Integrating or in conflict? : studying the experiences of local and foreign cyclists participating in Amsterdam’s cycling culture

Integrating or in conflict?

Studying the experiences of local and foreign cyclists participating in

Amsterdam’s cycling culture.

__________________________________________________________________________________

“It’s a complicated dance and everybody knows the steps.”

Roger Geller (Bicycle Coordinator Portland), about Amsterdam’s cycling culture

Marit Kocken - 10666990

Master Thesis Sociology – University of Amsterdam 22781 words

04-06-2019

Thesis supervisor: Olga Sezneva Second reader: Linda van de Kamp

Abstract

The growing mass-tourism in Amsterdam has led to many problems. Foreign visitors trying to participate in Amsterdam’s cycling culture is one of them: locals accuse them of not knowing how to bike and causing accidents, and tourists themselves seem to complain about locals for their rude cycling behavior. This means that there is a clash on the road. This research aimed to understand this problem through an interpretative approach, by looking at the conflict from the locals’ and foreigners’ perspective. To study this, three sociological concepts were used and tested through interviews, observations and diaries. Firstly, Kuipers’ idea of cycling as a national habitus explained the different cycling skills between the two groups. Secondly, Anderson’s concept of street etiquette and street wisdom showed the different ways both groups navigate and relate to another, and thirdly, Moerman’s theory of Amsterdam’s cycling culture as an organized chaos pointed out the difference in knowledge and performance of formal and informal rules.

This thesis has shown that the clash is experienced only by locals but caused by both. It seems a combination of lack of interaction and (local) experience of the foreigners, the rushed and impatient cycling behavior of locals, and the limited and pressured spaces in the center of Amsterdam.

Acknowledgments

I would like to start by thanking my parents, for helping me with this thesis. My dad gave me useful insights and advice, and my mom always gave me the confidence to finish it. Furthermore, I want to thank my boyfriend who also supported me and kept me motivated, not only for my thesis but throughout the entire year. Also Marlou was important for realizing this thesis. Every day we met in the library and spent our breaks together, relaxing and complaining. Likewise, Glenn played an important role at the university. Every day he welcomed me outside, wishing me good luck for the day. Of course, I want to thank my supervisor Olga Sezneva for providing me with useful ideas and ways to improve, and Linda van de Kamp for being my second reader. And last but not least, I want to thank my respondents, who were essential for the results of this thesis.

Table of content

1.2 Cycling history of the Netherlands ... 9

1.3 Amsterdam’s current cycling culture ... 11

2. Theoretical Framework ... 14

2.1 Cycling as a national habitus ... 14

2.2 Street etiquette and street wisdom ... 15

2.3 Organized chaos ... 17

2.4 Discussing the theoretical concepts ... 18

3. Research question and hypotheses ... 19

4. Design, Operationalization and Methods ... 20

4.1 Design and paradigm ... 20

4.2 Operationalization ... 20 4.3 Methods ... 21 4.3.1 Interviewing ... 21 4.3.2 Observations ... 23 4.3.3 Cycling diary ... 24 5. Results ... 25 5.1 Habitus ... 25

5.1.1 Role of the home country ... 26

5.1.2 Meaning of the bike and cycling ... 29

5.1.3 Cycling ease and habit ... 32

5.1.4 Discussion habitus ... 34

5.2 Street etiquettes and street wisdom ... 35

5.2.1 Own behavior ... 35

5.2.2 Interaction ... 37

5.2.3 Unsafe groups and strategies ... 40

5.2.4 Discussion street etiquettes and wisdom ... 45

5.3 Fietsjungle and organized chaos ... 46

5.3.1 Formal rules ... 46

5.3.2 Informal rules ... 49

6. Conclusion ... 56

6.1 Summary and conclusion ... 56

6.2 Contributions to sociology ... 59

6.3 Advice ... 60

6.4 Limitations and future research ... 61

8. Appendix ... 69

8.1 Figures ... 69

8.2 Topic/question list ... 74

8.3 Respondents... 76

Introduction

‘Te grote groepen slecht fietsende toeristen’, ‘Toeristen op fietsen niet toegestaan’ and ‘fietsles voor toeristen’ (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2017). These are a few examples of complaints mentioned by Amsterdammers in the neighborhood survey of the municipality of Amsterdam. With the enormously increasing tourism the past ten years, the problems in the city have grown. According to the World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC), Amsterdam belongs to the top 20% of cities that suffer most from the consequences of visiting crowds. WTTC emphasizes that locals mainly get affected by the negative sides of the mass-tourism and take little of the benefits (Stil, 2017).

Tourists on bikes are one of these negative consequences. Like the amounts of tourists staying in Amsterdam, the number of tourists trying to participate in the cycling culture, is also increasing (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2017). And this does not go without problems. Ambulances complained about a rise of accidents involving tourists: whereas in 2012, they were called out for tourists on average of four times a day, in 2016 this already incurred to ten times. Even though this does not only apply to cycle accidents, Peter Duijf from Ambulance Amsterdam said ‘vergeet ook de huurfietstoerist niet. De mensen die zich massaal met hun huurfiets in het verkeer storten en geen weet hebben van het gevaar van bijvoorbeeld de tramrails.' (Koppe, 2016). According to Bas Oosterhout, the director of MacBike, tourists do not cause major problems. He thinks this is an often heard misunderstanding, and explains: ‘Af en toe komt er eens iemand terug met een schaafwond of een verstuikte enkel. Het gaat om maar één of twee kleine ongevallen per jaar. Sinds 1988 is er in Amsterdam één toerist op een huurfiets overleden.’ Knowing that only MacBike already rents out 400.000 bikes a year, this does not seem a big problem. According to Oosterhout, dangerous situations are more likely to be caused by locals, who are known for their hasty cycling behavior.

How many accidents there are, and whether they are caused by tourists or locals is not clear. There are no official numbers, as ethnicity and origin are not registered in case of accidents (ibidem). What is clear however, is that the locals complain about the lack of skills and knowledge of the cycling tourists, and tourists on its turn complain about the rude cycling behavior of the locals (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2015). This means there is a conflict on the road. With two groups pointing fingers at each other, the question arises: how can this conflict be actually explained?

This thesis aims to examine this problem on the road. Through an interpretative approach, this thesis tries to learn from the experiences of members and temporary participants of Amsterdam’s cycling culture. Therefore, firstly a literature review will examine Amsterdam’s cycling culture. When considering cycling in Amsterdam a culture, constituted by shared norms, values and beliefs and expressed by certain behavior, it can be explained that foreign visitors as outsiders, do not seem to blend in so easily. The second chapter will form a theoretical framework, where three concepts are put forward to approach the problem. The concept of national habitus as used by Kuipers (2013), will focus on explaining the different cycling skills of foreigners and locals. Street etiquettes and street wisdom of Anderson (1990) and organized chaos of Moerman (2014) will focus more on the inter-subjective act of cycling and will show how the cyclists relate to another. Based on these concepts, the third chapter will offer three hypotheses, that will be tested through interviews, observations and cycling diaries. Finally, the conclusion will close the thesis by answering the main research question: What can the cycling experience of locals and visitors explain about the conflict on the road, and how can sociological concepts help address this?

