Marina Kyriakou
Master Thesis
23.06.2014
Perceptions of the influence
of bottom-up cycling initiatives
as a path to achieve
mobility transition
-a case study of Nicosia, Cyprus
Supervisor: dr. Julio Soria Lara
Second reader: dr. Stan Majoor
Student: Marina Kyriakou
student number: 10635165
Abstract
In recent decades, urban settings face the challenge of how to ensure an environmentally, economically and socially sustainable future, and seek to create space for transition and innovation. In the field of mobility planning, this transition requires a change in the way transportation professionals approach problems as well as in the way individuals behave as citizens and consumers. Academics argue that “bottom-up” urbanism can effectively respond to societal needs.
Under this context, this research seeks to explore the potential of bottom up initiatives advocating cycling in making a significant change in mobility patterns and in cultivating a more sustainable future for transportation. To address this topic a study using Q Methodology was conducted in order to identify the patterns of perceptions about the future impacts of bottom-up efforts in cycling through the case of Nicosia, Cyprus. The mapping of perceptions focused on a group of initiators of the cycling initiatives and a control group consisted by the inhabitants of Nicosia. The similarities and differences between the discourses of the participants were analyzed in order to provide insights for the role of bottom-up initiatives in mobility transition. The findings of the research proved that most of the participants perceive bottom-up cycling initiatives as contributors in progressing in mobility issues. Nevertheless some hesitations about their effectiveness show that a continuous effort and support from other stakeholders is crucial.
-Abstract
_____________________________________________________
1
- Preface
______________________________________________________
3
1. Introduction
_________________________________________________
5
2. Theoretical and conceptual framework
__________________________
9
2.1. Transition in mobility and social change
_______________________
9
2.2. Bicycling: a global urban trend
______________________________
11
2.3. Relation between bicycle ridership and the planning context
_______
12
2.4. Mobility culture and individual factors determining modal choice
___
13
2.5. Bottom-up initiatives: a “social movements” perspective
__________
15
2.6. Conclusion of literature review: conceptual framework
__________
18
3. Introduction in the context of Nicosia
__________________________
21
3.1. Why Nicosia?
____________________________________________
21
3.2. Background of transportation planning in Cyprus
_________________
22
3.3. Policies, planning agenda, political support and funding
___________
23
3.4. Physical characteristics of Nicosia
____________________________
25
3.5. Mobility patterns and mobility culture in Nicosia
_________________
26
3.6. The future of cycling and bottom-up initiatives in the capital
__________
28
4. Empirical Research Design
___________________________________
35
4.1. Q Methodology
___________________________________________
37
4.2. Who are the respondents and why?
___________________________
38
4.3. A theory-guided framework to compare perceived scenarios
________
43
5. Patterns of perceptions
______________________________________
51
5.1. Induced Scenario
_________________________________________
51
5.1.1. Discourses on the Induced Scenario within the group of cyclists___51
5.1.2. Discourses on the Induced Scenario within the control group________56
5.1.3. Induced scenario: Cyclists VS control group____________________60
5.2. Desirable scenario
________________________________________
65
5.2.1. Discourses on the Desirable Scenario within the group of cyclists____65
5.2.2. Induced scenario VS Desirable scenario according to cyclists______70
6. Conclusions:
_______________________________________________
75
6.1. Final discussion on the map of perceptions
___________________
75
6.2. Towards the understanding of the influence of bottom-up initiatives
in transport planning
______________________________________
78
-References
___________________________________________________
80
- Appendices
__________________________________________________
86
Preface
This thesis concludes my master year in Urban and Regional Planning at the University of Amsterdam. Through my research I explored two topics for which I am fascinated about. The first one is the bottom-up initiatives, which is a very interesting strategy and process allowing to citizens to be active and contribute in the making of their cities and lives in general. The second one is the bicycle and more precisely urban cycling. Being born and raised in Cyprus I only considered car as a real means of transport. After my experience from living abroad in Europe, I have realized the benefits of cycling in the wider society and quality of life. The use of Nicosia in my case study shows my interest in sharing my acquired knowledge and experience with my compatriots, both citizens and experts. The fieldwork was an opportunity for me to view my familiar environment through the eyes of the urban planner!
I would like to thank some persons for their support and advice since the beginning of this thesis until its finalization. The first person I want to thank is my supervisor Julio Soria-Lara for his time, his guidance and feedback, and for helping me improve my research. Secondly, I would like to thank the participants of my research for their time and for accepting to provide the necessary information; the cyclists, the group of inhabitants of Nicosia and the urban planner Anna Caramondani. Moreover, I feel the need to thank my family that gave me this opportunity to study this master course and has supported me from a distance. Finally, I want to thank my friends for being there for me whenever I needed them. Special thanks go to the team of The Three Hundreds / Tα Τρία Εκατο - #3x100 for inspiring me with their trans-European cycling ride (https:// www.facebook.com/thethreehundreds/info).
1.Introduction
The domain of transportation is experiencing a transitional era, where sustainability is sought at a local and global scale, and innovative approaches are needed in order to confront the irreducible uncertainty and the challenges of urban mobility (Bertolini, 2007; Geels et al., 2012; Switzer et al., 2013). The growing phenomenon of transport users pushing the urban agenda towards bike-friendly cities worldwide (Delgado, 1997) proves that the required innovation is not only technological. Innovations of societal nature are crucial in order to change transit options for urbanites (Ross et al., 2012; Aldred, 2013;) and lead to a mobility transition (Switzer et al, 2013).
It is however urgent to consider the context where bottom up movements take action, since policies and regulatory frameworks may hinder these cycling movements (Rietveld & Daniel, 2004; Blickstein, 2010; Oldenziel & de la Bruhèze, 2011; Pucher, 2011; Ross et al., 2012). Furthermore, urban environments with short distances, well connected networks, density and land use mix, favoring climates and flat topography are also influential for a shift in active commuting and cycling (Moudon et al. 2005; Winters et al. 2010; Pucher et al. 2011; Madsen, 2013).
Nevertheless, academics generally neglect to assess the internal dynamics of bottom-up initiatives (Blickstein & Hanson, 2001; Batterbury, 2003; Fraser et al., 2006; Goodman et al., 2013). There are different types of groups advocating cycling, varying from soft user innovations to more rebellious movements or deriving from various motivations besides commuting. Cycling initiatives vary also in their scope, depending on whether the initiators wish to satisfy their own personal interests or the interests of the broader community. Thusly, the diversity of motivations behind cycling initiatives reflects the importance of considering individual preferences which determine the modal choice to bike (Jensen, 2008; van Acker et al., 2013).
