In a recent article on Mobility Lab, bike advocate Veronica O. Davis noted that she thinks there is too much emphasis on “biking to work” and not enough on “biking for recreational purposes.”
Interesting point, but I’m not sure I agree.
Granted, if one is promoting utilitarian cycling, jumping right into bicycle commuting may be a stretch. In the Roanoke metropolitan statistical area, for example, the average round-trip work commute is 10 miles, which is an imposing distance for a new cyclist who may not be in the best shape.
However, there are other utilitarian trips that advocates should be talking more about – short trips to the corner store and trips to visit friends, for example – that not only replace a vehicle trip and therefore represent a mode shift, but also highlight the accessibility of one’s own neighborhood or community by bicycle.
TDM Takeaway Focus on helping people think differently about their trip needs. Instead of driving to the mall across town, perhaps a bike doesn’t have to simply be considered recreational and could work for getting to closer stores.
For advocates promoting more utilitarian bicycle use, I believe this latter aspect is important for getting people to think about the scale of their trips differently. Shopping by bicycle may seem unrealistic if you’re used to driving to the mall across town, but if you can get someone to begin their trip planning by thinking closer to home, a bike (or other non-drive-alone trip) might become more feasible.
When it comes to focusing on recreational trips as a pathway to encourage mode shift, my concern comes from a couple of places.
First, no one needs to be convinced a bicycle can be used for recreation – this is well accepted. Indeed, I’d argue, strongly, that this is a bias that transportation demand management (TDM) advocates need to work harder against. There’s an overwhelming perception that a bicycle is a toy, not a tool, that needs to be overcome.
Second, while in my experience there is some overlap between recreational cycling and utilitarian cycling, it’s less than one might imagine. In my community, for example, there is a huge road and mountain-bike community, but only a small fraction of those bike-friendly folks ride for transportation. While there are certainly differences from community to community, my general sense is that recreational cyclists will have found a way to enjoy this hobby already: if they are not riding in their communities, they’re driving their bikes to nearby trails and bike paths.
The reason they ride is the experience on the bike itself: the adventure, the exhilaration, the adrenalin rush of riding fast and riding hard; or, the relaxed pace of a leisurely ride on neighborhood streets and bike paths where there’s no particular destination in mind.
I’m not sure that folks who ride for transportation want or need the same thing – certainly my own needs as a bike commuter are much more practical: to get to work on time, to get a little exercise, to save some money, avoid parking hassles, and free up some time (though I acknowledge that the fact that I have more fun on a bike commute than a car commute is also an influencing factor).
Further, there are lots of groups out there promoting recreational cycling: most bike shops, your local parks-and-rec department, and mountain-bike clubs, to name a few. There are relatively few voices – like TDM advocates – for utilitarian cycling. I’d hesitate to back away from that.
All that said, I believe Davis’ larger point is valid: successful advocacy and promotion must match the message to the ambition and comfort level of the audience. Don’t jump right into a 10-mile round-trip commute to work, but maybe recommend a family make its next ice-cream outing by bike instead of the minivan.
The remainder of Davis’ comments about the lack of data and preconceptions about who is cycling are spot on.
In Roanoke, we do have a large number of cyclists who are blue-collar workers. We have a significant Hispanic population that qualify as utilitarian cyclists. I’m not sure these numbers get counted and certainly these folks’ stories rarely get told.
An example: Several years ago, the organization I work for, Ride Solutions, ran a campaign called “Sweet Ride” to to promote the ease of riding during the colder months. We stopped people on bikes, took their pictures, interviewed them, then gave them vouchers to a local sweet shop.
The vast majority of these folks were not our traditional target audience of young, hip knowledge workers who put their bikes away for the winter. These were men (and they were mostly men) who biked mainly out of necessity, during uncomfortable conditions, and they loved it. They were great spokespeople for bike transportation, but they were not the people we in the TDM community usually talk about.
[Editor’s note: This article is adapted from a comment Holmes made in the Mobility Lab LinkedIn group.]