This thesis will be relevant for the field of (urban) sociology, as it will contribute to microsociology. This thesis aims to understand different cultural practices and addresses how an assemblage of people with different backgrounds, values, ideas and skills can lead to mobility problems in a city. Furthermore, knowledge about the friction on the road can contribute to improving local policy, which is considered necessary, according to the Municipality of Amsterdam (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2017). However, important to emphasize here, is that this thesis will only focus on the practice of cycling. Presumably, the problem is part of and can be explained by the rising mass tourism, but this thesis is delimited to the cycling practices of the two groups.

1. Literature review

This chapter will firstly define the concept of cycling culture. Thereafter, the cycling history of the Netherlands and Amsterdam will be examined to subsequently describe and understand the current cycling culture of Amsterdam.

1.1 Cycling culture

Cycling culture as a concept is often used in literature, but rarely precisely defined. This is mainly because the concept ‘culture’ is difficult to define, as it can be interpreted in many different ways. Following Linton’s definition of 1945, culture is ‘the way of life of its members: the collection of ideas and habits which they learn, share and transmit from generation to generation’ (p. 203). Also Leininger, even though written for a book on nursing culture, provides a comprehensive and useful description of culture: ‘Culture refers to learned, shared, and transmitted values, beliefs, norms, and lifeways of a specific individual or group that guide their thinking, decisions, actions, and patterned ways of living.’ (1991, p. 46). The elements that constitute a culture as mentioned above, will be followed throughout the thesis and examined how this expresses for both locals and foreign visitors on

the bike in Amsterdam.

When talking about a cycling culture, it depends on whether it is part of a subculture or dominant culture, and whether it is the case of recreational, sportive or utilitarian cycling, when referring to it. In the Netherlands, when spoken of a cycling culture, people usually refer to utilitarian cycling as part of the dominant culture: cycling is normative and considered a mainstream way of transport (Cox, 2000, p.29). Then the question arises how it became normative. Often scholars point out to demographic, economic and political factors to explain the development of the cycling culture. The focus is then on practical cases like infrastructure, city design or policies. This explains the idea of copying and implementing Amsterdam’s cycling culture abroad. However, according to Oosterhuis (2013), the role of history is especially important and often overlooked. He argues that cycling cultures are characterized by ‘historically defined vicious circles in which spatial planning, infrastructure, imaging, habits and attitudes, democratic support and policy mutually influence,

reinforce, stimulate or discourage each other’ (p.44-45). Also Pelzer argues that cycling is often considered a neutral or rational choice, in which the strong connection with culture and history tends to be ignored (Pelzer, te Brömmelstroet, 2010, p.5). According to Stoffers, ‘the overwhelming presence and commonness of the bicycle has hindered its perception as a cultural artefact with a specific history.’ (Stoffers, 2012, p.94). Therefore, the cycling history of the Netherlands needs to be examined.

1.2 Cycling history of the Netherlands

Quickly after the bicycle was introduced in the Netherlands in 1868, it became a means of transport for all classes of society. One of the reasons for this is that the Netherlands has always been a relatively egalitarian society with little power differences, and thus little status display between classes (Kuipers, 2013). According to Fleming, this egalitarianism derived from Calvinism, the doctrine that made people live an austere and simple life. Even though Calvinism arrived 300 years before the bicycle, this doctrine is still underlying the Dutch culture. Fleming states it is the key to why the Dutch cycle so much (Fleming, 2012, p.13).

Another reason is that the Algemene Nederlandse Wielersbond (ANWB), founded as the Dutch Cycling Union in 1883, and developed into a general association for traffic and tourism around 1900, promoted the bicycle as a means that ‘taught independence, self-reliance and self-control, that [it] helped to form a bond with the nation and the national heritage’ (Ebert, 2004, p.360). As a non-religious association in a non-religiously divided country, the ANWB was committed to serving the interest of all people interested in cycling by producing maps, working on a system of road signs, raising money for cycling infrastructure and promoting the activity itself (Stoffers, p.102). In 1923, when already 74% of all vehicles on the road were bicycles, the ANWB connected cycling to the Dutch (national) identity: ‘There is no country in the world where the bicycle is so indispensable in the daily routine of everyone … the bicycle is for the Dutchman part of his life.’ (De Kampioen, 1923). Also, this was reinforced by the institution Veilig Verkeer Nederland, which implemented traffic and cycling safety education in primary schools since 1932. Kids were educated and tested on their traffic

knowledge, theoretically as well as in practice.

During the second world war, the bike was not only a means of transportation, it was also used as a way to bother the Nazi’s in Amsterdam, who were also confiscating bikes. By not giving right of way to Germans and slowing up convoys, cycling became ‘the biggest expression of resistance to the Nazis… it gave ordinary people satisfaction that they were hindering the Nazi cause.’ (Jordan, 2013). The popularity of the bicycle remained the same until after the Second World War, when car ownership and use started growing enormously. According to Oosterhuis (2013), the promotion of the bicycle as a national and democratic vehicle for everybody, and the connection with ideals and norms of civilization, kept the bicycle popular during those years. Characteristic for the imaging was ‘een evenwicht tussen dynamiek en zelfbeheersing en tussen individuele vrijheid en gemeenschapszin’ (Oosterhuis, p.44). This was especially expressed by the ANWB and other cycling institutions by focusing on tour cycling, in which people were stimulated to discover and enjoy the historical-cultural heritage and landscape of their country. With this, the status of the bicycle as national proud and unity was emphasized (Ibidem). Moreover, the ANWB was so significant, because of its specific approach. According to Stoffers, ‘It was influential because of its contacts and organisation, but also because of the pragmatic way it defended cycling: in line with dominant Dutch elite political culture its style was cooperative, willing to compromise and nonconfrontational.’ (p.102). Unlike some other countries that were trying to stimulate cycling, the ANWB did not oppose cars, but tried to find ways to make the different modes of transport coexist as good as possible.

In the early 1970s, the popularity of the car was slowly stagnating, because of resistance (Stoffers, p.100). This had a few reasons. First of all, in 1965, the anarchistic Provo movement was erected in Amsterdam and created the Witte Fietsenplan, as one of their ‘white plans’1. To fight congestion caused by cars, the Provo’s wanted to put around 2000 white painted bikes in Amsterdam without locks, for collective use. On their pamphlet, they explained: ‘Provo’s fietsenplan brengt bevryding van het auto-monster. Provo’s lanceert de witte fiets in openbaar bezit [..] de witte fiets is het eerste, gratis, gekollektiviseerde, vervoersmiddel’ (fig. 1 in appendix). However, the city council

1

Plans made by the Provo’s related to social or urban issues. They were called white, as the color of innocence and nonviolence (Otten, 1984, p.34).

did not agree with the plan and therefore it was not embraced.