The contribution of bottom-up initiatives in achieving mobility transition and change the policies and mobility patterns in a context are in the center of the research. My assumption is that both the underlying motivations and the type of action of the cycling initiatives paired with the characteristics of the general context determine the likelihood of achieving a cultural change. Social movements can be a mechanism of transition, yet under certain conditions which enable a cultural switch, such as a bike friendly urban environment and a supportive planning framework, but also a supportive public opinion. Apart from the perceptions of the cyclists themselves on their potential influence, the aggregate of individual attitudes and beliefs of the rest of the inhabitants of a city are of interest in the study. The research question guiding my thesis is the following:
“What are the patterns of perceptions between cyclists and the general public on the influence of bottom up cycling initiatives as a path to achieving a transition in mobility?”
The investigation of this question is based on the hypothesis expecting cyclists and general public to have different viewpoints on the effectiveness of bottom up initiatives. In order to answer to the main question, four sub-questions will be operationalized:
1. Who are the involved parties in bottom-up initiatives whose perceptions towards the cycling movement need to be understood?
2. How can we grasp the different motivations underlying cycling movements and the different focuses of change?
3. What are the similarities and differences between the perceptions of the cyclists and the general public about the induced results of the cycling initiatives?
4. What are the patterns of perceptions within the cyclists’ group about the desirable results of their efforts?
The academic relevance of my study comes from the fact that literature focusing on bottom up movements in the field of transportation planning is still in its infancy and this new trend is a new source of sustainable transport innovations that needs to receive more academic attention (Ross et al., 2012). The research has an exploratory character, whilst existing knowledge is combined with empirical research in order to gain insights and familiarity for further investigation in bottom up initiatives and mobility transition. A technique known as Q-methodology was used in order to uncover the perceptions of cyclists and non-cyclists and identify their discourses about the potential of bottom-up initiatives. The topic will be explored using the case of Nicosia, demonstrating surprisingly low levels of cycling for its size (Dutch Cycling Embassy, 2014). The island of Cyprus and its cities have hardly gained the attention of academics and practitioners in the urban planning field, but wrongfully because it has a unique character and history that dissociates it from the rest of Europe. The recent increase in cycling advocate teams shows that social innovation is taking shape and deserves attention.
Chapter 2 reviews literature and presents the existing academic and scientific knowledge associated to the topic and the relevant conceptual and theoretical framework. Afterwards, the empirical research commences with the introductory chapter 3 in the case of Nicosia. The fourth chapter outlines the empirical research design describing the Q methodology technique and replying to methodological aspects of the research. The fifth section of the thesis concerns the patterns of perceptions identified in regards to an induced and a desirable scenario, and finally Chapter 6 consists of some concluding remarks and future research topics.
2. Theoretical and Conceptual Framework
2.1. Transition in mobility and social change
The current urban settings full of uncertainty and complexity offers some space for new solutions and visions for how to deal with the current crisis in the domains of economy, polity (Chang, 2007) and environment (Lefevre et al, 1996). Changes in economic and sociodemographic characteristics of a city are shaping the urban transport and land use, and vice-versa, urban transport and land use are the physical support of these changes (Bertolini, 2007). In a time where sustainability is at stake more than ever, a change in the way we act in the transport field is needed (Banister, 2005). Conventional approaches, such as the traditional “predict and provide”, are no longer adequate to confront the irreducible uncertainty and the challenges of urban mobility. Thus, transformative change is needed in order to understand the social and technological dynamics and make mobility systems more resilient and adaptable (Bertolini, 2007; Switzer et al., 2013). How might we become more effective in moving
towards sustainable transport behaviors (Geels et al., 2012)? This issue gained the
attention of many authors.
Portney (2005) has put forth the idea that a sustainable city is developed in a way to meet the present needs of its citizens without compromising the ability of the future generations in meeting their own needs. Banister (2007) has outlined the areas where measures must be taken in order to achieve sustainable transport; technology and pricing, regulations, land use developments and finally information (social pressure, awareness raising etc). Clearly, sustainability involves a shift in perceptions of the problems and the framing of ideas along with a change in the material practices (Blickstein & Hanson, 2001; Geels et al. 2012). The work of Blickstein and Hanson (2001) focuses on how people will be convinced to shift towards sustainable transport practices. First of all, we need to insist on the interconnection of scales regarding decisions and actions; from local to regional, national and global. Then, it is important to identify the most and the less sustainable transportation practices and give incentives to people to shift from less-sustainable to more-sustainable.
When assessing the means that could lead to sustainability (Ness et al., 2007), the role of civic involvement is yet an integral part (Portney, 2005). On the one hand participatory programs are necessary tools for a durable and operational definition of sustainability. The inhabitants of a city are instrumental in the effort to enact and regulate policies for the promotion of sustainability. On the other hand, civic engagement itself is a fundamental aspect of a socially viable city overcoming political and social impediments to sustainability (Portney, 2005).
We should be able though to go beyond the implementation of participatory pro-grams in order to construct a feeling of collective responsibility. Banister (2007) has
pointed out the imperative of making transport policies more acceptable from both the public and the politicians and the need for a change in behavior resulting in the support of the various transport stakeholders. The open and active involvement of all the concerned parties is evidently more effective than the conventional method of passive persuasion. We can only start debating about sustainable mobility as soon as we form coalitions including experts, academics and practitioners, policy makers and activists (Banister, 2008).
Geels, Kemp, Duudley and Lyons (2012) argue that the uncertain future of cities is calling for a new analytical perspective and an innovative approach for analyzing change processes. Therefore, transition studies and theories are introduced in the field of transport planning in order to understand the transitions in this complex socio-technical system of mobility (Switzer et al., 2013) and clarify what ways lead to sustainability. The book “Automobility in Transition? A socio-technical analysis of
Sustainable Transport” (Geels et al., 2012) aims to overcome the division in transport
studies between technical perspective and behavioral. The “transition theory” concerns evolutionary processes aligned on multiple levels using various disciplines from engineering, planning, economics and psychology to cultural studies, business studies, innovation studies, political science and sociology. A new alternative approach to achieve a transition in mobility requires innovative way of thinking both the reality as it is and the desirability for the city futures (Banister, 2008). Mobility transition is the change leading to a new system state that privileges different and more sustainable practices in the mobility field (Switzer et al, 2013). This transition encompasses the idea that there are certain ways and conditions under which changes in different elements may come to reinforce each other in a larger, coherent, long-term transformation in mobility patterns towards a sustainable future (Switzer et al. 2013).
Blickstein and Hanson (2001) drew attention on the central role of bicycle transportation in the path towards sustainability. Citizen groups such as the Critical Mass movement (Blickstein & Hanson, 2001), contribute in the sustainability goal by creating new communities and expanding activist networks beyond the local scales. The environmental and financial crises invite the people to take the control and the responsibility by becoming both consumers and producers of their future (Manietes, 2001). Even in the now-bike-friendly Netherlands during the postwar period the car ownership increased, the roads were widened for motor vehicles and bicycle infrastructure has been removed (Covington, 2013). However, the critical point for bicycle’s future in transportation policy came in the early 70’s when the outraged reaction of the population due to the dangerous street conditions along with the oil crisis forced the government policies to actively promote bicycle use again. New social movements standing for democracy and equality and fighting for environmental justice seem to be indispensable in achieving a change (Blickstein & Hanson, 2001).
