فهم تجربۀ زیستۀ دوچرخه‌سواری شهری: مروری انتقادی با هدف ارائۀ یک دستور کار پژوهشی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 پژوهشگر دکتری شهرسازی، گروه شهرسازی، دانشکده هنر و معماری، دانشگاه تربیت‌مدرس، تهران، ایران.

2 استادیار طراحی شهری، گروه شهرسازی، دانشکده هنر و معماری، دانشگاه تربیت‌مدرس، تهران، ایران.

3 استادتمام حمل‌ونقل شهری، دانشکدۀ علوم اجتماعی و رفتاری، دانشگاه آمستردام، هلند.

چکیده
حرکت در شهر فقط فرایندی کارکردی برای انتقال افراد از مبدأ به مقصد نیست؛ بلکه کنشی پیچیده و چندبعدی است که تحت‌تأثیر عوامل محیطی، اقتصادی، فرهنگی، اجتماعی و سیاسی قرار دارد و تجربۀ زیستۀ افراد از جابه‌جایی را شکل می‌دهد. امری که متأثر از طرح «چرخش جابه‌جایی» در علوم انسانی و اجتماعی، مورد توجه مطالعات شهری معاصر و حوزۀ تحقیقات پدیدارشناسی حرکت قرار گرفته است. هدف این پژوهش، بررسی مطالعات انجام‌شده دربارۀ فهم تجربه‌های زیستۀ دوچرخه‌سواری شهری و ارائۀ دستور کار پژوهشی برای مطالعات آینده است؛ شامل معرفی چهارچوب مفهومی مناسب، طرح پرسش‌های بنیادین پژوهش و ارائۀ الزامات روش‌شناسی در این حوزه. بدین منظور، پژوهش‌های پیشین از منظر چهارچوب‌های مفهومی، پرسش‌ها و اهداف پژوهش و روش‌شناسی بررسی شدند. پس از تشریح فقدان چهارچوب مفهومی جامع در مطالعات قبلی، چهارچوب پدیدارشناسانه‌ چهارگانه معرفی‌شده توسط ون منن، برای استفاده در پژوهش‌های آتی معرفی و سپس پژوهش‌های پیشین در چهارچوب آن تحلیل شدند. همچنین با ارزیابی روش‌های پژوهش به‌کاررفته، ویژگی‌ها و الزامات روش‌شناسی کلیدی برای فهم تجارب زیستۀ دوچرخه‌سواری شهری در مطالعات آینده ارائه شده است. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که درک تجربۀ زیستۀ دوچرخه‌سواری شهری مستلزم بهره‌گیری از چهارچوب مفهومی جامع برای تحلیل ابعاد مختلف و درهم‌تنیدگی آن‌ها با یکدیگر، و نیز تلفیق روش مردم‌نگاری با رویکردهای نوآورانه متناسب با ماهیت زیسته، متحرک و بدن‌مند این تجربه است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله English

Understanding the Lived Experience of Urban Cycling: A Critical Review to Propose a Research Agenda

نویسندگان English

Mohammad Nazarpoor 1
Ehsan Ranjbar 2
Marco te Brömmelstroet 3
1 PhD Researcher, Department of Urban Planning, Faculty of Art, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Urban Planning, Faculty of Art, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
3 Full Professor in Urban Mobility, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
چکیده English