A few years later, resistance against the car focused more on safety. The number of deaths caused by cars was growing everywhere in the Netherlands, with a peak of 3300 in 1971. With 400 of them being kids, the action group ‘Stop de Kindermoord’ (Stop the child murder) was erected (Van der Zee, 2015). By successfully organizing demonstrations (fig. 2), special days to block streets to create safe space for kids, and occupying accident black spots, the organization was growing, leading to cooperation with the government years later (De Boer & Caprotti, 2017, p.618).

Moreover, when the oil crisis hit in 1973, driving a car also became increasingly expensive. All of this led to political measures in favor of the bicycle: policies strengthened control and taxes on the use of cars, city and transportation planning regulations were modified in favor of more dense urban developments and financial support was provided to stimulate bicycle use (Vivanco, 2013, p.72). In 1975, the Netherlands was the first country to implement a national bicycle policy. The Dutch Ministry of Transport and Public Works granted 500 million guilders to invest in the construction of cycling facilities nationwide (Rietveld, Daniel, 2004, p.536). This was only the beginning of the cycling policy, which today forms an integrated part of the mobility policy.

This concise overview of Amsterdam’s cycling history has shown the role of the egalitarian culture that created a specific attitude towards cycling, guided by the imaging and promotion of institutions, and facilitated and stimulated by policy. The different social, environmental and political elements thus have mutually influenced and enhanced each other, and together shaped the current cycling culture of Amsterdam.

1.3 Amsterdam’s current cycling culture

With more than 80% of the people in Amsterdam owning a bike and more than 70% of the people using their bike daily to commute (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2018, p.109), cycling seems mainstream and normative. However, there are some groups in Amsterdam who do not cycle that often: lower educated and especially non-western immigrants cycle significantly less. Also, second- and third-generation immigrants rather choose another type of transport. Pelzer (2010) explains that this has to

do with the fact that they do not share the Dutch history, and that the bicycle often has a more inferior status in their native country. Consequently, the habit of cycling is not transmitted to the next generation, neither is it copied from the Dutch. This seems to show the importance of the Dutch national habitus for cycling, which will be further explained in the theoretical framework.

Currently, Amsterdam’s cycling culture is often described as a chaos (De Jong, 2017). It is usually distinguished from other Dutch cities by a combination of tourists, crowdedness and (arrogant) cycling behavior. As the capital of the Netherlands, and often called the bike capital of the world, Amsterdam is attracting many tourists that also want to experience ‘going Dutch’ (Van der Zee, 2015). As a city that is already struggling with mass-tourism, cycling tourists have become another problem for Amsterdam to deal with. Not only the number of tourists visiting Amsterdam is growing, also the amount of them wanting to go around by bike is growing. This led to an enormous increase in bike rentals. ‘Iedereen in Amsterdam heeft verzonnen dat hij of zij fietsen moet verhuren. Het gaat om snackbars, coffeeshops, groentewinkels, hotels, noem maar op. Iedereen verhuurt fietsen.’, said Oosterhout, director of MacBike in an interview (Nu.nl, 2017). With more cycling tourists on the streets, more locals seem to complain. The tourists are considered dangerous and accused of not knowing the rules, or not even knowing how to bike (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2017). This has led to the Municipality launching the campaign ‘Happy Cycling is Safe Cycling’ in 2015. As an attempt to get tourists better integrated into the cycling culture, an ‘ironic’ video and folder with rules and tips was made to show at bike rentals. However, the question is whether this is successful. Het Parool writes ‘Heel verhelderend is het instructiefilmpje voor fietsende toerist niet’, and four years later the situation has not changed much (Kieft, 2015; Gemeente Amsterdam, 2017). The Municipality does not seem willing to implement stricter measures, like a cycling diploma for tourists, often mentioned by locals and even the Fietsburgemeester (AT5, 2016). Reading the Strategic Tourism Agenda of the Metropol Region Amsterdam, this seems to have an economic reason: ‘De fiets is een fijn vervoermiddel voor bezoekers; flexibel, gezond, en goedkoop. [..] Fietsen is in het kader van spreiding en duurzaamheid een belangrijk thema voor marketing en promotie richting internationale bezoekers; verkrijgbaarheid en gebruiksgemak van huurfietsen is een belangrijke voorwaarde om gebruik te faciliteren.’ (Metropoolregio Amsterdam, 2017). The authorities of Amsterdam thus value cycling tourism and

therefore want renting a bike to stay easy and accessible. The policy is therefore now limited to informing tourists about cycling in Amsterdam (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2017).

What also characterizes Amsterdam is its crowdedness. Not only the number of tourists on the bike is growing, also the amount of Amsterdammers on the bike (Gemeente, 2017). The streets are getting fuller, but the infrastructure is staying behind. Previously, Amsterdam was chosen as the most bike-friendly city in the world for a few years in a row, but in 2017 the capital slipped down to the third place (Copenhagenize Index, 2017). According to the organization, ‘Amsterdam lacks the innovation and investment we see in Utrecht and Copenhagen’. However, due to its historical, dense city design, it is difficult for Amsterdam to make increasing space for cyclists in the center: ‘The typology of the city is unique, which might explain why they struggle to implement ideas from other

places.’ (Ibidem).

A combination of the growing number of (inexperienced) cyclists and stagnating space for all these cyclists lead to chaotic or dangerous-looking situations. Even though the tourists are often and easily blamed for this kind of situations, some say it is actually the Amsterdammers who are responsible for that. In the article ‘Amsterdammers zijn aso’s, vooral op de fiets’, Persson notes that Amsterdammers do not care about the rules, are always in a hurry and (think they are) always right (Persson, 2014). Also Blokker writes in a more recent article ‘Niemand krijgt straf in de fietsjungle’, about the reckless cycling behavior. He characterizes the local’s cycling behavior by not abiding the rules: riding on the sidewalk, not giving priority and crossing red lights. Therefore, he pleads for more police on the street to supervise (Blokker, 2018). One of these reckless cyclists responds saying: ‘U begrijpt het niet. In Amsterdam gelden andere regels.’. Section 5.3 will go deeper into these different rules.

Perhaps this disobedient cycling behavior could be explained by the fact that throughout history, the local cyclists had to fight for their position on the road: first against the Nazi’s, and later against the cars. Overcoming this and gaining a prominent place in the streets of Amsterdam could explain their arrogant and rebellious behavior.

In this section, Amsterdam’s current cycling culture has been described and explained that it can be characterized and distinguished by the amounts of tourists, (over)crowdedness and

rule-breaking behavior of the locals. Based on the literature, all these elements can play a role in the conflict between the locals and foreigners on the road. The next chapter will provide a theoretical framework, to look at the conflict with sociological concepts.

2. Theoretical Framework

In order to understand the conflict on the road better, this chapter will provide three theoretical concepts. First of all, Kuiper’s interpretation of cycling as a Dutch national habitus will be explained, to understand the different cycling skills of locals and foreigners. Secondly, Anderson’s theory about street wisdom and street etiquettes will be used to look at ways both groups navigate the streets, and lastly, Moerman’s idea of Amsterdam as an organized chaos will be explained, to examine the role of

informal rules.