2.2. Bicycling: a global urban trend
Several countries of the western world have been enjoying a bicycling “boom” over the past two decades with growing interest in sustainable mobility along with increasing levels of cycling (Pucher et al, 1999). This cycling renaissance is the result of the implementation of a wide range of infrastructure and policies in order to improve and create a safe environment for cyclists. Bike lanes, traffic calming, bike parking, bike-public transport programs, bike sharing and other measures exemplify this global trend. Academics have illustrated examples from the Unites States and Canada, demonstrating how cycling is being implemented in the agenda of so-far car-oriented cities (Pucher et al., 1999; Pucher et al. 2011). Also, London is one of the European cities that attracted the attention of academia (Steinbach et al., 2011).
A look through the literature related to bicycle, can easily explain the big turn in urban and mobility planning towards bike-friendly cities, after a few decades of being a “forgotten mode” under the shadow of the car (Blickstein & Hanson, 2001). Bicycling is a pleasurable commuting and recreational activity, thusly, the manifold character of the literature on bicycling is not surprising. Many authors have expanded on the growing awareness of the benefits of cycling on health (Terzano & Morckel, 2011; Rabl & de Nazelle, 2012) but also its efficiency in terms of financial costs from the positive impacts on noise and congestion (Hoffman et al., 2014). The quantification of the significant impacts of cycling has helped policy makers and urban planners in their work. Furthermore, cycling is considered to be the only environmental friendly means of transport together with walking, being energy efficient and nonpolluting (Rabl & de Nazelle, 2012). It is also more convenient for door-to-door service and cyclists suffer less from traffic congestion and parking problems (Blickstein & Hanson, 2001). So the concerns over the damaging consequences of traffic jams, the climate change and sedentary lifestyles have led planners to encourage the use of bicycle as the mainstream commuting means (Larsen & El-Geneidy, 2011). Nevertheless, cycling has some disadvantages compared to motorized transport such as the exposure to bad weather, the lack of possibility to transport large goods and the physical effort that it needs from the user (Madsen, 2013).
Many scholars have sought to enumerate the rationales behind cycling (Jensen, 2008; Steinbach et al., 2011). Jensen (2008) inspired by the Danish context defined four fundamental motives underlying biking; the recreational practice, the everyday life commuting, the identity marker and the political statement. Steinbach et al. (2011) propose his own four kinds of cycling, namely cycling as identity, the cycling habitus, cycling for health and cycling for minimizing costs.
Being one of the classified rationales of biking, the notion of identity has been discussed by many academic authors. Steinbach et al. (2011) explores the meaning of cycling and its resonance across different urban, gendered, ethnic and class identities
by studying the case of London. Green et al. (2012) have also explored the attachment of mobility discourses to the responsibilities of a ‘good citizen”. Car driving is currently framed as immoral while cycling is laudable and characterizes a conscious citizen. Aldred (2013) also talks about a “shared group identity” to which cycling advocates commit and redefine existing cycling identities. Finally, Aldred (2010) has associated cycling to both independence and interdependence; two aspects that are beneficial for the individual and collective making. On the one hand, she considers cycling as a form of auto-mobility since it is an individually controlled movement. At the same time, she believes that cycling encourages a particular articulation of citizenship and provides societal benefits. Thus, Aldred (2010) used the concept of the “cycling citizen” in order to explore the relation of the self to its natural and social environments.
2.3. Relation between bicycle ridership and the planning
context
Under the heading of planning context the historical and planning background is included along with the public policies and a number of site and marker factors. Thus, not only the planning practice is taken in consideration but also the political will, the funding, as well as the physical features of the context like the topography and climate which influence the planners’ work.
Academics generally assess the internal dynamics of bottom up transportation movements, but it is also urgent to consider the context where they take action, since local and national policies may hinder these movements (Ross et al., 2012). The study of Ross, Mitchel and May (2012) offers an understanding of the conditions that support grassroots innovations in transport as well as the barriers that prevent their success. Key barriers emerged that were associated with local and national government policy like the system complexity and the multiple, and changing, stakeholders. Since bicycle use varies substantially between countries and municipalities, it is important to explore the relationship between bicycle ridership and municipal policies (Rietveld and Daniel, 2004). Blickstein (2010) argues that legal and regulatory framework may suppress cycling initiatives. Low et al. (2003) attempted to understand the institutional and discursive barriers to sustainable transport, and their findings are also applicable for cycling policies. Therefore, supportive policies are essential as well as a broader embedding in bicycle culture and in politics (Rietveld & Daniel, 2004; Oldenziel & de la Bruhèze, 2011; Pucher, 2011). Apart from political support and commitment, an additional requirement is rendering policies acceptable from the public through information, marketing and engagement techniques (Banister, 2007). Burby (2003) reminds that the involvement of all relevant stakeholders in decision and plan making would guarantee the incorporation of local knowledge in the projects. Moreover, the percentage of cycling in commuting habits is conditioned by policy measures in
techno-The academic world has also associated a variety of built environment factors with the bike-ability of a city, and like Winters et al. (2010) indicate, the spatial context has a significant influence on travel decisions, especially for bicycling. These factors include the commuting distance between locations, the network layout and the connectivity between streets, the residential density and the land use mix, the available bicycle infrastructure and facilities and their degree of safety (Moudon et al. 2005; Winters et al. 2010; Pucher et al. 2011; Madsen, 2013) . Small and compact cities are proved to be more acquiescent to cycling because of the accessibility of many destinations in a shorter time, the low traffic congestion and less physical challenges like bridges (Pucher, 1999).
Many scholars assessing the factors of an urban and geographical context that favor or prevent an increase in cycling has mentioned physical features such as topography and climate. Extreme heat and humidity and hilly topography discourage cycling and contribute in maintaining high levels of car ridership (Pucher et al. 1999; Ortuzar et al. 2000; Rietveld and Daniel, 2004 ; Moudon et al. 2005 ; Winters et al. 2010 ; Pucher et al. 2011).
2.4. Mobility culture and individual factors determining modal
choice
Mobility culture is a significant notion in the field of transportation since individual factors and historical facts determine the travel behavior of user groups. Möser and Lavenir (2003) associate the term of culture to the one of technology, since the cultural representations and values that social groups attribute to tools and technological products are significant throughout time. This reasoning explains that the way citizens perceive and use mobility technologies are well embedded in the broader culture of their society. “All the forms of mobility(individual or collective) have in the fact common
that they associate technical systems (networks, means of transportation) with systems of values and representation” (Möser &Lavenir, 2003). Cultural contexts shape the
way in which each mode of travel is experienced and practiced (Pelzer, 2010).
