Cycling Inequalities in Copenhagen : Strategies and Policies

Cycling inequalities in Copenhagen : Strategies and policies

Léo Couturier Lopez

Urban Studies Master's (Two-Year) Thesis 30 Credits Semester 4 / 2021 Supervisor: Elnaz Sarkheyli

Abstract The bike, once relegated to a neglected, dangerous, and less efficient means of transport compared to cars, has seen its role and is images being reinforced all around the world. However, despite its intrinsic characteristic of being easily accessible, the cycling practice is not value-free. It embodies and reproduces inequalities that cross our societies. The transportation justice research framework investigates conditions to access this sustainable means of transportation insofar of our needs. As such, my research questions the capacity of the municipality of Copenhagen to address mobility justice challenges in cycling practices. First, I investigated this question by analyzing two main types of documents: A national travel survey, disaggregated at the scale of the greater Copenhagen, and strategic documents made by the municipality to evaluate their progress in developing the cycling practice. Then, I ran a set of expert semi-structured interviews to explore what I observed in the documents. The results showed that behind the outstanding numbers, the cycling strategies and visions focus essentially on the commuters and exclude other groups. It limits the cycling practices to the productivity sphere, ensuring an efficient mode of transport to work or education. Despite a gender gap non-existent in biking, the study showed strong differences in cycling patterns. More surprisingly the highest income groups are the ones that cycle the most, but they also drive their car the most as they live predominantly in the suburbs. The cycling practice is also plateauing, may be decreasing. I conclude with a call for diversifying the types of cycle mobility that would take better take into consideration the different needs. In order to maintain a high level of cycling in the Capital, the strategies and policies of cycling should be overseen at the metropolitan scale with a clear structure or institution defining goals and visions.

Key words: Cycling practices; Mobility Justice, Policies, and strategies.

Acknowledgment I would first like to thank my thesis advisor, Senior Lecturer Elnaz Sarkheyli at Malmö University. She managed to keep me on the right tracks by providing me rightful advises and encouragement. She consistently allowed this paper to be my own work but steered me in the right the direction whenever he thought I needed it. I would also like to thank the experts who were involved in the interviews of this research project: Thomas Sick Nieslen, Marianna Weinreich, Pernille Bussone. Their insights and sometimes passion about the field of mobility made these interviews more than just a method of data collection. I would also like to acknowledge Natalie Gulsrud from Copenhagen University for her very valuable comments on this thesis and hope our collaboration will go further. Finally, I must express my very profound gratitude to my flat mates for providing me with unfailing support and continuous encouragement throughout the difficult months of study and through the process of researching and writing this thesis. This accomplishment would not have been possible without them. Thank you.

Table of Contents

1 Introduction ...... 8 1.1 Background ...... 8 1.2 Research question ...... 11 1.3 Aim of the study ...... 11 1.4 Previous research ...... 12 1.5 Layout ...... 14 2 Theory ...... 15 2.1 Mobility Justice ...... 15 2.1.1 The modern mobility ...... 15 2.1.2 Mobility Justice ...... 15 2.1.3 The “Right to the City” for a just city? ...... 17 3 The object of study ...... 18 4 Methodology ...... 19 4.1 Secondary data sources ...... 20 4.1.1 City of Copenhagen: Green Mobility ...... 20 4.1.2 City of Copenhagen’s budget: a city for everyone (En By for Alle) ...... 20 4.1.3 City of Copenhagen: Cycle Superhighways ...... 20 4.1.4 City of Copenhagen & Decisio: Effects of lower car use ...... 21 4.1.5 Denmark Statistic ...... 21 4.1.6 Gender studies by Ramboll ...... 22 4.1.7 Danish National Travel Survey ...... 22 4.1.8 Bicycle account 2018 (published in 2019) Copenhagen Municipality ...... 25 5 Analysis ...... 26 5.1 The recontextualization of the cycling practice ...... 26 5.2 Spatial inequalities between the Greater Copenhagen and Copenhagen Municipality ...... 28 5.2.1 Statistics ...... 28 5.2.2 Cycling policies and strategies ...... 31 5.2.3 Interviews ...... 33 5.3 Gender ...... 33

5.3.1 Statistics ...... 33 5.3.2 Cycling policies and strategies ...... 36 5.3.3 Interviews ...... 36 5.4 Income ...... 36 5.4.1 Statistics ...... 36 5.4.2 Cycling policies and strategies ...... 38 5.4.3 Interviews ...... 39 5.5 Age ...... 39 5.5.1 Statistics ...... 39 5.5.2 Cycling policies and strategies ...... 40 5.5.3 Interviews ...... 42 5.6 Occupation ...... 42 5.6.1 Statistics ...... 42 5.6.2 Cycling policies and strategies ...... 44 5.6.3 Interviews ...... 44 5.7 Analysis summary ...... 45 6 Discussion ...... 47 6.1 A half-hearted tone theory ...... 47 6.2 Disparate methods but consistent results ...... 48 7 Conclusion ...... 48 7.1 Recommendations ...... 49 8 Bibliography ...... 51

Table of figures

Figure 1: Share of total carbon reductions. Source: Climate Plan Copenhagen 2025, page 21 ...... 9 Figure 2: Allocation of reductions from mobility initiatives. source: Climate Plan Copenhagen 2025, page 21 ...... 9 Figure 3: History of the Danish National Travel Survey ...... 22 Figure 4: Denmark NUTS (source Eurostat) ...... 23