Introduction
Since the final decades of the twentieth century, a growing critique of car-dominated transportation systems has led to an epistemological shift in the humanities and social sciences, widely referred to as the mobility turn. Also known as the new mobilities paradigm, this theoretical reorientation challenges the static, functionalist understandings that have traditionally shaped urban mobility research. Instead, it emphasizes the dynamic, relational, and meaning-laden dimensions of mobility. Urban mobility is understood not merely as the act of transporting people from one location to another, but as a socio-cultural, political, and affective meaningful practice deeply embedded in individuals' lived experiences.
Against this backdrop, the present study critically reviews the existing literature on urban cycling lived experiences from a phenomenological perspective. It aims to synthesize fragmented research, reveal conceptual gaps, and propose a unified research agenda for future inquiry. The central proposition is that urban cycling should not be examined solely through functionalist or positivist lenses—as is often the case in conventional transport studies—but as a complex, embodied, and socially situated phenomenon that can be better understood through phenomenological inquiry into lived experience.
Methodology
To establish a robust conceptual foundation, the paper introduces Van Manen’s lifeworld existentials—lived space, lived body, lived time, and lived human relations—as an integrated framework for understanding lived experiences of urban cycling. Drawing on a comprehensive literature review, the paper argues that current research lacks a coherent conceptual model capable of accounting for the multidimensional, situated nature of cycling practice as a lived experience. While various studies engage with aspects of cycling experiences, they tend to selectively draw on disparate sociological or anthropological theories without offering a unified framework that can be generalized across contexts.
Through this lifeworld-based conceptual lens, the study rearticulates key research questions that examine how cyclists experience and interpret space, navigate social interactions, embody mobility, and make sense of temporality as they move through urban landscapes. These questions are designed to uncover the nuanced interplay between urban form, bodily engagement, emotional responses, and socio-cultural norms that shape the experience of urban cycling. In doing so, the paper foregrounds a view of cyclists not merely as users of infrastructure but as active agents whose movements and perceptions are co-constituted by their embodied presence in place.
Methodologically, the paper emphasizes the importance of adopting qualitative, immersive research strategies that are attuned to the experiential, affective, and sensory dimensions of mobility. In particular, it advocates integrating methods such as ethnography, autoethnography, photo-elicitation, narrative inquiry, and mobile interviews, which enable researchers to explore how meaning is constructed through embodied practice. The paper also highlights the value of innovative and participatory approaches, such as video analysis, mapping exercises, and creative storytelling, in capturing the tacit, subjective, and multilayered realities of urban cycling.
Conclusion
The review is based on an analysis of studies selected from major academic databases, all of which focus on the lived experiences of urban cycling from a phenomenological standpoint. Each study analyzes the lifeworld dimensions, revealing patterns in how space, body, time, and social relations influence cyclists’ experiences. Findings suggest that different urban contexts and social backgrounds significantly shape how cyclists perceive and negotiate these dimensions.
In conclusion, this study underscores the need for a paradigm shift in urban mobility research. Rather than focusing on normative prescriptions or purely functional concerns, researchers must engage with the experiential realities of mobility and the situated meanings that arise through embodied practice. The lifeworld framework offers a promising pathway to explore the holistic, intersubjective, and embodied aspects of urban cycling. It allows for a richer, more empathetic understanding of how people move through and make sense of urban environments on two wheels.
The proposed research agenda outlines both theoretical and methodological imperatives for future studies in this field. This research calls for deeper engagement with interpretivist epistemologies, cross-contextual and comparative studies, and greater attention to the material, social, cultural, affective, and emotional intricacies of cycling practice as a way of urban life. By centering the lived experiences of cyclists, this approach has the potential to inform more responsive, inclusive, and human-centered policies and designs in urban planning and mobility policy, ultimately contributing to the creation of more sustainable and equitable urban mobility.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Keywords: Lived experience
Urban cycling
Phenomenology
Mobility turn
New mobilities paradigm
1.       Adey, P., Bissell, D., Hannam, K., Merriman, P., & Sheller, M. (Eds.). (2014). The Routledge Handbook of Mobilities (1st ed.). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315857572