Pelzer (2010) views mobility culture consisting of four dimensions which interact at an individual and social level; the micro-dimension of experience and meaning, the micro-dimension of material practices, the macro-dimensions of mobility culture and the macro-dimension of the physical environment. The dimensions show that the culture of mobility is both socially and materially constructed, fact that is often neglected by practitioners trying to influence people’s travel choices. In literature we can distinguish two types of mobility cultures that drew the attention of scholars; the car dominant culture and the bicycle culture. The first is characterized by a system that supports and increases the use of cars (Pelzer, 2010). This dominant culture of
«auto-mobility” relies on social patterns that are spatially linked to places of habitation and work, and are reflected in the built environment (Sheller, 2011). Currently, we perceive bicycling as a symbolic and ideological resistance to the dominant car mobility. Bicycle culture is echoed through this phrase from Pelzer’s work “Bicycling has become
natural, because it is part of the upbringing in a lot of Dutch households and embedded in institutions and standards”. A lack of tradition of cycling for utilitarian purposes
impedes cycling to become a daily urban travel means (Pucher et al., 1999). Deeper cultural shifts are critical in changing socially and culturally embedded practices of the car, the bicycle or the mass transit (Sheller, 2011).
Some studies have attempted to explore the interaction between psychological factors and the choice to bike (Tertolen et al, 1998; van Acker et al., 2010; Larsen & El-Geneidy, 2011; van Acker et al., 2013; Sigurdardottir et al. 2013; Fernandez-Heredia et al,2014). Van Acker et al. (2013) argue that the daily travel behavior results from a decision hierarchy ranging from the short-term choices on daily trips to long-term decisions related to lifestyle. The latter reminds the connotation of travel mode and identity, since the lifestyle of a user informs about their ideologies and attitudes. Nonetheless, this research has also insisted on the fact that individuals with the same lifestyle, thus belonging to the same socio-economic homogeneous group, can also have different travel behaviors. The explanation for this is given to the distinct perceptions, attitudes and preferences of each individual towards his way of traveling. A person evaluates the built environment, the activities they wish to undertake and
(2014) also focused on psycho-social reasons, emotions and feelings making bicycle eligible and suggest that understanding intentions, attitudes and perceptions of people will lead planners to make more successful policies (see Figure 2).
2.5. Bottom-up initiatives: a “social movements” perspective
Many authors argue that along with technological innovation, ones of a societal nature are needed for entering a transition era in mobility planning (Pflieger et al.,2009; Ross et al., 2012; Aldred, 2013; Moyo, 2013). Today there is a growing phenomenon of cyclists pushing the urban agenda towards bike-friendly cities worldwide (Delgado, 1997). Individual transport users and/or communities seek solutions to urban problems, inspired from their personal or societal concerns. This trend is a new source of sustainable transport innovations needs to receive more attention by academics in the following years (Ross et al., 2012). Bottom-up initiatives in urban issues involve the action of organized groups to induce a change and influence their opponents or “awake” other citizens. Different types of bottom up initiatives advocating cycling exist; varying from soft interventions and networks, for example bicycle flash-mobs or the World Carfree Network (Worldcarfree.net,2014), to more rebellious movements, such as the Critical Mass (Delgado, 1997; Blickstein & Hanson, 2001). The pioneer Critical Mass cycling rides have inspired a number of other bicycle movements that range from political movements to campaigns increasing awareness such as the Critical Manners rides encouraging riders to obey traffic laws. Pedaling revolution encompasses both organized and more disordered elements (Buckley, 2010). On the one hand, cycling can be a form of political activism, when a well-organized public coalition motivated by local circumstances, gets on bikes in order to protest for a certain cause like for environmental causes (Scheidt et al., 1992; Pucher et al., 1999; Buckley, 2010). On the other hand, grassroots movements may express small scale niche experiments in innovating local transport, by improving their habits as transport users. (Pucher et al., 1999 ; Pflieger et al., 2009; Ross et al. 2012, Aldred, 2013 ; Moyo, 2013;).The metaphor of critical mass is refereeing to the presence of a group of participants adopting an innovative way of action and with their time, money and other resources seek to provide and product a public good. These idealistic organizers fostering mass action try to bring people together and communicate to them what should be their true interests (Oliver, et al., 1985). Moreover, the research of Scheidt, Wilson and Sten (1992) illustrate activism as well-organized coalitions and groups, who are motivated by local circumstances and use their creativity and skills to take over actions for the sake of the community and to promote or impede change on a specific level. Furthermore, the concept of social innovation expresses a new solution to a social problem which is more effective, efficient, sustainable or just, than existing solutions
(Ross et al., 2012). Grassroots movements are a good example of this kind of innovation which is more important at the level of the society as a whole rather than at the level of individuals. This concept can be associated to the one of user innovation which refers to innovations that originate from consumers or end users rather than from experts of supplier organizations or authorities. The aforementioned concepts are necessary in understanding the different kinds of initiatives that exist in the mobility field. These concepts can be explained through the notion of self-organized groups that was introduced by Boonstra and Boelens (2011); “initiatives that originate in civil society itself, via autonomous community-based networks of citizens outside government control and participate in developing the urban fabric”.
Top down approaches treat sustainability as a matter for the experts, while the bottom-up approach involves ordinary citizens (Portney, 2005). Citizen control is a powerful position for the inhabitants of a city according to the eight-rung ladder of participation of Arnstein (1969). Marwell et al. (1988) were also interested in the investigation of the social ties within grassroots groups and outline their characteristic profiles. Interdependence, the absence of complete independence is an interesting characteristic in the social process of the bottom-up movements from a sociological point of view (Oliver et al., 1985). Also in the domain of collective action and urban transformation, Kirkman et al. (2012) have investigated the role of individual responsibility, in terms of actions and decisions, through the case of Atlanta BeltLine’s grassroots movement.
In all the different nuances of initiatives, cycling movements meet the definition of social movements as they are “networks of informal interactions between a plurality of individuals, groups or associations, engaged in a political or cultural conflict, on the basis of a shared collective identity” Diani and Bison (2004). Or as Aberle(1966) defines it, the social movements are “organized efforts of citizens to effect a change in the face of resistance or apathy by other actors” (Aberle, 1966). So, the social movements theory is appropriate in the discussion about bottom-up initiatives, since is explains from a social viewpoint how the civil society organizes itself autonomously and takes action in order to “survive”. The members or initiators of a social group are considered by Aberle and his theory as a “deprived” group of people that begin from the marginal niche to reach the larger social framework. The context in which a social movement occurs determines partially the character of the movement as it rests on how evolutionary or resistant the society is and on what obstacles they confront and how tremendous these are.