Figure 5: National Travel Survey. Denmark scale (DTU, 2020) ...... 24

Figure 6: National Travel Survey. Copenhagen scale (DTU, 2021) ...... 24 Figure 7: Cykelredegørelse 2020, translated from the internet...... 25 Figure 8: Technical and Environmental Administration or TMF (Teknik-og Miljøforvaltningen) of Copenhagen Municipality ...... 25 Figure 9: Share of mileage by mode. Chart made from table 3 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 6). Reference: author ...... 27 Figure 10: Share of mileage by purpose. Chart made from figure 21 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 17). Reference: author ...... 27 Figure 11: Commuter modal split per trip (bikes). Comparison between Copenhagen Municipality and the Greater Copenhagen. Chart made from table 25 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 21) and the “Bicycle account 2018”(Copenhagen Municipality, 2019, p. 6); Reference: author ...... 28 Figure 12: Greater Copenhagen. Modal split by mileage (all modes). Chart made from the table 8 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 8). Reference: author ...... 29 Figure 13: Modal split comparison between Greater Copenhagen and Copenhagen Municipality (all trips). Chart made from the table 18 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 14) and the “Bicycle account 2018” (Copenhagen Municipality, 2019, p. 6). Reference: author ...... 30 Figure 14:Modal split comparison between Greater Copenhagen and Copenhagen Municipality (Commuting). Chart made from the table 18 of TU (DTU, 2019, p. 14) and the “Bicycle account 2018” (Copenhagen Municipality, 2019, p. 6). Reference: author ...... 30 Figure 15: map of the existing and future cycling highways. Source: Cycle superhighways bicycle account (REF)...... 31 Figure 16:Sketch from the first Finger Plan created by the Regional Planning Office in 1947 (Danish Ministry of Environment “Finger plan”) ...... 31 Figure 17: Potential living area for targeted car commuters. Map made on QGIS with the data from opendata.dk and the figure 15. Reference: author ...... 32 Figure 18:Gender modal split by mileage and travel time. Chart made from the table 28a of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 22). Reference: author ...... 34 Figure 19: Gender. Number total of causalities on the bike in the Greater Copenhagen. Chart made from Denmark Statistic Data. Reference: author ...... 35

Figure 20: Gender. Numbers of seriously injured in a bike in the Greater Copenhagen. Chart made from Denmark Statistic Data. Reference: author ...... 35 Figure 21: Gender. Numbers of slightly injured in a bike in the Greater Copenhagen. Chart made from Denmark Statistic Data. Reference: author ...... 35 Figure 22: Bicycle. mileage per day per income groups. Chart made from the table 37 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 28). Reference: author ...... 37 Figure 23: All modes of transport. Mileage per day per income group. Chart made from the table 37 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 28). Reference: author ...... 37 Figure 24: Bicycle. Modal split per mileage per income group. All modes of transport. Chart made from the table 37a of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 28). Reference: author ...... 38 Figure 25: Bicycle. Mileage per day per age group. Chart made from the table 31 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 24). Reference: author ...... 39 Figure 26: Bicycle. Modal split per mileage, per age group. Chart made from the table 31a of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 24). Reference: author ...... 40 Figure 27: Occupation groups, bicycle mileage per day. Chart made from the table 34 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 26). Reference: author ...... 43 Figure 28: Occupation groups, bicycle modal share (Personal mileage). Chart made from the table 34a (DTU, 2021, p. 26). Reference: author ...... 43

Table 1: Commuters by car to work or study in Copenhagen, divided by the distance to work or education. Table made from "Bicycle strategy 2011-2025" (Copenhagen Municipality, 2012, p. 5). Reference: author ...... 32 Table 2: Key figures in Greater Copenhagen. Chart made from the table 2 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 5). Reference: author ...... 33 Table 3: Analysis summary table ...... 45

1 Introduction

1.1 Background What is it to be mobile? It is moving in space and time. It is the capacity to face the present, heading to a future as the opposition of a remote past. Mobility has always incarnated the sense of modernity, from the non-sedentary population to the mobility of the Capital in the Marxist theory. Mobility is always the symbol of life and growth. Whatever the means, a device that gives access to better mobility than before will be prioritized whatever the cost. The industrialization of the late 1900s, slowed down by the two world wars, brought cars into everyday life during the post-world wars economic growth. The democratization of this individual mode of transport was the quintessence of mobility. As consequence, we shaped the cities and the landscapes around the usage of this machine. Which led unavoidably to its limits, especially in a world with such rapid growth. Congestion, air, and noise pollution were the visible sign of these limits. They arrived hand in hand with the evidence-based recognition of global warming that will drive this century's challenges. The bike, once relegated to a neglected, dangerous, and less efficient means of transport compared to cars, has seen its role and is images being reinforced all around the world. Biking is an attempt to protect mobility in a specific environment (urban). The cars jeopardized this capacity of being mobile (congestion, space-consuming, accident) and its ecological costs arrive at the same as the awareness of its impact on the health. Therefore, the bike is claiming again to be the sovereign of the streets. Although the reasons behind biking are diverse, the benefit of the practice starts to be clearer. Cycling addresses multiple United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) number 3, 10, and 11 that respectively correspond to “Good Health and Well-being”, “Reduced Inequalities” and “Sustainable Cities and Communities”. The Capital of Denmark plays an unusual role in this context. Its early history with cycling was strongly associated with low-cost bicycles indispensable for lower- and middle-class commuters. The early 20’s century saw the streets of Copenhagen flooded by bikes with an incredible 31% of trips made by bike at the time, a score much better than many modern cities these days. Despite a post-world war turn marked by top- down modern urban planning taking the cycling practice out of the equation, the famous Finger Plan was not even proposing a cycle track network (HENDERSON & GULSRUD, 2019). The city did not make a clear car-oriented mobility transition in the ’70s as many other cities did. Even though there was a clear drop in the cycling rate at the time with 17% of modal share (OLDENZIEL ET AL., 2016), the investments have not been made at the time to mark a clear transition to the car city. The context of the economic crisis of the ’70s opened the room for street reappropriation. The ’70s have seen across the world the rise of new left/progressist movements contesting capitalism and its symbols like cars. The bike was elevated as a weapon to advocate a world more just. Copenhagen was a place of fights and the bike, with its strong history there, took a central role in the contestation (Christiania, cycling federation demonstrations, car-free Sundays,). Copenhagen faced a huge economic crisis in the ’90s with high unemployment and a drop in the city inhabitants. The city compromised with the state and embrace a neoliberal urban renewal scheme, like the redevelopment of the 42km of industrialized waterfront, to finance expensive loans it had to take out. From there, the competition, even with the suburbs, to bring back inhabitants with the highest incomes started. We will observe later that this ideology has an impact even today in the cycling practices, policies, and strategies.