2.1 Cycling as a national habitus

As noted before, an often mentioned reason for the conflict on the road is the lack of cycling skills of the foreigners. To understand the different cycling practices between the two groups, Kuipers’ interpretation of cycling as a Dutch national habitus is explained.

Borrowing from Bourdieu and Elias, Kuipers considers a habitus ‘all the acquired practices, uses, feelings and standards that have become such a part of ourselves, that they are self-evident and feel natural’ (Kuipers, 2013, p.20). According to her, cycling is a habitus of the Dutch, and because this is collective, she calls it the national habitus.

Four processes contribute to the formation of a national habitus. First of all, the increasing interdependence (p.22). Since the Middle Ages people have become more and more part of bigger social groups: from belonging to a town, to a region, to a nation-state. Because of this, people started to look more alike, identify themselves more with others and adjust to each other. Second of all, there were growing numbers of (national) institutions that were influencing people’s life. Institutions like media, care and education have a binding and normative function, and their regime all ended at the borders (p.23). For the cycling habitus, the ANWB was a very important institution, but also cycling

education starting as early as 1932, could have played a role. The third process has to do with the vertical distribution of standards, taste and practices. These were usually first performed by higher classes, and later copied by the lower. In the Netherlands however, these processes were sometimes reversed. The quite informal royal court sometimes adapted to the manners of the bourgeoisie. For example, queen Wilhelmina, reigning from 1898 till 1948, used a bicycle and often presented herself with it (Stoffers, p.102) (fig.3). The last process Kuipers defines is the development of a national ‘us-feeling’. People who look alike, identify with each other, and copy each other’s behavior (p.24). The media plays an important role in connecting all the people who do not know each other personally. They offer the symbols, stories and rituals for people to connect (Kuipers, 2010, p.7). Again, photos of the royals casually cycling, can contribute to this feeling: ‘In the Netherlands, the ‘ordinary’ royals with their bikes and unpretentious manners were instrumental in the development of a national

we-feeling.’ (p.24).

All these processes have contributed to developing a national cycling habitus. This shared national habitus is created by history: the history of society shapes personal histories, which shapes the persons itself. Therefore, persons are defined by the country they are from. This means that the Dutch are defined by cycling, and can explain why immigrants cycle significantly less. It is ingrained in the Dutch body as a habitus, and considered a second nature, like walking.

Kuipers emphasizes this argument by contrasting it with tourists. She mentions how easy and natural it is for the Dutch to maneuver through busy traffic, becomes even more clear when seeing tourists struggle their way through it (p.20). Considering foreigners as people without the cycling habitus confirms the idea that they are generally less skilled cyclists, which explains the conflict on the road.

2.2 Street etiquette and street wisdom

Not knowing how to bike can not only be interpreted as not being skilled enough to cycle, but also as not knowing how to relate to and negotiate with others while cycling in Amsterdam. Therefore, this section will go deeper into the inter-subjective act of cycling, by focusing on the concept of street

etiquette and wisdom of Anderson.

In his book ‘Streetwise: Race, Class, and Change in an Urban Community’, Anderson writes about how Black and new white residents negotiate their safety on the street. Even though it was written in 1990 to describe reacting to danger when encountering people from a different race, while walking the street, it can be applied to navigating while cycling in Amsterdam.

Anderson states that everyone who is walking the street, ‘must negotiate their passage with others they encounter’ (p.210). By doing this, he explains two strategies. One is using ‘street etiquettes’: a set of rules that can be applied to every situation. These rules are made by yourself, created by rough descriptions based on superficial characteristics of the persons you meet. For every social type, you create a small theory, on how to act when encountering one. This helps people with giving a sense of what kind of person you can expect where, and how to act accordingly. Also this could be applied to cycling. Unlike in the Village, the main focus will probably not be on race when creating street etiquettes, but will be more related to cycling skills. However, section 5.2 has to point out which characteristics contribute to creating street etiquettes.

However, Anderson emphasizes that with the help of street etiquettes the street might feel more safe, it will not necessarily lead to more safety. Actions are based on generalized situations, not on specific ones. Therefore, street wisdom should be used for more safety. According to Anderson, this is a more sophisticated approach as people who use this strategy, acknowledge that you are not always able to solve problems in the social environment with a standard set of rules. People with street wisdom ‘develop coping strategies for different situations, tailoring their responses to each unique event’ (p.210). These strategies are based on etiquettes, but used wisely. According to Anderson, ‘street wisdom is really street etiquette wisely enacted’ (p.231).

When applying this theory to the cycling conflict in Amsterdam, there could be a discrepancy in (the use of) etiquettes between the two groups. It could be argued that foreigners only use etiquettes for general situations. When you are cycling in Amsterdam for the first time, you only know the standard set of rules (if you do). You can imagine what to do in some occasions, but you lack the experience to act in new, specific situations. Locals have more experience and as ‘veterans of the public space’ (p.232), they have had the time to take mental notes and therefore know how to apply

etiquettes wisely to specific situations. The expectation that foreigners follow general etiquettes, which does not lead to actual safety, and that locals adapt their etiquettes to specific situations, which makes them street wise and safe, can contribute to explaining the conflict on the road.

2.3 Organized chaos

As mentioned before, the reckless cycling behavior of locals is seen as one of the reasons for the clash on the road with the foreigners. Locals are often held responsible for creating a fietsjungle, where breaking the rules is normalized (Persson, 2014; Blokker, 2018). Moerman (2014) however refutes this, and coined the idea of an organized chaos, by emphasizing the importance of informal rules.

According to Moerman, Amsterdam’s cycling culture is made of formal as well as informal rules. Informal rules are the result of Amsterdammers interpreting the formal, legal rules and collectively making it their own. These rules are new and unwritten, and sometimes contradict with the formal rules. Moerman explains that breaking the formal rules, for example crossing a red light, is not a problem. Amsterdammers are very experienced and know how the lights work. They pay very well attention and therefore know when it is relatively safe to cross a red light. Furthermore, Moerman emphasizes the importance of interaction. While cycling, cyclists look at other people on the bike: to their eyes, the movement of their handlebar, their position on the bike. In this way, they try to predict other cyclists’ behavior and anticipate to it. He concludes that because Amsterdammers know and usually follow the informal rules, Amsterdam is actually more of an organized chaos, than just a chaos, or even a fietsjungle. However, not knowing the informal rules and seeing people break with the formal rules, could lead to experiencing it as a fietsjungle.

Like Kuipers, Moerman emphasizes his idea by contrasting it with tourists. He states that tourists’ cycling behavior is more difficult to predict, as they can make very sudden moves. Also, they lack the common sense to understand and perform the informal rules. Therefore, the clash on the road can be explained by a discrepancy between the locals’ and foreigners’ knowledge and performance of

the informal (as well as formal) rules.