Aberle (1966) attempted to classify social movements by referring to two dimensions; first, the dimension of the locus of the change sought and second, the dimension of the
amount of change sought. The former is concerned by whether the movement aims
movements. According to Aberle, the combination of these two dimensions gives birth to four types of social movements. The first type is the alterative, aiming for a minor change at the level of the individual. The second is the redemptive also focusing in individuals but for a total change. The third type is the reformative which aims at a partial change in supra-individual systems. Finally, the fourth type of social movement is the transformative or revolutionary, striving for a radical change in supra-individual levels. The work of Aberle explains that any social movement can change type in due course as probable elements of one type of movement can be found to the other. Moreover, a movement stops being one when it succeeds its goal and turns into the establishment.
Aldred (2013) also attempted the exploration and positioning of cycling movements within the social movement literature. She demonstrated the debate about what cycling movements actually do; are cyclists rational political actors who make specific
demands or they communicate new visions of the world, constructing new shared identities? Through the illustration of the Londoners on Bikes group she sought to
provide insights on the potential of cycling advocacy in effecting changes in policy and practice. Therefore, my thesis contributes in gaining more insights in this area of research.
Obviously, existing scientific and academic knowledge in the area of social movements and innovation in planning gives evident proof about the variety and types of bottom up initiatives. My research aims to go a step further and explore the perception of people of these kinds of social movements. The pioneer Critical Mass cycling initiative is referred to as a form of protest, a street theater or a social party on wheels (Blickstein & Hanson, 2001). However, motorists around the world express their dislike towards the “Critical Massholes” that are rather considered as problem than a solution (Chicagonow.com, 2014). A part of the urban population perceives these groups as “hipsters and other cycling morons” with “illegal, selfish and
society-undermining behavior”. They view the organized rides in a negative way because of
the Critical Massholes taking over the city streets and ruining people’s daily life. This causes problems of road rage and affects negatively the goodwill of motorists that were potential bike users. The reaction in question proves that the perception of other citizens of the cycling initiatives and their influence should be investigated in order to take a proactive attitude towards the issue.
2.6. Conclusion of Literature review: conceptual framework
Academic and scientific theory from five areas related to the thesis topic has been reviewed; the mobility transition and social change, the bicycling as a current global trend in cities all over the world, the impact of the general context on the levels of cycling, the mobility culture and the role of individual preferences, and finally a sociological viewpoint of bottom-up movements. Concepts and ideas found in the literature will guide the structure and the focus of the empirical study, both for the presentation of the case of Nicosia as for the design of the research.3.Introduction in the context of Nicosia
3.1. Why Nicosia?
The study explores one single case, Nicosia, the capital of Cyprus because it meets the conditions for challenging and extending the urban cycling theory due to its unique particularities (Yin, 1994). On the one hand it is an extreme or deviant case since Cyprus is only a small island but holds one of the first positions in car ownership and other modes of transport are virtually inexistent (Livadiotes, 2013). The aim of exploring the case of Nicosia is to obtain information on an unusual case as the few studies focusing on cycling initiatives have been carried out either in North American context or in metropolitan milieus such as London, and they do not necessarily provide externally valid results for smaller urban environments. On the other hand, it is expected that the findings of the research can expand the current knowledge by obtaining unprecedented conclusions, and enhance the discussion of the potential of bottom up initiatives in a transport context of a smaller scale. Furthermore, mapping perceptions demands producing context dependent knowledge (Flyvbjerg, 2006) in order to provide a complete image of the context and highlight the similarities and differences of viewpoints on the same setting. The single-case study of Nicosia is suited to identify whether it is a “black swan” case as it is expected, or the closer examination will maybe prove that it is a “white swan” even if it does not appear to be one (Flyvbjerg, 2006).
Nicosia, the capital of the Mediterranean island of Cyprus, is the last divided capital in the world and the most southeastern capital of the European Union. The city is internationally recognized as capital of the territory of the Republic of Cyprus and seat of its government, although the northern half is under the control of the Turkish Republic of the Northern Cyprus, which is only recognized by Turkey (News.bbc.co.uk, 2014). After the Turkish invasion in 1974 in the island, this northern part is viewed by the international community as a Cypriot territory under Turkish occupation.
Being the largest city of the island with an area of 111km2, it is also the main business and financial center and it locates in the center of the Mesaoria plain, on the banks of river Pedieos (Zaphiris, 1995). The urban décor of Nicosia has a double character; first, there is the old and original face of the city surrounded by Venetian walls from the 16th century. This part of the city is very distinct from the modern metropolitan area which concentrates 240 000 inhabitants including the suburbs (Mof.gov.cy, 2011) (see Figure 3).
In this chapter the planning context of Nicosia will be presented in order to illustrate the milieu where the bottoms up initiatives take place, not only the planning practice is considered but also the political desire and the funding. This introduction to the case
also explores the general conditions that cause the inferiority of cycling compared to motorized transport, through the presentation of the transport planning agenda and local policies. As bicycling is a human-powered vehicle, it is important that the weather and the urban landscape of a city favor biking. The physical features of Nicosia such as the topography and climate which influence the planners’ work will be considered as well. Additionally, since individual preferences and historical factors appear to have a determinant role in the successfulness of bottom up movements, the current mobility culture of the Cypriot capital will be discussed through the travel behavior of transport users. Moreover, I will present the general barriers for making Nicosia bicycle friendly and the main stakeholders in cycling issues (Dutch Cycling Embassy, 2014). Finally, the discussion on the bottom-up cycling initiatives in Nicosia will be opened.
Figure 4. Nicosia and its fortifications. The photo on the left shows the dividing border
3.2.Background of transportation planning in Cyprus
When the Republic of Cyprus was established in 1960 the transport planning responsibilities were distributed along various departments in different ministries (Livadiotes,2013). The Public Works Department, which was responsible for transportation issues, was a sector of the Ministry of Communication and Works and the Planning Bureau, holding land-use planning responsibilities, was placed in the Ministry of Finance. Since the Turkish invasion in 1974, the island of Cyprus is physically divided by the “Green Line”, complicating any planning and development strategy (Caramondani, 2008). The two constituent parts have two independent transport planning systems. Both sides have turned their back to the separation line which they view as a barrier instead of a border (Caramondani, 2008). The incidence of 1974 has changed the development program of the road network in a radical way and forced the creation of new priorities in order to cover basic needs (Drousiotis, 2010). Nicosia, split in two by the separation line, has experienced a severe population growth of nearly 40% due to the settlement of displaced people at its outskirts affecting the travel trends of the town (Livadiotes, 2013). In 1975, the MCW established the Department for Road Transport holding responsibilities of operations and fleet management. Moreover, the Ministry of Labour is in charge for air quality control and management, while the Ministry of Agriculture, Natural Resources and the Environment is responsible for the
transport planning in Nicosia to various authorities has made integrated decisions more difficult. Moreover, the current malfunction of the mobility system in the island is due to the non-coordination of national and regional plans (Caramondani, 2008).