2.       Auge, M. (1995). Non-places: introduction to an anthropology of supermodernity. London: Verso.
3.       Bhandal, J., & Noonan, R. J. (2022). Motivations, perceptions and experiences of cycling for transport: A photovoice study. Journal of Transport & Health, 25, 101341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2022.101341
4.       Brömmelstroet, M. T., Mladenović, M. N., Nikolaeva, A., Gaziulusoy, İ., Ferreira, A., Schmidt-Thomé, K., Ritvos, R., Sousa, S., & Bergsma, B. (2022). Identifying, nurturing and empowering alternative mobility narratives. Journal of Urban Mobility,123, 55-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urbmob.2022.100031
5.       Brömmelstroet, M. T., Nikolaeva, A., Glaser, M., Nicolaisen, M. S., & Chan, C. (2017). Travelling together alone and alone together: mobility and potential exposure to diversity. Applied Mobilities, 2(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/23800127.2017.1283122
6.       Büscher, M., Sheller, M., & Tyfield, D. (2016). Mobility intersections: social research, social futures. Mobilities, 11(4), 485–497. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2016.1211818
7.      Cook, M., and Edensor, T. (2017). Cycling through Dark Space: Apprehending Landscape Otherwise. Mobilities 12 (1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2014.956417.
8.       Cox, P. (2023). Cycling Activism: Bike Politics and Social Movements (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003082248
9.       Cresswell, T. (2006). On the move. UK: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203446713
10.   De Certeau, M. (1984). The Practices of Everyday Life. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
11.   Dunlap, R, Rose, J, H. Standridge, S and L. Pruitt, C. (2020). Experiences of urban cycling: emotional geographies of people and place, Leisure Studies, 40(1), 82–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2020.1720787
12.   Fallon Mayers, R., and D. Glover, T. (2019). Whose Lane Is It Anyway? The Experience of Cycling in a Mid-Sized City, Leisure Sciences, 42(5–6), 515–532. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400.2018.1518174
13.   Fernandez, K. V. (2019). Critically Reviewing Literature: A Tutorial for New Researchers. Australasian Marketing Journal, 27(3), 187-196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2019.05.001
14.   Forsyth, A., and K. Krizek. 2011. “Urban Design: Is There a Distinctive View from the Bicycle?” Journal of Urban Design, 16 (4), 531–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2011.586239
15.   Freudendal‐Pedersen, M. (2015). Cyclists as Part of the City's Organism: Structural Stories on Cycling in Copenhagen. City and Society, (27), 30-50. https://doi.org/10.1111/ciso.12051
17.   Grant, M.J. & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, (26), 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
18.   Hannam, K., Sheller, M., and Urry, J. (2006). Mobilities, immobilities and moorings. Mobilities 1(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450100500489189
19.   Haustein, S., Koglin, Tl., Nielsen, T., Sick, A., and Svensson, Å. (2019). A comparison of cycling cultures in Stockholm and Copenhagen. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 14(4), 280–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2018.1547463
20.   Heim LaFrombois, M. (2019). (Re)Producing and challenging gender in and through urban space: women bicyclists’ experiences in Chicago, Gender, Place & Culture, 26(5), 659–679. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2018.1555142
21.   Jones, P. (2005). Performing the city: A body and a bicycle take on Birmingham, UK. Social & Cultural Geography, 6, 813–830. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649360500353046
22.   Jones, P. (2012). Sensory indiscipline and affect: A study of commuter cycling. Social & Cultural Geography, 13, 645–658. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649365.2012.713505
23.   Jungnickel, K., & Aldred, R. (2014). Cycling’s sensory strategies: How cyclists mediate their exposure to the urban environment. Mobilities, 9, 238–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2013.796772
24.   Larsen, J. (2014). (Auto) Ethnography and cycling. International journal of social research methodology, 17(1), 59-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2014.854015
25.   Latham, A., and Wood, P. R. (2015). Inhabiting infrastructure: exploring the interactional spaces of urban cycling. Environment and Planning A, 47(2), 300–319. https://doi.org/10.1068/a140049p
26.   Laurier, E. (2010). Being There/Seeing There: Recording and Analysing Life in the Car. In: Fincham, B., McGuinness, M., Murray, L. (eds) Mobile Methodologies. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230281172_8
27.   Lee, D. J. (2016). Embodied bicycle commuters in a car world. Social & Cultural Geography, 17(3), 401–422. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649365.2015.1077265
28.   Lefebvre, H. (1991). The Production of Space. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
29.   Lugo, A. (2013). CicLAvia and human infrastructure in Los Angeles: Ethnographic experiments in equitable bike planning. Journal of Transport Geography, 30, 202–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.04.010