Figure 1: Share of total carbon reductions. Source: Climate Plan Copenhagen 2025, page 21

Figure 2: Allocation of reductions from mobility initiatives. source: Climate Plan Copenhagen 2025, page 21

The 2000s initiated a neoliberal turn with the city embracing its international dimension, extending at a worldwide scale. the competition to bring the “creative class” and mobilize the “3T’s of economic growth”: Technology, Talent and Tolerance (FLORIDA, 2005). Then the bike endorsed the anachronic role of influencer that promotes and brands Copenhagen, notably through its program of being a carbon-neutral city by 2025. Its ambitions carry new policies and strategies to reduce gas emissions from transport. Legitimately, the plan includes the development of cycling practice through a modal shift that will reduce CO2 emissions from cars. The Climate Plan 2025 of Copenhagen Municipality1 estimated at 11% the share of Green mobility in the total of the carbon reductions capacity. Among this 11%, 30% is attributed to the City of cyclist initiative. Its weight in the total capacity of gas emissions reductions is “only” 3.3% (30% of the 11%). It is important to recontextualize the role of cycling and not being caught in the fantasy of cycling will solve the problem of global warming. Therefore, it is normal to ask ourselves, what makes cycling practice important if it is not only for its ecological impact? It is now widely spread among the research community and the population that physical activities while commuting, like biking, are positively associated with health strong health benefits (VON HUTH SMITH ET AL., 2007). Commuting by bike might even be more important than we thought as doubts even rose that leisure-time physical activities alone might not be a sufficient public health approach to fight obesity for instance (BAUMAN ET AL., 2008). In the context of Copenhagen, the Cycle Superhighways program

1 https://urbandevelopmentcph.kk.dk/artikel/cph-2025-climate-plan

evaluated the benefits from health effects as a result of physical exercise during cycling. 85% of the money saved by using the new cycling lanes that the program proposed same from the economy made from the health system. Advocates of cycling-as-commuting present it also as money-saving for individuals. Even though the previous figures show the slight impact the cycling practice has on CO2 emissions, reducing the number of cars and changing the practices might have side effects underestimated in the calculation like the artificialization of the grounds. Biking today could be pitched by opponents as an attempt to reduce mobility. Putting aside the economic lobbies that advocate for an evolution of the technology such as electric cars, some car users see the new restrictions to cars usage as a genuine threat, because it would indeed reduce their mobility, grinding them to a halt, and therefore taking them their aptitude/capacity to project themselves in time and space away. Despite these outcomes that advocate strongly in favor of initiating the modal shift, one cannot exclude that Environmentalism could be part of a “postmaterialist” mindset characterized by human self-realization and quality of life. In this theory, these attributes are to be found in the world’s economically advanced societies and therefore in the most advantaged social groups (GROSS, 2018). Embracing biking is therefore associated with symbols of belonging to specific parts of the population that can “afford” to cycle. Moving rapidly and at a longer distance is still the duty of the poorest, whereas moving rapidly at a shorter distance though might be the prerogative of the richest. Mobility incarnates the symbol of modernity. But even the notion of modernity itself is switching. Then, it is not uncanny to witness blurriness between symbols that should represent it. Indeed, there are different representations, though maybe not incompatible. For Recchi & Flipo: “the automobile epitomizes the key material object and the foundational ideology of advanced capitalism: speed, individual control of time and space, personal freedom, and the idea that identity expresses itself through consumption choices” (RECCHI & FLIPO, 2020, P. 131).

The contemporary discourse around green mobility, like in Copenhagen (COPENHAGEN MUNICIPALITY, 2013), defines the bike as an iconic object this vehicle takes center stage in the “virtuous materiality of environmentalism”, participating in the legitimation of specific social classes (HORTON, 2006). This representation of the car suggests that the social groups that benefit the most from advanced capitalism would “naturally” choose this mode of transports. However, the democratization of cars and the re-development of cities center made this mode of transportation obsolete for those who can afford to live in urban centers. Consequently, the bicycle is today a “potent symbol of identity and status (…). Cycling to work is positively associated with the share of creative-class jobs and negatively associated with working-class jobs” says Richard Florida, the head of the Martin Prosperity Institute at the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto, to the Guardian in an article that questions the role of the bikes in the gentrification of cities (GEOGHEGAN, 2016). For instance, whereas African-Americans make up 20% of the population of Boston, they make up only 1% of the city’s cyclists. In Amsterdam, one of the most famous bicycle-friendly cities, residents of Moroccan and Turkish descent are less likely to cycle than their Dutch- descent counterparts. “Minorities are just as likely to cycle but often live-in areas that lack bike infrastructure”, says Samuel Stein, an urban geographer at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, to the Guardian (GEOGHEGAN, 2016). Social, gender, and ethnic inclusivity is, therefore, a key topic to understand determinants of and obstacles to cycling.

What if the cycling culture, its policies and representations, is leaving aside, a big part of the population, preventing to initiate a sharped modal shift that plays an essential role in tackling all the contemporary challenges in matter of ecology, health, and economy. Despite a universal accessible image, the bike might reproduce the inequalities of our societies. Then it is legitimate to consider the success of the biking story in the light of inequalities that lie behind this practice. Thus, the questions arise as, considering that the bikes imply to be an alternative to the cars, are there any inequalities in the access to cycling? Who, exactly, is not biking? Is there a specific segment of the population that does not adopt this means of transportation? Are social classes or groups a factor of inclusion/exclusion in cycling practices? Copenhagen has been and is still today a place of mobility space fights. The politics of mobility have been driven by concepts such as inclusivity and “right to the city” (HARVEY, 2003) from the Left progressive. However, the process of gentrification, not independent from the Neo-liberal politics of urban growth, slowly pushed away in the suburbs some population that cannot afford to live in the vibrant and elitist Copenhagen. They are forced to embrace car-dependent configurations. The Neoliberal city abandons such concepts and lets the market drive politics of housing and mobility. Cycling practices take place in this context. Looking at cycling behavior without a political perspective is missing crucial understandings and undermines the long-term goals of sustainable mobilities. 1.2 Research question Copenhagen is a city where the cycling practice is shown as an example of a sustainable mode of transport accessible to everyone. However, despite its intrinsic characteristic of being easily accessible, the cycling practice is not value-free. It embodies and reproduces inequalities that cross our societies. Consequently, the study aims to answer the following question: - How Copenhagen’s cycling policies and strategies addressed transportation justice issues? To deepen the angle of research, the study will try to answer sub-questions such as what are the segments of the population that cycle less or not at all? How can they be characterized (ethnic, social, economic, geographical)? Are the income groups or social classes equally represented among the cyclist’s commuters in Copenhagen today? What are the factors underlying these inequalities? 1.3 Aim of the study Why these questions are relevant? Despite the accessible nature of the bike, its cost, and its image in post-modern society, they are not just a simple mode of transportation. Like universal and free access products and services, at least allegedly, such as water, education, and health, for instance, it will not ignore the underlying inequalities that cross our societies. This study is also important because it uses the bike to both enhance these inequalities and explore areas to improve the access to something that should be the most simple and equal mode of transport. Overall, my project pursues a better understanding of cyclists: who they are, and who is missing. Firstly, it will provide new perspectives that will contribute to the theoretical debate explored later in the literature review. Indeed, the competition among cities to attract innovative and wealthy individuals might drive forces of gentrification that could extend the cycling gap between classes. At the same time, bicycle aims to become a mainstream mode of transport that would tackle health, ecological and economic challenges in cities but lack to tackle inequalities in the cycling culture. The research corpus would benefit