3.3. Policies, planning agenda, political support and funding
Supportive cycling policies and political commitment are indispensable for progressing in bike use levels (& Daniel, 2004; Oldenziel & de la Bruhèze, 2011; Rietveld Pucher, 2011). During the period 1997-2000 Nicosia was involved in the European Life Program part of the project “Bicycles networks in Cyprus cities” (Dutch Cycling Embassy, 2014). This concerned the implementation of pilot schemes to launch the creation of cycling networks. In the following years, the city commissioned Colin Buchanan’s consultancy firm for the preparation of preliminary designs for the “first priority” cycle routes which were later proposed in the Integrated Mobility Master Planfor Nicosia in 2010. This IMMP was developed by the government targeting to increase
the modal share of public transport, cycling and walking and to upgrade the road network. According to the “Plan for supporting non-motorized transport development” included in the IMMP, creating safer conditions for cyclists and pedestrians, two modes of transport which are often combined with public transport, the modal split should be more balanced.
A basic density cycling network planned to be implemented by 2020, will offer opportunities for work based, educational and recreational trips. Two important cycling provisions have been previously put into operation; a cycling path following the Pedieos river from south of Strovolos to the center of Nicosia and more paths connecting the campuses of the universities of Nicosia and the city center (MCW,2010). The phasing of implementation of the cycling network of Nicosia considers three time periods; Phase A (2010-2012), Phase B (2013-2016) and Phase C (2017-2020). The cycling routes projected for each phase can be seen in Figure 5. The phase A was the early winner’s project which was easy to construct with a total length of 24 km of bicycle lanes. During the second phase 50 km of lanes will be completed and 46km for the third phase.
The University of Cyprus participated a few years ago in the “Students today
Citizens Tomorrow” program, which is a European project on energy-efficient transport
including cycling (Drousiotis, 2010). A survey has resulted in quantitative data about the travel behavior of the population of the university and their attitude towards changing this behavior. The results of this project are an innovative sustainable mobility plan connecting the university areas and a bike-sharing system. Universities represent critical mobility centers for the cities and the participation to this project shows that the national government of Cyprus is willing to target young travelers and low income groups via cycling policies in order to make changes effective (MCW,2010; Livadiotes,
2013).
In 2012, the municipalities of Nicosia have introduced a bike sharing scheme “Bike in Action” and created DEPL (Intermunicipal Bicycle Company of Nicosia) (Podilatoendrasi.com.cy, 2014). Seven municipalities of the metropolitan area of the capital are participating in the scheme; Nicosia, Aglantzia, Strovolos, Dali, Ayios Dometios, Latsia and Engomi. It appears that, the bike sharing facilities are scarcely used by cyclists of Nicosia (Livadiotes, 2013; Dutch Cycling Embassy,
lack of feeling of safety, the inconvenience, the lack of infrastructure, the unconnected bike routes and the general transport mentality. Finally, with an announcement of the president of DEPL on December 13th 2013, the bike sharing system was temporarily suspended. The suspension was necessary in order to upgrade the management of the system (Podilatoendrasi.com.cy, 2014).
After studying the cycling policies and the overall strategy regarding the management of travel demand, the main observation is that the transport authorities always make use of a technical focus. There is a lack of focus on the social impacts and social behavior concerning mobility. Furthermore, this view on transport planning as a technical field is also associated to the limited interaction between experts and the inhabitants when it comes to decision making, as the public is hardly mentioned in the IMMP. The content and focus of the Students today, Citizens tomorrow project was an opportunity to show to public authorities in Cyprus that mobility choices are emotional and are not only related to real needs of the users. An assumption is that inferiority of cycling compared to other means of transport in Nicosia is linked to the conservative strategies in regards to public investments and to technical limitations. Even though the document announces a very complete and efficient mobility plan for Nicosia in 2020, probably the approach lacks a creative and innovative aspect that could ensure the success of the plan. The decisions derive in a top-down way and the completion of each phase depends highly on external factors such as the financial funding.
Nevertheless, the development of alternative means of transport necessitates financial investments from a government with declining economy. The economic crisis in Europe, affected the financial stability of the country needing a bailout in order to avoid bankruptcy (Beggs, 2013). In Cyprus, unemployment is currently increasing while GDP per capita is decreasing, two trends that prove that the country is now in a vital transition period, with a recession in national economy announced to be worse than in 1974 (Orphanides, 2013). The capital Nicosia, experiences this transitional era with a lot of difficulties. Some of the projects of the transport sector were victims of public spending reduction after being considered as non-priority ones. Cycling is still not a real alternative for the inhabitants of Nicosia.
3.4. Physical characteristics of Nicosia
A favoring climate and flat surface contribute to the bike-ability of a place (Pucher et al. 1999; Ortuzar et al. 2000; Rietveld and Daniel, 2004 ; Moudon et al. 2005 ; Winters et al. 2010 ; Pucher et al. 2011; Dutch Cycling Embassy, 2014). Cyprus has a subtropical climate- of Mediterranean semi-arid climate with very mild winters, especially on the coast, and dry summers that vary from warm to hot (En.climate-data.org, 2014).
Summers can be very uncomfortable for cycling, especially in August with an average temperature of 28 °C. Thus, in the case of Cyprus, the warm climate from March to October and the atmospheric conditions are not supportive for non-motorized transport. The low cycling level is therefore associated to the high temperatures because, even though the distances in Nicosia are not significantly long, people require protection from the extreme weather (Newman & Kenworthy, 1999). Fortunately, the weather in the island is sunny even in winter, a fact that encourages cyclists to continue their biking habits when the heat is not insufferable. The lowest average temperature in the winter is 10.1 °C and Nicosia receives little rainfall throughout the year (En.climate-data.org, 2014).
Furthermore, Nicosia is located in the center of Mesaoria plain and most of its surface is almost flat facilitating cycling. The areas closer to the Troodos mountains on the west are slightly hilly but the center of Nicosia seems to be very bike-able (Dutch Cycling Embassy 2014).
3.5. Mobility patterns and mobility culture in Nicosia
A few decades ago the size of the city and the lifestyle of the islanders used to privilege soft modes of transport (Livadiotes (2013). Before the Turkish invasion, Nicosia had a notable non-motorized transport mode share with walking and cycling representing the 41% of the intra-urban trips as seen in Figure 6. The use of public transport was reaching 6% while the private car was only used by the British officials and the more affluent Cypriots.