2.4 Discussing the theoretical concepts

This chapter has offered three sociological concepts to address the conflict on the road. Even though they address different causes of the conflict, they are connected.

Consciously is chosen for habitus as the first framework. The habitus is considered an individual constellation, which can demonstrate the difference in cycling experience, and therefore different cycling skills of the two groups. Once cycling has become embodied knowledge, there is more mental space for inter-subjective cycling practices. Therefore, street etiquettes and street wisdom form the second framework. Experience due to the habitus has given people the skills, but also the time to create etiquettes, and perform them wisely. The second concept that is enabled by habitus and focuses on inter-subjective cycling practices, is organized chaos, which forms the third framework. Again, cycling needs to be engrained, in order to create, understand and perform informal rules. Furthermore, there can also be a link between street wisdom and organized chaos: once it is proved that the locals are street wise, and thus know how the streets, people and situations very well, they are also more likely to feel comfortable bending the rules. Again, this seems only possible when cycling is self-evident.

The next chapter will demonstrate how using these concepts leads to three hypotheses and how they can contribute to explaining the conflict on the road.

3. Research question and hypotheses

The literature review has shown the history and contemporary characteristics of Amsterdam’s cycling culture, including the conflict on the road. Based on this, the theoretical framework provided three sociological concepts to approach the problem. This led to the following hypotheses:

- Locals have a habitus for cycling and foreigners do not.

As the locals have the national habitus for cycling, they cycle very well, often, and easily. Foreigners on the other hand, do not have a habitus for cycling and are thus not that skilled. This could explain and confirm the idea that the conflict is (partly) due to the lack of skills of the foreign visitors.

- Locals are street wise and foreigners only use street etiquettes to navigate the street.

Being street wise means being safer than only using etiquettes. However, street wisdom requires experience. Because locals are expected to be very experienced (due to their habitus for cycling), they are also expected to be street wise. Because of the lack of cycling experience in their life and in Amsterdam, foreigners only know how to use the basic etiquettes and are therefore less safe cycling in Amsterdam. Both the different ways of navigating and the different levels of safety this leads to, can contribute to explaining the conflict between both groups.

- Locals experience cycling in Amsterdam as an organized chaos and foreigners as a fietsjungle. Amsterdam’s cycling culture is not only made up of formal, but also informal rules. As they are made by locals, who collectively interpreted the formal rules, expected is that foreigners do not know these. Knowing and performing these rules leads to experiencing Amsterdam’s cycling culture as an organized chaos, but not knowing these can lead to experiencing it as a fietsjungle, as they are

considered to be very important. Knowing different rules leads to different behavior, and could therefore contribute to explaining the conflict between both groups.

Chapter 5 will address these three hypotheses in three separate sub-chapters. Thereafter, the conclusion will answer the main research question: What can the cycling experience of locals and visitors explain about the conflict on the road, and how can sociological concepts help address this?

4. Design, Operationalization and Methods

This chapter firstly addresses the paradigm of this thesis. Subsequently, the concepts used to create the hypotheses will be operationalized and explained which methods are used to research them.

4.1 Design and paradigm

This thesis has a qualitative research design. Hennink et al. explain that a qualitative approach ‘allows you to identify issues from the perspective of your study participants, and understand the meanings and interpretations that they give to behaviour, events or objects’ (2011, p.9). This refers to an interpretative paradigm, which will be used to understand the social reality by seeking to ‘understand people’s lived experience from the perspective of people themselves’ (p.14).

4.2 Operationalization

For this thesis, three sociological concepts are used. Firstly, habitus will be examined. In order to examine cycling as a habitus, the focus will be on three elements: the role of the home country, the personal meaning of the bike and cycling, and cycling ease. The first element is chosen because the first chapter has shown how important the history and culture of a country can be for the use of the bicycle. In every country cycling can be considered differently: as a means for sports, fun or transport, and it can have certain stereotypes. The prevailing image of cycling in a country, can influence personal opinions and motivations for cycling. Therefore, this is chosen as the second element. The focus will be on how people think about cycling. This can have an effect on for example what kind of

bike they have, want to have, or even if they have one at all. This means that the personal stance towards cycling can also influence whether and how people cycle. Therefore, the third element focuses on cycling ease, as people with a habitus are supposed to cycle often, regularly and thus with ease. Having a habitus means cycling is engrained, and therefore riding a bike should feel natural.

To examine the use of street etiquettes, the focus will be on how people interact with others and which people or groups of people they identify as unsafe. Having one fixed strategy to deal with all unsafe situations will be considered as using basic etiquettes. People who have specific strategies or acknowledge that every situation requires a particular response, will be considered more safe. The better a person estimates others and adapts its behavior to specific situations, the more he/she can be considered street wise. Therefore, the aim is to find out what people’s strategies are, and how they are performed.

To test the concepts fietsjungle and organized chaos, the focus will be on formal rules, informal rules, people’s experience with this, and their perception of cycling in Amsterdam in general. The knowledge, value and performance of the informal rules will be examined firstly, to subsequently understand how this influences their experience of cycling in Amsterdam. Not knowing and performing them might lead to experiencing Amsterdam as a fietsjungle, and the opposite might lead to experiencing it as an organized chaos.

4.3 Methods

The chapters made hitherto are based on written sources. Mostly literature was used, but especially for the introduction and chapter 1.3 policy documents and news articles were reviewed. The following chapters will be based on interviews, observations and cycling dairies.

4.3.1 Interviewing

The foundation of this research is composed of findings from the interviews. I talked to fifteen Amsterdammers, and fifteen foreigners who identified themselves as tourists, about cycling and their experience in Amsterdam. The latter group was formed by people found in Vondelpark, selecting only

people that seem not to have a habitus for cycling.2 I chose days with nice weather, assuming that more foreigners would rent a bike, and that they would be more likely to make time to talk to me. This appeared more difficult than initially thought. Many times people did not want to do an interview. In the beginning, I did not tell them beforehand how long it would take, but then I noticed that after ten minutes the respondents would get a bit impatient, and answer shorter. Therefore I started telling people it would take around twenty minutes, when asking them whether they wanted to participate. Notwithstanding, people now often said they found this too long, had to return their rental bike or

were on a tight schedule.

Furthermore, sometimes I had to reject potential respondents. Because I wanted a good variety of age, gender and nationality, one time I rejected an English man, as I had already spoken to three. Also a few times after some introductory questions, I noticed that the level of English was not good enough for a full interview. I thanked them and said they did not qualify. Only one time I completed an interview and decided afterward not to use it. After analyzing an interview with a Ukranian man, it appeared that he was giving inappropriate or unsuitable answers due to a lack of English.

In the end, after ten afternoons cycling around Vondelpark, offering stroopwafels and cans of soda, I managed to speak to fifteen foreigners. Eight of them are male and seven are female. Both groups are constituted by various ages leading to the same average age of 24 years old. Appendix 8.3 shows the respondents’ nationality, age, gender and whether they have a bike at home. As I often did not ask the names of the foreigners, and to protect their privacy, all respondents have a new name

made up by me.