from deepening the crossing of social, economic, and spatial inequalities with the bicycle practice. It would also help investigate the relevancy of the income group categories in the understanding of bike practices. Secondly, in practice, the research’s outcomes will be multiples. The social inequalities in cycling will be explored and enriched with a more critical approach to “green” mobility policies. Specific areas or populations are consisting of what I call “reservoirs of cyclists” that could be triggered to release their flow and, consequently, stimulating the modal shift from cars to bikes. By identifying these groups and their location, policies can be adapted to their needs. The same approach cannot fulfill the need of these different interests at the risk of favoring the richest through green mobility policies. Besides, the research could pave the way to the creation of an indicator with the identification or, maybe, the design of methods of measuring the inequalities and assessing the inclusivity of the bicycle policies. The effectiveness of the methods and the tools for evaluating cycling policies are expected to positively impact the process of public policymaking aiming at fostering cycling practices. It could shed light on the success stories of cities achieving levels of inclusion in cycling, as well as highlight emerging, and innovative work being undertaken in lesser-known global cycling hotspots through the indicator. It also explores the potential for comparing cities in their actual successes in transitioning all segments of the population towards cycling as a mobility mode share. In conclusion, my subject is situated between the technical debates around the means to promote cycling and the research to determine who is biking. My research will be of interest to both professionals and researchers. My research-based approach will expand upon existing knowledge around the reasons that prevent people from biking but will also propose tools that will capture a picture of the situation in Copenhagen, and potentially in other contexts. In this way, professionals may find new possibilities to both evaluate and compare a specific dimension but also find useful examples in cities that wouldn’t immediately be regarded as the most bicycle-friendly. 1.4 Previous research Inequalities take on several forms when it comes to cycling. Numerous studies investigated gender approaches as a factor of cycling inequalities. The results of these studies demonstrate that cycling practices are strongly embodied in gender inequalities (CARROLL, 2020; LUBITOW ET AL., 2019; PRATI, 2018; PRATI ET AL., 2019; SHAW ET AL., 2020), Even though an almost perfect gender balance is observed in cycling practices in Copenhagen by gender (HAUSTEIN, KOGLIN, ET AL., 2020), the Municipality itself points out that, among the 48% of Copenhageners with a background in countries without a “strong cycling culture” that never cycle, most of them are women (COPENHAGEN MUNICIPALITY, 2019, P. 27). A recent green paper from Rambøll explored the different cycling trip patterns between men and women and advocate for better inclusion of women in the decision-making process (RAMBØLL, 2021). The report points out the hidden forces that shape the gender inequalities in mobility in Denmark. Beyond the “consensus” of gender balance in the transport and mobility sector in Denmark, the report brings elements that demonstrate uneven transport patterns between men and women and that these inequalities are not addressed in transport planning. The place of the car in the household and the symbol it incarnates play a crucial role to understand its uses and by extension, the barrier for the modal shift it embodies. The lack of women in decision-makers corps, politicians, researchers, and other experts and economists advising the first ones, create a strong limitation to tackling cycling inequalities through strategy and policies. These

events take shape in theoretical frameworks such as David Harvey’s “Right to the City” that defend the right to shape the city we live in (developed later in the “Theory Chapter”). Haustein et al. reaffirmed in earlier research the gender balance in the Danish context but confirmed that inequalities were found within social groups where individuals with residence in neighborhoods with a higher share of people of non-Western origin are less likely to cycle (HAUSTEIN, KROESEN, ET AL., 2020). However, the studies do not demonstrate whether the cultural factor is preeminent to explain the lack of cycling practice or if other socio-economic and spatial characteristics of these groups might explain the phenomenon. The Copenhagen municipality’s Bicycle Account reports that citizens with a background in countries without a “strong cycling culture never bike” (COPENHAGEN MUNICIPALITY, 2019, P. 27)). They also mention a report from 2012 on immigrants cycling practice is mentioned but I could not find it online. 56% of those citizens that never cycle are women. Behind the good cycling numbers stated by ht Municipality of Copenhagen, there might be ethnics, economics and social groups that we are left aside of the bicycles practice because of a lack of consideration of their own barriers. The same way that showing that there is less corporal and deadly accident when biking in Copenhagen than before might not convinced specific groups of people to bike because that is not their main consideration. The sense of biking safety illustrates the limits of a basic approach in the cultural explanation of cycling inequalities. Some researchers consider safeness globally, not only through physical accidents. They recommend including more crime statistics (aggression and thefts) and improving their understandings of minorities’ own fears (BROWN, 2016) and considerations (LUSK ET AL., 2017). This approach suggests the lack of biking among specific groups should not be reduced to simple fears stemming from low biking skills or habits, but also, and maybe mainly, due to an overall concern about the safety of their own property (the bike). Indeed, studies built bridges between incomes, ethnicity and bike accidents and found out a direct correlation between high poverty rates in areas with more biking trips and more cyclist crashes (YU, 2014). This result might be in contradiction with my hypothesis that higher income groups cycle more than the others. However, owning and using a car in the United States is still a sign of self-accomplishment, wherein in Western European countries, less and less the highest social groups attribute to biking post-materialist value and reinforce the feeling of belonging to the dominant class. As the cultural factor becomes less and less relevant to explore cycling inequalities, researchers cross different cultural and ethnic characteristics with spatial attributes to determine inequalities. In Malmö, in Sweden, a research on “bike and ride” opportunities, i.e., possibilities to involve the use of a bicycle in conjunction with another type of transportation such as public transit, found out that the cultural factor or the racial/ethnic discrimination were not relevant to understand inequalities in cycling (HAMIDI ET AL., 2019). The opportunities to cycling are more due to social groups' location rather than their background, suggesting it is more a spatial problem (BÖCKER ET AL., 2020). These conclusions are found in other research that investigates income classes and spatial segregation in bike-sharing systems (BÖCKER & ANDERSON, 2020). These spatial inequalities in cycling are shown through the imbalance in job accessibility, where most improvements in the access to bikes, as a mode for transit trips, are observed in middle to high-income areas whereas the poorest areas with the lowest accessibility, improved the least (PRITCHARD ET AL., 2019). The socio-economic status becomes a determinant factor to investigate inequalities in active travel and its consequences on the health benefit (OLSEN ET AL., 2017; TAYLOR ET AL., 2006). Indeed, economically disadvantaged and racial/ethnic minority populations have more barriers to become physically active and acquiring healthy weight and dietary standards (TAYLOR ET AL., 2006).