Conversely, the rapid settlement of nearly 75 000 displaced people from the northern
Figure 6. Person-trips in internal zones in Nicosia, average weekday summer 1969 (Dalby & Jacobs, 1971)
and work-based trips and has influenced the modal choices. The dichotomy of the city distorted its urban form and the government controlled inadequately the development patterns and land-use until the early 1990’s. This has led to a polycentric and not sustainable urban development (DHTP, 2011) with poor connectivity. There have been institutional contributions in dropping significantly the bike-use levels in Nicosia from the ‘70s till today; the Cypriot government adopted an auto-oriented land-use strategy after the Turkish invasion and did not invest in bus connections improvements, safe cycling infrastructure and provision of pavements for pedestrian (Dutch Cycling Embassy, 2014). Also, the economic progress in the 90’s has contributed in the rising level of car ownership in the national level, with approximately 91% of the households owning a car (MCW, 2010; Livadiotes, 2013) with a ratio of 600 vehicles/1000 residents. The car is used even for walking distances of less than 1km (Dutch Cycling Embassy, 2014) while cycling represents only 1% of the modal split (see Figure 7).
Like in many other cities across the world (Newman & Kenworthy, 1999; Banister, 2005), the unbalanced modal split in the Cypriot capital has extremely negative effects on the national economy, the environment, the safety and the liveability of the city. The way that the city has developed, forces the citizens to use their cars as it appears to be the most convenient in terms of time management and safety (Hatzivassiliou, 2011). Nevertheless, in reality citizens waste more time in traffic jams and more money in fuel (Nicolaides, 2010). The Nicosian citizen is trapped in this mulfunctionning transport system where the supply of infrastructure does not match their needs and so their mobility behavior can only adapt to it.
Apart from the uncontrolled development, considering Nicosia’s socio-demographic image, the city is more likely to always have higher levels of car ownership in comparison to the rest of the country. Dalby and Jacobs (1971) explained that the affluence of Nicosians allows them to buy cars and the horizontal expansion of the city promotes car use. The modern lifestyle and the insufficient “traffic education” to youth (Caramondani, 2014) resulted very low bike use levels in Nicosia for all the age groups. In order to change the embedded practice of car it is necessary to overcome profound cultural beliefs impeding cycling to become a daily travel mode (Pucher et al. 1999; Sheller, 2011). All the factors contributing in the mobility culture of Nicosia are summed up in Figure 8.
Figure 8. Adaptation of the Cycle of Automobility Dependency of Victoria Transport Policy Institute with the contributing factors in mobility culture in Nicosia (Livadiotes, 2013)
3.5. The future of cycling in Nicosia and bottom up initiatives
This section concludes the description of the planning context of Nicosia in regards to cycling through the presentation of how the experts perceive the future of cycling in the city and the introduction of the discussion on the citizens’ role and bottom up initiatives. In December 2013, the ThinkBike workshop was conducted by Dutch and local experts regarding the cycling-related issues of Cypriots cities in order to pro-vide insights to the problem and consider effective solutions. Nicosia’s cycling state isthe strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats in increasing cycling in Nicosia instead of giving technical solutions (Dutch Cycling Embassy, 2014).
The experts view the short distances and the flat topography of the city as very strong points for Nicosia in promoting bicycle use. The transport experts see also that the current over dimensioned road space offers opportunities to integrate cycling lanes and continue the network based on the cycling paths of the phase A of the IMMP. The professionals perceive the relevance of cycling in resolving local issues in terms of environment, health and declining economy as a top opportunity to implement projects, especially programs sponsored by the EU. The increased awareness for liveability and urban quality is also promissory for cycling to emerge as a trend.
The participant experts of the workshop found that the weakest points and threats for Nicosia in becoming a cycling city are the lack of funding because of the financial crisis putting cycling in a low priority level and the car oriented culture creating a negative perception for road safety. Also, importance was given to the lack of political commitment in influencing the cycling levels. The conflicting policies between land use planning and public transport and the non integral approach, which is probably resulting from the lack of cooperation of the relevant stakeholders is another flaw of Nicosia’s transport supply. The weather conditions of the city have been mentioned as both a strong and a weak point in regards to cycling.
This analysis from the planners’ perspective about the potential and complexity of increasing cycling in Nicosia sums up the context that cyclist proponents have to face. Part of the workshop’s activities was to do an actor analysis (see Figure 9 and Figure 10) and identify the “allies” as well as the “enemies” in influencing the status quo of cycling in Nicosia (Dutch Cycling Embassy, 2014). The actors were ranked in line with their influential power and their attitude when it comes to the promotion of cycling. The general objective according to the experts would be to establish a feeling of partnership and mutual support among the variety of actors to guarantee the success of the projects (Burby, 2003).
The partners, positive and powerful actors, are governmental authorities that should improve their cooperation, such as the ministries, the Mayors, the planning expertise, as well as the European Union. The opponents, equally powerful actors but who could be resistant to promoting cycling are the ministry of finance, the developers, the oil industry and car dealers, and other actors that have either contrasting interests or they would not give a high priority to cycling projects. The current opponents should be invited to get involved as partners in order to change their negative position and take advantage of their power. Otherwise, a solution is also to try decreasing the influence of the opponents. When it comes to the weaker actors of the diagram, we can notice that they are of course less authoritative. The fans are cycling supporters that should
Figur 9. Actor Analysis scheme (Dutch Cycling Embassy, 2014)
become more influential such as the cycling communities, the bicycle shops, the universities, but also the national tourism organization. The outsiders are mainly the citizens, perceived to have insignificant influence in the making of the city, and they are more unlikely to accept a change because of a car-dependent culture. The strategy for increasing cycling should inform the citizens about the benefits of cycling in order to change their attitude. The average citizen is the potential user of the cycling services so, ideally, the outsiders should become fans and ultimately partners.
The findings of the workshop revealed that Nicosia is a very suitable city for cycling. The conventional planning approach of top-down would eventually provide a secure environment for cycling but continuous efforts are needed for coordination and cooperation, in order to overcome the institutional, bureaucratic, technical and financial obstacles. While powerful actors have conflicting interests, the fans and more precisely the cycling teams feature spontaneous self organization without depending on financial resources, promising to bring change through social innovation (Boonstra & Boelens, 2011). This research aims to assess how the citizens view the impact of the initiatives promoting cycling. Are the cycling communities the key-actors of the “game”? How influential is really their power and how their positive attitude should be used?
Figure 10. Desirable changes on the influence and attitudes of various stakeholders (Dutch Cycling Embassy, 2014)
started in 1991 with the creation of the NGO Podilatokinisi (meaning Bicycle Movement in Greek). The goal of this club was to promote, to organize and to spread cycling in Cyprus as an efficient, healthy, environmental and non costly means of transport. The efforts of Podilatokinisi aimed to ensure that bicycle will become a real alternative choice for transport users, in order to improve the social welfare and life quality. To accomplish their objectives, the members of Podilatokinisi aimed to influence the mobility mentality, the local strategies and policies as well as the budget intended for the promotion of cycling. This movement started due to the conviction of cyclists that, in Nicosia, decision makers and transport planners, are mostly car drivers without knowledge and experience on cycling (Hatzivassiliou, 2011). Therefore, with their action they wanted to persuade the experts to listen to their suggestions and adapt their plans according to the cyclists’ needs.