Finding local respondents was a lot easier, as they were composed by people from my own network. The requirements were that people are Dutch, grew up in the Netherlands and cycle regularly in Amsterdam. People who commute by bike or use their bike multiple times a week as a form of transport qualified. Also, I tried to find participants who have lived in Amsterdam for at least a few years. Apart from one respondent, who has only lived in Amsterdam for almost one and a half years, the time people have lived in Amsterdam differed from 4,5 years up to 19,5 years.

Also in this group I aimed for some diversity. Eight respondents are female, and seven are

male. The women were between 24 and 27 years old, leading to an average age of 25 years old. In the men’s group there were more various ages, differing from 19 to 33 years old. The average age was 26 years old, and thus almost the same as the women and the foreigners.

The interviews with both groups were semi-structured. A topic list with corresponding questions was used in the beginning to guide the interviews (appendix 8.2 for topics and questions). However, after having taken a few interviews, the question list was not used anymore, as I knew the main questions by hearth.

After all the interviews were done, they were analyzed. As all the respondents allowed me to record the interviews, they were transcribed and all put together in a file, composing 207 pages. In order to analyze this, I did not use ATLAS.ti or any other coding program, but created my own way. Twenty-three topics were chosen based on the interviews, and written down below each other, on one page per person. An example of a topic was ‘own behavior’. This would be followed by keywords, like ‘slow’, ‘careful’ or ‘cautious’. The keywords were the respondent’s own words, so when I wanted to read the entire sentence or context, it could be found efficiently by using ‘control + F’. Also, before addressing a certain topic, I could easily compare opinions, by looking at the number of the topic. For more clarity, I made a table in Excel with colors representing certain answers, making a comparison at

a glance possible.

4.3.2 Observations

Observing was the second method. It was used mainly to illustrate theories, and experiences mentioned during the interviews.

For observations I went to three busy, central crossings and observed how people cycle: one regular crossing without traffic lights (Spiegelgracht and Weteringsschans), one regular crossing with traffic lights (Raadhuisstraat and Spuistraat), and one peculiar crossing, in which it might not be completely clear who has priority (where het Spui crosses Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal). Figure 4 shows where these streets are located in Amsterdam, and a picture of each crossing from above. Every location was observed three times, for at least 1,5 hours. I made sure to observe every location during

the morning and afternoon traffic hour, and one random moment between.

The observations focused on two concepts: the habitus and the organized chaos. Focusing on street wisdom and etiquettes was not specifically done, as interviews were needed to know which groups were identified as unsafe, and what the strategies were to deal with them. To observe how the habitus was expressed, the focus was on cycling ease, assuming that people with the habitus have cycled their entire life, and therefore are very experienced cyclists. The body posture and cycling ease are indicators for having a cycling habitus, assuming that someone who does not seem comfortable or confident on the bike, might not have the habitus. Indications can be driving slowly or swinging, having a low seat (to be closer to the ground), a tense body and a focused or scared look in their eyes. Of course, having a rental bike was also an indicator. Indications for people with a habitus were cycling steady and nonchalantly, illustrated by different ways of multitasking, like calling, texting or

carrying objects.

Observing the organized chaos or fietsjungle meant looking at the performance of rules. Questions I asked myself were: Do people follow the rules? And if not, do they seem to break the rules purposely? Do they cycle on the sidewalk, against traffic or through a red light? If yes, is this safe? How do other people seem to respond to this? Does it look streamlined or very chaotic? These findings were used to support the experiences of the respondents.

4.3.3 Cycling diary

Furthermore, I wanted to have five Dutch people between 18 and 35 years old, to keep a cycling diary for one day. This age was also chosen for the interviews, because I expected most foreign visitors to be around this age, and the majority of people from my (Dutch) network are as well. This method was chosen to get more insight into the role of etiquettes, as these might be performed unconsciously, and therefore need more thinking or practice to become aware of. Also, because observations focused mainly on the concepts habitus and organized chaos, I believed a cycling diary would complement this well. Therefore, I asked the writers to think about their interaction with other road users, and whether they adapt their behavior depending on the type of person/road user they encounter in traffic.

Furthermore, I asked whether there are certain groups they identify as unsafe, and what kind of strategies they use to deal with them.

In practice, two respondents delivered their diary easily. One respondent I had to ask multiple times, but finally delivered it quite late, and two respondents did not do it at all, even though promised. However, the content of the three diaries did not give any new or more specific information on etiquettes. The interviews appeared more useful to understand the practice of etiquettes. However, it did give me useful information for the performance of formal and informal rules, which are used in 5.3.

When all the interviews and observations were done, and one new dairy writer was found, I decided it was not necessary to find another one. With thirty interviews, nine observations and four diaries, I collected enough information.

5. Results

First, the hypothesis concerning habitus will be tested, followed by the hypotheses of street etiquettes and wisdom, and organized chaos and fietsjungle. All sections start with the results of the fieldwork, and will be followed by a discussion of the theoretical concept used.

5.1 Habitus

This section addresses the hypothesis that locals have a habitus for cycling and foreigners do not. In order to examine this, this chapter is divided into three sections: the role of the home country, the meaning of the bike and cycling, and cycling ease. As mentioned before, this order is chosen because the home country influences people’s personal stance and opinion towards cycling, which can be expressed in their cycling ease (or struggles). Their cycling ease or unease can help explain the conflict on the road.

5.1.1 Role of the home country

‘What we learn as members of a society, in a specific social position, is literarily incorporated— absorbed into our bodies—and becomes our self.’ (Kuipers, 2013, p.20). Therefore, this section looks at the role people’s home country plays for cycling.

All Dutch respondents learned to ride a bike when they were a kid. Most of them did not remember why or when they exactly started, because they were so young and believed they ‘just’ had to. The 25-year-old Valentijn explained: ‘Ik denk dat ik vier was. Ja... omdat het gewoon onderdeel is van je ontwikkeling hier in Nederland, dat je leert fietsen. Het hoort er gewoon bij’. Often was mentioned that they had to learn because they live in the Netherlands. Nena, another 25-year-old respondent explained that she did not know how to ride a bike until she was seven years old. At that age she moved back to the Netherlands from Hungary, and needed to learn, in order to get to school. This shows the influence of the Netherlands on people’s choice for cycling.