This part supports my hypothesis that the highest social classes would embrace new green mobilities faster than other classes (define by income and/or job categories). Spatial inequalities raise several questions and question the responsibility of the urban structure in the production of these inequalities (ROSAS-SATIZÁBAL ET AL., 2020). The scission between central areas and more peripheral ones is growing and is problematic regarding the cycling promotion as a contribution to public health, and sustainable mobility (NIELSEN ET AL., 2016). Lower-income areas have less accessibility to cycling facilities and commuting by bicycle higher in the highest income area than in the lowest (FULLER & WINTERS, 2017). This could be explained by the disparities in cycling infrastructure investments. Indeed, a study in Portland and Chicago showed that marginalized communities are unlikely to attract as much cycling infrastructure investment without the presence of privileged populations (FLANAGAN ET AL., 2016). 1.5 Layout My study is shaped around a diversified research framework that includes, firstly, a literature review that introduces the theoretical framework of Mobility Justice in critical geography within which my research question takes place. These two entries will constitute the core of the second part of the literature review where I will present a state of the art of Copenhagen cyclists' studies corpus. Secondly, the research methods will involve a state of the art of current socio-economic and spatial facts, figures, and statistics of the cyclists in Copenhagen. This part analyses official documents provided by the municipality like “Bicycle Accounts” (from 1996 to the date) and any other strategic documents or political programs that inspire municipalities’ policies. I will also use the data and publications from the Center for Transport Analytic DTU2 (Dansk Tenkske Universitet) and any other sources, like ones provided by the Cycling Embassy of Denmark3 or ones on which rely the Municipality’s planning and strategic documents A particular point should be made as I requested sets of data through a partnership with the Center for Transport Analytics (CTA) as mentioned on its website4. I did not get any direct favorable answer but in the following days, they answered me that the data set for the Greater Copenhagen was from now available online. Based on this first secondary data analysis, I ran a set of interviews with the Transports DTU that produce the Danish National Travel Survey 2019 (DTU, 2021) and experts from Rambøll, Copenhagen University, the Danish Road Directorate, and the association Cycling Without Age, all involved in the cycling sector in Copenhagen. As I will describe in the methods chapter and the appendixes, the Municipality has been unreachable by any means, providing me only secondary data available online. Finally, I will use the primary and secondary data collected to present cycling inequalities in Copenhagen and how their manifestation discusses the Mobility Justice theoretical framework. I will make recommendations to improve the evaluation of these inequalities and the strategies and policies addressing them

2 https://www.cta.man.dtu.dk/english 3 https://cyclingsolutions.info/cycling-embassy/ 4 https://www.cta.man.dtu.dk/english/national-travel-survey/access_to_tu-data

2 Theory

2.1 Mobility Justice

2.1.1 The modern mobility In the pure radical geography form authors like Harvey, Massey, Smith, see the space as social and relational before being geographical and material. Its materiality is only the physical representation of the social phenomenon that occurs. Therefore, I see first the cycling space as a resultant of power relations within the social structures and their components. Space contributes to reproducing inequalities of the power structures of societies. Therefore, why the space, its physical/material representation but also its legal existence or its cultural manifestation (in the debate, the social networks, the branding,) would not let societies' inequalities be reproduced? Mobility devices allow individuals to feel that they have control of space and time, like for instance, mobile phones allowing us to be in many different places at the same time. It is supposed to represent the perpetual movement and the end of the sedentary lifestyle. The car before, and today the bike also gives the feeling that you control the time and space since you re-conquer the public space like the paramount of the streets who finally got back to his kingdom. Also, the bike gives you the feeling you can go anywhere in the city and faster, without or very few limits: Time and space control. Movement is an ideology and a utopia of the twenty-first century. It incarnates the freedom of multiple movements which, more than knowledge, characterize the neo-liberal dream (GRIECO & URRY, 2011) I see two ways, probably not exclusive one to the other, to understand the interest in the resurgence of the cycling culture nowadays. The emergence of capitalism goes hand to hand with the mobility of the workers that were pulled away from the countryside to feed the need of labor forces implied by industrialization. The roots of mobility are therefore old and deep, and their ramifications are still at the core of social life today. Max Weber, who studied the immigration of the poles in Germany during the 19 century and its implication in the matter of class struggle, places the mobility of the population as a force of social and cultural disorganization (RECCHI & FLIPO, 2020). The opposition of the sedentary rural areas and the nomadic urban spaces put mobility at the center of the urban phenomenon. Therefore, William I. Thomas presents the “mobile man” as the individual that crafts and detains universal knowledge, where the sedentary possesses “only” the local knowledge (RECCHI & FLIPO, 2020). This comparison inspires my assumptions that the high social classes take out from the bike practices the image of being mobile, feeling/need that was once fulfilled by the car. Tim Cresswell considers three aspects of mobility: physical movement, the representations of movement that give it shared meaning; and, finally, the experienced and embodied practice of movement. There is a politic of representation of mobility that defines its narratives, its representations. Mobility is liberty and progress. No one wants to be immobile. (CRESSWELL, 2010) 2.1.2 Mobility Justice Regarding transportation justice, Mimi Sheller’s Mobility Justice concept offers theoretical supports that suit my research question. Grounded in centuries of imperialism and capitalism, transportation inequalities