The action of Podilatokinisi did not have obvious consequences in increasing cycling in the country, probably because of the fact that the financial and social prosperity that dominated in the ‘90s. Car was the most comfortable and efficient transport mode, and still affordable for most of the inhabitants. The Cypriot society was not ready to make a shift in terms of travel behavior since no significant motivations supported this kind of change (Gregoriades, 2014; Karaolis, 2014; Mavros, 2014). The European influence and the financial crisis caused various changes in the socioeconomic making
of the capital and provided more reasons for improving the modal split of Nicosia (Gregoriades, 2014; Karaolis, 2014; Mavros, 2014). Now the transport users have more motivations in considering a change in their commuting habits, either for reasons of convenience such as saving money and time, or for ideological convictions such as environmental consciousness and need for healthier lifestyle. Learning from the organization of Podilatokinisi, new informal groups stepped in to continue and develop the action of promoting cycling in the capital. The difference of this new movement is that minority groups of transport users try to become an intermediate actor between demand side and supply side, and “educate” the public, instead of addressing directly the authorities (Gregoriades, 2014; Karaolis, 2014; Mavros, 2014).
Currently, there are organized bicycling rides promoting cycling in the city in a regular basis of three to four times a week. Each of these days, a different cycling team organizes a specific ride and takes the responsibility to show to the participants of the ride the appropriate behavior of cyclists as road users. The initiators of the teams have noticed that the number of the cyclists participating in their campaigns increases but with a slow pace. Every so often, beginner cyclists join the groups. Seeing a mass of cyclists riding through Nicosia and its suburbs have become a weekly phenomenon that every resident of Nicosia witnesses.
Photos from the cycling initiatives in Nicosia
1. Nautilos cycling team 2. Cycling Club Latsia 3. D.O.P.I.
5. Nautilos cycling team 4. Cycling Club Latsia
4. Empirical Research Design
The purpose of the research is to answer to the question “What are the patterns
of perceptions between cyclists and the general public on the influence of bottom up cycling initiatives as a path to achieving a transition in mobility?”. The four sub-questions
will be restated below. The first two sub-questions concern the methodological choices of the research, therefore they will be answered in this fourth chapter on the empirical research design. The sub-questions 3 and 4 will be answered in the chapter 5 “Patterns of perceptions” where the results of the study will be presented.
Sub-question 1: Who are the involved parties in bottom-up initiatives whose
perceptions towards the cycling movement need to be understood?
Firstly, the involved parties considered for this study will be presented as well as an explanation of the need to understand their perceptions towards the cycling movement.
Sub-question 2: How can we grasp the different motivations underlying cycling
movements and the different focuses of change?
To answer this, an explanation will be given about how the academic literature inspired the use of scenarios in order to compare several perceptions on the most probable and most desirable consequences of the bottom-up initiatives.
Sub-question 3: What are the similarities and differences between the perceptions
of the cyclists and the general public about the induced results of the cycling initiatives?
Here, the shared beliefs of the strength of cyclists’ impact on changing the mindset of transport users are of interest. The perspectives of the cyclists themselves will be compared with the viewpoints of individuals that are not involved in cycling initiatives.
Sub-question 4: What are the patterns of perceptions within the cyclists’ group
about the desirable results of their efforts?
Finally, this questions concentrates on the identification of the variety of goals of the cyclists. Understanding the motivations of the initiators of the bicycling teams is also essential in order to illustrate how individual preferences determine the scope of the cycling initiatives.
For the purposes of the research, Q methodology will be used as a tool for identifying subjectivities, namely the different viewpoints within the cycling groups and the counter population. The inspiration for using this approach to forecast and compare the possible scenarios according to individual viewpoints comes from the studies of Pikora et al.
(2003), Shiftan et al. (2003) and Geurs &van Wee (2004). Attitudes and perceptions of experts are also important because grassroots innovations are not likely to be successful without the consent and active support of the experts (Masser et al., 1992). After exploring the demand side, a supplementary method of an interview of the urban and transport planner Mrs. Anna Caramondani (2014) will enhance the discussion about how the authorities, or simply the supply side, perceives and supports the cycling teams. The Figure 11 presents the general methodology which seeks to present a comprehensive image of the case and allows having a complete and valid argumentation.
4.1. Q Methodology
Q methodology is a research method that helps exploring tastes, preferences, sentiments, opinions, beliefs, attitudes, motives and goals. It allows for an examination of the general personality that greatly influences an individual’s behavior but is hardly explored (van Exel & de Graaf, 2005). This method was designed for the objective revelation and analysis of similarities and/or differences in the subjective viewpoints of individuals, namely the patterns of views on a specific topic in question. Q methodology has an advantage compared to the standard social science approaches that seek to measure the association between variables. It has the ability to map and compare subjectivities in much richer way that conventional surveys, while at the same time apprehends the complexity of multifaceted responses (Davis & Michelle, 2011). At last, using Q methodology is an opportunity to develop, explore and test theory before proceeding to surveys in larger scale (Davis & Michelle, 2011).
Q methodology follows five steps: 1) the definition of the concourse; 2) the development of the Q sample or Q set; 3) the selection of the P set; 4) the Q sorting and 5) the analysis and interpretation. The concourse involves all relevant aspects of ordinary conversation, commentary and discourse surrounding a topic. The Q sample
or Q set entails the process of selecting statements that represent all the different
perspectives of the concourse which will be eventually presented to the participants of the study. The P set is the sample group of persons that are selected to participate in sorting the selected statements about the concourse. Q method does not require large numbers of participants in order to produce valid results, as far as people with all the relevant different views are involved (Ellis, 2004). Contrary to the survey process, Q method cannot involve a random group of people, and there is a “recruitment” strategy for selecting the P set. During the process of Q sorting, the respondent ranks the selected statements according to a specific scale of measure or a condition of instruction (van Exel & de Graaf, 2005) such as preference, judgment, feeling or agreement. Thereupon, the participant operationalizes their own subjective viewpoint through a self-referencing procedure revealing their personal profile (van Exel & de Graaf, 2005; Davis & Michelle, 2011). The analysis of the data collected makes use of PQ Method
software. The Q sorts are factor-analyzed in order to identify a small set of factors which
represent inter-correlated groups, which typically express shared viewpoints on the topic. The results emerge as shared subjective accounts among respondents following a process of comprehensive understanding of the factors (Davis & Michelle, 2011). Q methodology has an exploratory character that demands interpretation from the researcher as it involves a hybrid combination of qualitative and quantitative dimensions (Davis & Michelle, 2011). Additionally, after the Q method process, short interviews with participants allow to gather more information and qualitative explanations about the underlying reasons that lead them to rank the statements in that particular way.