Everyone was convinced about the fact that growing up in the Netherlands affected how early they started cycling. Jaira, a 25-year-old woman explained how self-evident it is: ‘Dat leer je gewoon op jonge leeftijd. Omdat iedereen dat doet ga je geen vragen stellen van ‘waarom moet ik leren rijden?’, want iedereen doet het. Je kunt je gewoon niet voorstellen dat je in Nederland wordt geboren en niet leert fietsen.’ Therefore it is no surprise that all respondent’s family members also ride a bike, with some exceptions, like Jaira who explained that only one of her grandmas does not cycle, because she lives in Curacao, and Valentijn’s father, because he works in another city than he lives in. Two respondents however, explained that not everyone in the Netherlands seems to participate. Luna, a 25-year-old pointed out to some projects to stimulate and teach cycling to migrants, and also Valentijn said: ‘Ik denk wel echt dat het in de Nederlandse cultuur hoort. Het is niet voor niks dat je allochtonen toch vaker een scooter ziet rijden of met het OV, dan dat ze de fiets pakken. Het zit er niet in bij hen ofzo.’ This confirms the importance of the national history for cycling (Pelzer, te Brömmelstroet, 2010; Stoffers, 2012; Oosterhout 2013), as crucial factor for the habitus: ‘Habitus is congealed history, absorbed into our bodies—our personal history, which, in turn, has been shaped by the history of the society of which we are part.’ (Kuipers, 2013, p.20).

start because they simply ‘had to’. Whereas ‘Most people in the Netherlands use a bicycle simply because this is what one does when going from one place to another’ (p.18), the respondents from other countries use the bike more for leisure purposes. Roxanne, a 21-year-old woman from Montreal explained: ‘I think it was quite late. I was maybe ten years old. All my friends had a bike and that was pretty much what we did when we had free time, we just rode around [..] for leisure.’ Of the questioned foreigners, only eight people have a bike at home, of which only one person uses it on a daily basis, for transport. The other seven respondents said they use it sometimes on the weekends to go to the park or mountains, or they actually never use it. The same applies to their family members: only five respondents said that some of their family members sometimes use a bike. Most of them explained that compared to the Netherlands, cycling is not that common in their country. This on its turn, can explain why they also do not cycle that much themselves, as ‘our self-evident, automatic, yet learned behavior, is partly determined by the country where we have grown up.’ (ibidem). Because none of the foreign countries is connected to cycling, the respondents also cycle less.

Besides sports and health, cycling was also connected to environmental and money issues by the foreigners. According to Rietveld and Daniel, in other countries, the bicycle is sometimes considered ‘a poor man’s mode’ (2004, p.532). This seems to be the case for the South-American respondents. The 18-year-old Brazilian respondent Francisco said, like his fellow 32-year-old country-woman and Argentinian neighbor, that cycling is a way of transport for the poor in their country. When asked whether he believes that affects people and withholds them from cycling, he answered: ‘For sure, I would say yes, because it doesn’t have a positive connotation like it has in Europe. In here, you are seen as a person that wants to help the planet and that actually cares about the environment and goes to a place faster, whereas in brazil you see it as ‘oh that person can’t afford a car’.’ Francisco accurately illustrated how class differences influence people’s choice for the bicycle. This can prevent wide adaptation of the bicycle in a country, as in the Netherlands, this can be understood ‘from the country’s homogeneity and high level of integration; […] and the small power

distance between classes.’ (p.24).

Multiple times foreign respondents also mentioned the fact that they are pleased to see the Dutch care so much about their health and environment. Alex, a 28-year-old man from Ukraine knows

why so many people in Amsterdam cycle, compared to other cities or countries: ‘I heard that there is only one reason, and I follow this reason, and that is that in the Netherlands everybody cares about

the ecology.’

When asking the Dutch respondents when and why they use their bike, they all answered a few times a week, for transport. The fact that it is healthy, is not mentioned much, or as often as the foreign respondents did. Valentijn explained, ‘Ik denk dat het niet een reden is voor mensen om te fietsen maar meer van ‘nou, dat is mooi meegenomen’ die beweging.’ The fact that the bike is better for the environment is also only mentioned by one Dutch respondent. This can be explained because cycling is engrained in the Dutch since they were very young. When they started cycling around the age of four, the environment was not taken into consideration.

Most local respondents do not even see the bike as a consideration, but as self-evident. Throughout the fifteen interviews with the local respondents, the word ‘gewoon’ was mentioned 499 times. According to Nena, cycling is something ‘dat iedereen doet en niet eens over nadenkt. Ik denk dat je in andere landen wel bewuster ervoor kiest om te gaan fietsen. In Nederland is het niet echt een keuze.’ This is in line with Kuipers, saying ‘If you want to go somewhere, you just take the bike. Everybody cycles. You wouldn’t know any better.’ (p.25). For the Dutch respondents it becomes more of a choice when the weather is really bad. Mostly with extreme rain, but also heavy wind or icy roads the Dutch respondents are more likely to think about public transport. Almost all of them mentioned that in case of bad weather, public transport options will be looked at, but not necessarily used. Often was complained about how smelly, crowded, slow or hot the public transport is. Therefore, some never actually use it, even when it rains really badly. Four respondents said they have never used public transport to go to their work. One of them, the 32-year-old Johan said, ‘Sowieso de aansluiting van hier naar Oost is niet fantastisch. Dan moet ik drie keer overstappen als ik de metro zou gebruiken, dat is finaal kut. En het is duur. En het is druk. En ik word misselijk in de tram omdat het te warm is.’ It seems that the advantages of the bike, quick, flexible and free, outweigh the rain. Moreover, Marlies connected cycling in the rain to the image it has in the Netherlands: ‘[..] een bikkelimago, dat iedereen met weer en wind op de fiets stapt. Niet van suiker zijn, maar gewoon gaan.’ In general, respondents thus tend to use their bike as much as possible. Walking often takes too

much time, and only one respondent has a car, which he almost never uses. Therefore, public transport is generally only used in case it is faster and/or easier than cycling. Or in the worst case, if their bike is broken.

5.1.2 Meaning of the bike and cycling

The previous section has shown the different image and use of the bicycle in the Netherlands and other countries. In the Netherlands, utilitarian cycling is common. This cannot be said about all countries. According to van Oijen et al. (2011, p.4), cycling is often seen as a lifestyle abroad, which means it can be used for distinction. This section will examine the personal motivations and preferences concerning the bike and cycling, shaped by the country of the respondents.

To start, the question ‘what kind of bike do you have?’ was asked to the Dutch respondents. This seemed difficult to answer. Brands were often unknown or not mentioned, and therefore seemed unimportant. They sometimes did not know how to describe it, other than color and condition. Notable was that almost all of them had a quite old bike, usually second hand and not in the best state (anymore). The conditions of their bike were described as: ‘hij gaat bijna instorten’ (Anna), ‘Hij is zo’n beetje uit elkaar aan het trillen’ (Ole) ‘Gammel bakkie’ (Lauren) or ‘Aan het einde van zijn latijn’ (Nena). Frequently they spoke of broken brakes, lights, mudguards or other parts. It was usually not repaired because it was not considered necessary, people were lazy and/or did not want to spend much money on their bike. Nevertheless, they were all very satisfied with it. The fact that their bike does not look good, did not matter that much. On the contrary, often was explained that it was better to have a quite dilapidated-looking bike in Amsterdam, so it would be less likely to be stolen. Only one respondent had a more expensive, good quality bike. The 27-year-old Thom bought a Veloretti when he got his first salary and moved to a new house with a storage room on the ground floor. This was a requirement for him, because all his previous bikes got stolen in Amsterdam. However, even though he had a relatively expensive bike, he also explained that having a crappy bike, belongs to the culture in Amsterdam: ‘Het moet gewoon nonchalant zijn. Je moet niet komen met een fiets die helemaal perfect eruitziet, met zoveel versnellingen. Dan probeer je het te veel, weet je. Dat is raar. Dat hoort niet hier bij ons. Ik vond ook dat mijn Veloretti ook gewoon een beetje nonchalant

moest zijn, maar wel mooi.’ This illustrates the egalitarian culture in the Netherlands, and how ‘little ostentatious displays of status’ (Kuipers, p.24), also applies to cycling.