deepen with contemporary ecological challenges. Mobility Justice is more than the ongoing efforts to reduce car dependence, Mobility justice encompasses the notion of sustainability like unequal access to a sustainable mode of transport among the citizens (SHELLER, 2018A). It shows how uneven mobility distorts human experiences of the world. It is an overarching concept that helps to disclose patterns of unequal mobility and immobility. It explores the responsibility of power inequalities in shaping these patterns (SHELLER, 2018B). The mobility research was concerned initially with the question of transitioning low carbon models. It became clear that this would not be achieved without new understandings of social and cultural processes that interfered with the expected adoption of green solutions. Linking together the problem of sustainable transportation goals with social justice issues and politics of mobility is to explore the limits of contemporary green transition (SHELLER, 2020). Mobility Justice theory stems from the New Mobility Paradigm that examines the constitutive role of movement within social practices and the different modes of mobilities and their complex combinations (SHELLER & URRY, 2016). The structure of the New Mobility Paradigm draws from Kuhn’s philosophical works in the 1970s around the conditions that precede the emergence of a new paradigm in social sciences. It explores the perspective of the circulation of images and representation (like cycling in Copenhagen). In combination with the "world-class" approach (HOFFMANN & LUGO, 2014) that draw the model of an ideal class court by international competing cities, the theory assemblage offers an ideal lens to look at my subject of study My research strives to investigate cycling inequalities in Copenhagen. The mobility justice framework stimulates such an approach. Its ontologies encompass the understandings of unequal mobilities widely spread among groups, places, and time. It intersects transportation infrastructure, social equality, and civil rights (HOFFMANN & LUGO, 2014), from the rights to women to move freely in public space, without being subject to harassment, to the study of the displacement of population that the process of gentrification implies, through the uneven cycling practices. John Urry and Grieco identify five independent mobilities, in which I focus on the “corporeal travel” to work, leisure, education. The authors emphasize the links between mobility and transport disadvantage. The different levels of access to transports can increase social exclusion (differentials in education, socio- economic circumstances, employment opportunities, shopping, and recreation) but also can affect sustainable development. Three of the seven categories of exclusion are of any interest to my research (CHURCH ET AL., 2000 IN GRIECO & URRY, 2011): geographical exclusion in rural and urban fringe areas; economic exclusion; fear-based exclusion – particularly by women, children, and the elderly. Mobility Justice theory sparks off debates taking place in wider unequal mobility regimes. The injustices of uneven mobilities should be regarded through a new understanding of how we move physically around the city but also through gendered, racialized colonial histories and neocolonial presents. How do we define “uneven mobilities”? How does it will be helpful to discuss my research results? Mimi Sheller defines it first as a terrain that does not share the same pathways, access, or connectivity with all the individuals and groups. It can be a built environment integrated within an urban space, opening ways that connect some places while disconnecting others. Uneven mobilities refer also to segregated transportation systems with class-based exclusions that allocate, sometimes by force, the most vulnerable to outskirt areas with non-sustainable devices as the primary mode of transport, with longer distances for everyday commuting or leisure. Uneven mobilities encompass many objects of research like unequal access to environmental mobility solutions between suburban middle- and low-income classes, the spatial

restrictions of people with disabilities, the limited mobility of racialized minorities in neocolonial societies, or constrained mobility of women in man-centered societies (SHELLER, 2018B; VERLINGHIERI & SCHWANEN, 2020) Mobility research critically addresses contemporary political ramifications of sustainable mobility issues. Who is able to exercise rights to mobility and who is not? Who is capable of movement and who is stuck to stasis? These questions force the scholar to explore the political terrain of the theoretical framework on which uneven spatial mobilities rest upon. They open up the analysis of the different forms of governance of mobility. They contribute to a multi-scalar approach of mobility (in)justice, from micro-level, with individual experience of mobility, to meso-level with urban transportation justice issues and the “right to the city”, to macro-level transnational. This multi-layered perspective invites us to take action and to identify struggles such as embodied experiences of gender, age, disability, sexuality, and the right to the city and the public sphere. Furthermore, these struggles crosscut within groups and individuals, leaving the cities inhabitants divided. 2.1.3 The “Right to the City” for a just city?

I take upon myself Thrasymachus’ concept of justice as phrased by David Harvey (HARVEY, 2003, P. 940): “Justice is simply whatever the ruling class wants it to be.” Therefore, the notion of justice must be deepened. To do so, I flip around the notion and have a look at what is unjust. It is the incapacity to access basic needs and activities, through transportation systems, due to your condition as a person with disabilities, or an elderly person, or being pregnant. It is a city shaped and designed in a way that makes some spatialities more dependent on cars than the other to the point that benefits from using sustainable modes of transport (air pollution reduction, time travel, cycling health benefit,) go principally to the most privileged. The concept of “Right to the city” offers relevant understandings and perspectives on what is just and unjust regarding the experience of the city. Harvey defines such a right as not only access to the actual reality of the city but as a right to modify this reality (HARVEY, 2003). Verlinghieri and Schwanen see it as the right of the city’s inhabitants to “produce, appropriate, rework, and use urban space and life”(VERLINGHIERI & SCHWANEN, 2020, P. 3), declining the concept in its materiality dimension. Mobility researchers often mistake the two dimensions as they forget that the city has always been a place of confusion, inequality, and violence. Allowing access to an unequal city is not being equal: “Between equal rights, force decides”. There is “nothing more unequal than the equal treatment of unequals”. Through theoretical equality and under constant and equally shared growth, the poorer become poorer and the rich richer. The same perspective can be applied to transportation solutions. However, the place for utopian ideas is central to drive urban transformation. They are indispensable for motivation and action. Harvey advocates for new rights that also encompass the freedom of movement often confused the notion of mobility encapsulated in the neoliberal dream (see the mobility theory above) that pays no heed to the necessary diversification of types of movement. It is an active right to access a city shaped in accord with disadvantaged populations’ needs. Exploring the justice of mobility is to critically assess the provision of better cycling structure and their access by looking at it through the lenses of societies’ injustices like gender, generational, racial. It is also

unveiling the downsides of developing infrastructures, even in disadvantaged areas, as it might benefit gentrification and therefore, displacement of populations to even less connected areas. The expansion of cycling culture and infrastructures to car-dependent areas is at the core of the question of Mobility Justice. (SHELLER, 2020). The identification of spatial mismatch and physical accessibility can serve as a social indicator to evaluate government policies in cycling practices. (VERLINGHIERI & SCHWANEN, 2020). My research question draws on these perspectives and explores what meso-level cycling policies can bring to the research corpus. 3 The object of study

To investigate these questions, the capital of Denmark, Copenhagen, forms an ideal case since the city is recognized as one of the most bicycle-friendly cities in the world. In 2016 in Denmark, 15% of all the trips were made by bicycle, which makes the country one of the most cycling nations in the world (NIELSEN ET AL., 2016). People cycle in all weather conditions and at all times of the day. Bicycles are used in all facets of life: pleasure, commuting, transport of goods, family travel, and more. In this context, Copenhagen municipality is seen as an innovative and cutting-edge city as the city plans to achieve ambitious goals regarding the shares of bikes as the principal mode of transport (COPENHAGEN MUNICIPALITY, 2012). The city is often used by international media as an example of good cycling-related policy, practices, and urban planning, due to a strong culture of biking and political decisions (DESCAMPS, 2020; KIRSCHBAUM, 2019; REID, 2019). Indeed, Copenhagen, the city of cyclists, was not built in a day. Despite its global reputation, the story of the city is punctuated by struggle, backslashes, and conflicts over the public space and has still a lot to improve (HENDERSON & GULSRUD, 2019)