30.   Marquart, H., Schlink, U., Ueberham, M. (2020). The planned and the perceived city: A comparison of cyclists' and decisionmakers' views on cycling quality. Journal of Transport Geography, 82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2019.102602
31.   McCarthy, D. (2011). “‘I’m a Normal Person’: An Examination of How Utilitarian Cyclists in Charleston South Carolina Use an Insider/Outsider Framework to Make Sense of Risks.” Urban Studies 48 (7), 1439–1455. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098010375322
32.   McIlvenny, P. (2015). The Joy of Biking Together: Sharing Everyday Experiences of Vélomobility, Mobilities10(1), 55-82. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2013.844950
33.   Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
34.   Merriman P (2014) Rethinking mobile methods. Mobilities 9, 167–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2013.784540
35.   Moles, K., (2019). Mobile Methods, In P. Atkinson, S. Delamont, A. Cernat, J.W. Sakshaug, & R.A. Williams (Eds.), SAGE Research Methods Foundations.
36.   Nello-Deakin, S & Nikolaeva, A. (2020). The human infrastructure of a cycling city: Amsterdam through the eyes of international newcomers, Urban Geography, 42(3), 289–311.https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2019.1709757
37.   Popan, C., (2019). Bicycle Utopias: Imagining Fast and Slow Cycling Futures, Abingdon: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429424113
38.   Quintão, R. T., Lisboa, S. M., De Freitas, G. M., & De Oliveira, L. G. F. (2019). Limits on the use of public space and Consumer tactics: A study on Urban cycling. Latin American Business Review, 20(3), 211–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/10978526.2019.1639579
39.   Richards, L., & Morse, J. (2013). Readme first for a user's guide to qualitative methods. SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071909898
40.   Rodaway, P. (1994), Sensuous Geographies: Body, sense and place (London: Routledge). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203082546
41.   Sennett, R. (1994). Flesh and Stone: The Body and the City in Western Civilization. London: Faber & Faber.
42.   Sheller, M., & Urry, J. (2006). The New Mobilities Paradigm. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 38(2), 207–226. https://doi.org/10.1068/a37268
43.   Simpson, P (2018). Elemental mobilities: atmospheres, matter and cycling amid the weather-world, Social & Cultural Geography, 20(8), 1050–1069. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649365.2018.1428821
44.   Snizek, B., T.A.S. Nielsen, and H. Skov-Petersen. (2013). Mapping Bicyclists’ Experiences in Copenhagen. Journal of Transport Geography 30: 227–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.02.001
45.   Spinney, J. (2006). A Place of Sense: A Kinaesthetic Ethnography of Cyclists on Mont Ventoux. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 24, 709 – 732.
46.   Spinney, J. (2008(. Cycling between the Traffic: Mobility, Identity and Space. Urban Design Journal 108:28–30. https://doi.org/10.1068/d61j
47.   Spinney, J. (2009) Cycling the city: movement, meaningand method, Geography Compass, 3, 817–835. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-8198.2008.00211.x
48.   Spinney, J. (2011). A Chance to Catch a Breath: Using Mobile Video Ethnography in Cycling Research. Mobilities 6 (2): 161–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2011.552771
49.   Stefansdottir, H. (2014). Atheoretical Perspective on how bicycle ommuters might experience aesthetic features of urban space. Juournal of urban design, 19(4), 496-510. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2014.923746
50.   Themen, K., & Popan, C. (2021). Auditory and visual sensory modalities in the velodrome and the practice of becoming a track cyclist. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 57(4), 618-633. https://doi.org/10.1177/10126902211021359
51.   Urry, J. (2012). Mobilities: New Perspectives on Transport and Society (M. Grieco, Ed.) (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315595733
52.   Van Cauwenberg, J., Clarys, P., De Bourdeaudhuij, I., Ghekiere, A., de Geus, B., Owen, N., & Deforche, B. (2018). Environmental influences on older adults’ transportation cycling experiences: A study using bike-along interviews. Landscape and Urban Planning, 169, 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.08.003
54.   Van Manen M. (1997). Researching lived experience. Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. Albany: State University of New York Press; 1990. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315421056
55.   Verstappen, S. (2023). Worlding cycling: an anthropological agenda for urban cycling research. Urban Planning and Transport Research, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/21650020.2023.2264360
56.   Virilio, P. (1994). The vision machine. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
57.   Vivanco, L. A. (2013). Reconsidering the bicycle: An anthropological perspective on a new (old) thing. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203584538
58.   Waitt, G., & Buchanan, I. (2022). Velomobilities: Cycling geographies and well‐being. Geography Compass, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12672