. It also permits (and insists on) analysis of the backstage of infrastructure construction. The conclusions raises also questions like What processes and assumptions are behind the plans drawn up and the decisions made? Who are the people involved and what considerations drive them? How are these considerations justified? Furthermore, it is stated that this volume has begun a comparative assessment of existing and historic struggles.
This chapter introduces the topic of this volume and the issues touched upon in the different chapters. It explains today’s situation for cycling and the wider context of cycling infrastructure. Moreover, it also shows how this volume was put together and why there is a need for this book. Furthermore, it places the book in context to existing literature and shows what gaps exists in this literature and why this volume is an important contribution to the current publications on cycling and infrastructure. Additionally, this chapter gives an overview of the content of this volume, introduces briefly each chapter and explains the structure of this volume. In the end of this chapter, a note on language explains the terms used in this volume for different parts of cycling infrastructure.