Besides, the city portrays itself as a cycling city (COPENHAGEN MUNICIPALITY, 2019), and its efforts to evaluate cycling conditions extended to a program to promote cycling (HAUSTEIN, KOGLIN, ET AL., 2020). Two figures exemplify the outstanding performance of Copenhagen with regards to cycling as the preeminent mode of transportation: 49% of commuters traveling to work or education are cyclists, - the target is to increase that number up to 50% by 2025 - and 32% of all trips to, from, and in Copenhagen in 2018 were made by cars - the target is to decrease that number to 25% by 2025 - (COPENHAGEN MUNICIPALITY, 2017A). Despite these figures that bear witness to the success of policymakers, still more than half of the population has not adopted bikes as their primary mode of commuting yet. Moreover, the fairytale might have its downsides. Deregulation of housing in Copenhagen and the neoliberal approach of “green growth” policies such as branding Copenhagen as a cycling city might have pushed the working classes and middle class out of the city (HENDERSON & GULSRUD, 2019). Concepts such as “the right to the city” could resonate in the Copenhagen environment and help to shed light on the inequalities that undermine green mobility goals. Indeed, cycling policies and promotion will help to fight short-term goals about global warming but will probably fail long term if they do not incorporate the most vulnerable in the process, such as the “yellow vest” movement in France (KIMMELMAN, 2018; WATTS, 2018).

4 Methodology

To answer my research question, I organized my study method into three parts. First, I undertook to analyze the Danish National Travel Survey (TU) which has for the first time published the data set that concern the Greater Copenhagen (see the description of TU later in this chapter). It is the main data source from which Copenhagen Municipality’s Bicycle accounts and strategic reports are made. I chose this method following a quick review of the current study methods that explore cyclist’s behavior and understanding trends. Some research investigated, effects of gentrification on commuting behavior through the American Community Survey (ACS) (BEREITSCHAFT, 2020), also used to evaluate bike-sharing systems in the US (MOONEY ET AL., 2019; WANG & ZHOU, 2017). The same type of survey was used in Canada to examine income inequalities in Bike Score (FULLER & WINTERS, 2017) or England to exploring socio- demographic factors in relation to utility and leisure cycling (GOODMAN & ALDRED, 2018). The survey offers the advantage of crossing items and topics to widen the approaches of a phenomenon (ROSAS- SATIZÁBAL ET AL., 2020) In a Scandinavian context, different studies used the survey methods to explore aspects of cycling, from a comparison between Stockholm and Copenhagen cycling culture (HAUSTEIN, KOGLIN, ET AL., 2020) to the effects of the cultural origin of migrants on cycling practices (HAUSTEIN, KROESEN, ET AL., 2020). The consultancy company Ramboll just released a survey taking place in 7 different European capital cities about gender inequalities in mobility (RAMBØLL, 2021), following the same cross-sectional survey design that Prati et al. investigated also in Europe gender differences in attitudes towards cycling (PRATI ET AL., 2019) The mobility justice theoretical framework provided me with themes to look for in the analysis of cycling inequalities: spatial inequalities, gender, income, occupation, and age. The racial perspective on cycling was excluded as the Danish Technical University (DTU) that oversees the survey informed me they do not merge the different sets of data that will combine cycling behavior with citizen’s backgrounds. Even if I wanted, I could not get the clearance to proceed with the merging as they do not consider the intersection relevant and accurate (See interview with Thomas Sick Nielsen). Then, once I had a better picture of the cycling behaviors and patterns at the scale of the Greater Copenhagen, I could analyze available documents from the Municipality of Copenhagen that focus on the cycling strategy. I could draw a comparison between the two different scales: Greater Copenhagen and Copenhagen Municipality. However, the line is fine between the two as there is no meso-level planning strategy in the region of Copenhagen. As the results showed, the municipality of Copenhagen endorses the role of planning the mobility at the meta-scale of the Greater Copenhagen, notably through the Cycle Superhighways initiatives. The document analysis explored the same themes defined within the mobility justice theory. The documents, presented further, were political documents, written in English and therefore addressed to an international audience. However, the way the themes were approached helps understanding how the strategies and policies, or at least the vision that underly them, addressed the mobility justice challenges. Finally, I used the two precedents stages to feed a set of expert interviews that addressed the Mobility Justice themes. It is an efficient method to collect quickly good data from interviews with whom I share common scientific background. It also creates a stimulating environment to discuss. It is also a good entry

point to the field of research. The interviewee is a target but also holds a key position in the institution or organization. It can therefore expand my access to the field if the expert indicates another relevant expert (MENZ ET AL., 2009). I chose to run some semi-structured interviews as it is a frequent technique used in qualitative research (DICICCO-BLOOM & CRABTREE, 2006) and is often perceived as a quick and simple data collection method (WENGRAF, 2001). I provided beforehand a guideline of the questions I asked to reduce the chances to digress too much. On twelve requests for an interview, I sadly got only four positive answers and none of them from the municipality that forwarded me to the online documents I had already collected. To code my results, I used a table in which I synthesized and divided up the main results by themes (from the Mobility Justice) and by the source of data. This way I forced myself to focus on the main information. 4.1 Secondary data sources In this sub-section, I will present the different documents that I gathered during the research phase. It is a useful tool to come back to when reading the results as it can be overwhelming with the high quantity of information. 4.1.1 City of Copenhagen: Green Mobility This document is a focus of the Climate Plan 2025 for Copenhagen5 created in 2012. It presents more thoroughly the vision and goals to address the green mobility challenges. It was produced by the TMF (Technical and Environmental Administration) of Copenhagen. This document is a typical “vision and goals” document. It gives orientation to policies and regulations by defining political goals to achieve. The goals can be a quite precise event though their evaluation remains very abstract. The document does not present its sources of data. The text was created in English by the TMF. This document translates political visions into slightly technical goals. The facts presented in this document must be put in perspective. A certain distance from what they present is necessary. 4.1.2 City of Copenhagen’s budget: a city for everyone (En By for Alle) This document summarizes the features of a budget from 2017 that was dedicated to the most vulnerable. The budget integrates seven themes but only the “Investment in Green City and Infrastructure” and “A good and Safe life for all Copenhageners” will be of interest. It is CoUrban, a consultancy company in Copenhagen, that mentioned the budget for the first time as they benefited from it to run a project with Cycling Without Age (see interviews). The document has been found on the website of the municipality and was translated from a website. The translation might not be accurate sometimes. 4.1.3 City of Copenhagen: Cycle Superhighways The superbike trails are a network of bike paths in the capital region. It was created in 2009 to create better conditions for bike commuters and make the bike a relevant means of transport for daily commuting. It targets trips between 5-30 kilometers. Today, the superbike network connects 19 municipalities via 10 established superbike trails and the network is expanding. The project is a collaboration between 30 municipalities and the Capital Region of Denmark. The administration in charge of it is part of the TMF