This is in line with the observations. Mainly younger people, to which the target group belongs, had bikes that were not in the best state. Even one man around his 30’s was cycling on Spuistraat during a Thursday morning traffic hour without a saddle, sitting on his back carrier bending forward to reach his steering wheel. People (that seemed) over 35 years old were also often seen with a bike that was not in a perfect state, but slightly less. According to the Dutch respondents, the fact that younger people usually have a less good bike than people older than them, is because they have more money, and/or kids. For example Isabel noted that she would like to buy a better, nicer bike when she will have the first salary of her new job, and Luna explained that now she has a baby (of six weeks old), she would like to buy one that is in a better state and safer for her son: ‘Ik kom nu dus in een andere levensfase dat ik gewoon... ja, eerst had ik een fiets voor studenten, afgetrapt en het maakt niet uit, maar nu als ik hem [the baby] echt op de fiets ga nemen, gebruik ik het meer als een degelijk vervoersmiddel.’

The foreign respondents also did not care that much about how their bike looks like. They emphasized more that everything must work properly. For Bernardo, a 29-year-old man from Brazil, practicality is essential. When asked whether it is important if his bike looks good, he answered: ‘Yeah, yeah, but I think it just needs to work properly. Yeah, the brakes working... the bike in a good state!’ Also Lynn, a 18-year-old Chinese girl living in Spain answered to this question: ‘Eh I mean, if possible, yes. But I mean it’s not such a big deal. It is important that everything works well.’ To have their bike in a good condition is thus more important for the foreigners than for the locals. This could be explained by the fact that the local’s cycling skills are better, and therefore they can easier adapt to or feel comfortable on (different) bikes with some defects.

The groups also feel quite the same about the importance of themselves looking good on the bike. To the majority of both groups, this is not really important. Some Dutch respondents claimed this was actually the first time they even thought about looking good on the bike. For both groups, it is not necessarily important to look good on the bike, but it is important to look good in public in general. The 20-year-old Julia from Barcelona explained: ‘I want to look nice on the bicycle as I want to look

nice walking, you know’, and also Johan said: ‘Ik vind het belangrijk dat ik er goed uitzie. Of dat op de fiets is of niet, dat maakt verder niet zo veel uit.’

It seems that the foreign respondents do not especially want to look good on the bike, (or) to distinguish themselves. This is surprising, because cycling is not that common in their countries, which makes being a cyclist, being different. However, the 19-year-old George from England explained that it is a different case here, than at home. In Amsterdam, it is not important for him to look good on the bike. As everyone cycles there, it is common. In England however, it is important to him, because: ‘When you’re cycling at home you don’t want to be dressed up fully in cycling gear, you want to look like normal. [..] Here it’s a lot more casual.’ In contrast to him, the 30-year-old Heather from the United States, does want to match the stereotype at home: ‘In Vermont and the US, I feel like people that are on bikes tend to be perceived as fit, as long as they kind of match that physic. And I feel like I value that image more than someone who looks chique.’ In this case, it seems to look more like a lifestyle, that she wants to pursue. According to Van Oijen et al., a cycling lifestyle (in countries outside the Netherlands) comes with a set of attitudes with regards to sustainability, political interest and physical effort (2011, p.4). Sustainability and sports often came up in the interviews with the foreign respondents. Only Heather connected it to politics: ‘I think the US has kind of a hippy image. [..] People tend to identify more left-leaning liberal ideal people as ones that ride bikes.’

Clothing can thus play a role in whether people want to be associated or dissociated with a certain cycling lifestyle. However, the 28-year-old Sofia from Buenos Aires, who was wearing sport shoes and leggings during the interview, said she wears these sporting clothes because they are necessary for cycling: ‘I never wear jeans, always this, because I’m doing exercises!’ The fact that other people in Amsterdam do not wear special clothes for cycling, surprised her: ‘Yeah I just saw a woman with high heels. I was like... okay...?’

The locals did not focus on clothing when answering the question whether it is important to them to look good on their bike. For the foreign respondents, cycling is more an activity, or goal, rather than a means to get to their activity or goal. Therefore, the clothes they wear, tend to be chosen for this activity. For the locals, the clothes that are worn on the bike, are worn at the destination as well. Instead of clothing, the local respondents focused more on their posture on the bike, when

thinking about looking good while cycling. A few respondents who said not to care much about how they look on their bike, did say that they would like to sit nice and straight. Ole even connected this to the Dutch identity. He said: ‘Ik heb het idee dat ik rechtop wil zitten. In vergelijking met Berlijn: daar hebben ze van die brede stuurtjes en bijna racefiets-achtige normale fietsen en dus zit iedereen gekromd lelijk op zijn fiets. Dat vind ik niet cool. Ik wil wel gewoon, zoals een echte Hollander rechtop zitten.’ Likewise, Lauren said that sometimes she feels like she is positioned on her bike like a grandma, which she does not like, and also Valentijn explained that he likes the fact that on his ‘new’ bike, he is sitting a lot sturdier than on his previous girl’s bike. Kuipers also connected posture to the habitus, noting that the Dutch cyclists are ‘sitting upright, rather than bent over the steering wheel in the manner of sports cyclists.’ (Kuipers, 2013, p.20).

5.1.3 Cycling ease and habit

The first two sections have explained how the country a person grows up in can influence how people think about cycling (5.1.1), and subsequently whether and why they use a bike (5.1.2). This section focuses on how this is expressed in their cycling skills. Following Kuipers: ‘We see this incorporation in the ease with which Dutch cyclists move through busy traffic. [..] One realizes that this is not self-evident when seeing another person lacking this ease, like the clumsy tourists on their rental bikes in the busy Amsterdam traffic.’ (p.20).

The fact that the bicycle is used by the Dutch respondents multiple times a week, and by some even multiple times a day since they were a little kid, explains why they all feel comfortable on their bike. Similar to Kuipers (2013), who regards cycling a second nature, some Dutch respondents compared cycling to walking. So does the 26-year-old Aaron: ‘Ik voel eigenlijk niet echt een verschil of ik nou op een fiets zit of dat ik wandel. Zo vanzelfsprekend is het.’ It seems like a process of ‘muscle memory’ has taken place, where the brain automated certain physical movements. Whereas cycling required focus and conscious thinking in the beginning, when the brain has ‘saved’ these movements, cycling can become simple and automatic (Vogel, 2018). This ease and comfortableness was also clearly observed. With a quite nonchalant look in their eyes, some people cycled with one or even two