5 https://kk.sites.itera.dk/apps/kk_pub2/index.asp?mode=detalje&id=983

(Technical and Environmental Administration). The Office for Cycle Superhighways created in 2011 oversees the production of the document. Like its cousin from the Copenhagen Bicycle program, the Cycle Superhighways Bicycle account is first and foremost a tool of communication that presents the key figures of the Cycle Superhighway. It presents the results from the eight existing cycle superhighways as well as the effects the increase in cyclists has on congestion, climate, and health. This document is from 2019 but it shows numbers from the Danish National Travel Survey from 2018. Like the Bicycle account, the data comes from TU (Transportvaneundersøgelsen). They also use Denmark Statistics data bank. The text is translated was written in English by the Cycle Superhighway. Like for the bicycle account, this document has been produced by the municipality. It is a document that is both political and technical. Compared to the Bicycle Account, these documents present references. However, the references are listed but not incorporated in the text, making it difficult to testify the numbers. 4.1.4 City of Copenhagen & Decisio: Effects of lower car use This document is a report that investigates the effects of a shift from cars to public transport and biking. At Copenhagen’s municipality request, it has been made by two organizations, DECISIO, and SIGNIFICANCE. They are respectively an independent research institute specialized in quantitative research on mobility and transport and a private economic research consultancy specialized in spatial economic issues. This document was transmitted by the TMF after I attempted to interview them. It is an external consultant production for public decision-making. The data comes from TU (Transportvaneundersøgelsen). They also use other publications from DTU and other sources. I will use this document as it has been provided by the municipality which implies that they share the conclusions of the report and they might influence their strategies and policies with it. First, the report presents a statistical analysis of the modal split to work or education per income class, then, secondly, proceed an analysis of social and economic effects of lower car use. The report focuses on the Capital Region and eastern Sjaelland. This might be a bit bigger than the area of the Greater Copenhagen covered by the TU survey. The report makes a distinction between the urbanites, people living in the cities of Copenhagen and Frederiksberg, and the rest of the population called the suburbanites. This distinction is simple but allows a first approach to the topic. 4.1.5 Denmark Statistic To investigate the gender approach of cycling accidents (see analysis chapter), I collected the raw data provided by Statistic Denmark6. I narrowed it down to the municipalities that constitute the Greater Copenhagen and compile the results that I split afterward into three groups: total casualties, seriously injured, and slightly injured. All of them were observed from a gender perspective.

6https://www.statbank.dk/statbank5a/selectvarval/define.asp?PLanguage=1&subword=tabsel&MainTable=UHELD K1&PXSId=113915&tablestyle=&ST=SD&buttons=0

4.1.6 Gender studies by Ramboll The report has been developed by Ramboll Smart Mobility7 in partnership with and supported by the Ramboll Foundation, Helsinki Region Transport (HSL), Region Stockholm and Trafikverket in Sweden, and VBB in Berlin Germany. Rambøll is a consultancy company from Denmark. The purpose of this report is to shed light on gender inequalities and differences in transport and mobility and to contribute to bridging the data gender gap. 4.1.7 Danish National Travel Survey TU or Transportvaneundersøgelsen is a national travel survey of Danes' transport behavior in Denmark realized by the Technical University of Denmark (DTU). Here is a figure that summarizes the origin of the survey in the last 45 years8

Figure 3: History of the Danish National Travel Survey

In 2021, DTU segmented and disaggregated the data from 2019 to the scale of Copenhagen’s built area.

7 https://ramboll.com/services-and-sectors/transport/smart-mobility 8 https://www.cta.man.dtu.dk/english/national-travel-survey/what_is_tu

The data extraction focuses to the scale of the Greater Copenhagen area (named “Copenhagen area” in the TU report). This area is constituted of the two Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS) DK011 and DK012 of Denmark, which is respectively Copenhagen city (Byen København) and Copenhagen surroundings (Københavns omegn). NUTS is a geocode standard for referencing the subdivisions of countries for statistical purposes. Here are the cities that are integrated into this area NUTS DK011: Copenhagen, Frederiksberg, Dragør and Tårnby. NUTS DK012: Albertslund, Ballerup, Brøndby, Gentofte, Gladsaxe, Glostrup, Herlev, Hvidovre, Høje-Taastrup, Ishøj, Lyngby- Taarbæk, Rødovre and Vallensbæk.

Figure 4: Denmark NUTS (source Eurostat9) The Center for Transport Analytics from DTU oversees the survey and is managed on behalf of a group of Danish authorities and organizations. DTU Transport is more generally in charge to enhance the quality of future traffic modeling. The survey answers a need arising from the university’s partners to access a stable and operational survey that oversees Danes’ travel behavior in both detailed but not very advanced analysis. I will use the Copenhagen focus survey 2019 The technical operation of the survey is carried out by a subcontractor. However, DTU oversees the designing of the data collection, the provision of tasks to external suppliers, quality assurance as well as post-processing of data collected, and finally the dissemination of results. They cover 365 days a year and the data collection takes place all along the year every month, providing a very steady source of data that constitutes a knit monitoring of the transports behaviors, with working and non-working days. TU is a combination of internet and telephone interviews and concerns Danish residents over 6 years old, exclusive Greenland, and the Faroe Islands. However, there is a grey area since it is mentioned in the documents also that the age span is between 10-84 years old. It will be assumed that it does not influence grandly the results though.

9 https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/345175/7451602/2021-NUTS-3-map-DK.pdf

The document presents several limitations to take into consideration. The interview recipients must have a CPR (Central Person Registered), the national identification number that most Danes or temporary and permanent residents must apply to. Non-EU citizens must apply to a CPR number if they intend to stay more than 3 months in the country and EU citizens must apply to it within the first 6 months of their arrival on the Danish territory. Therefore, we can question the results regarding the mobility of people that do not have a CPR number. Though, I could not find any references on the evaluation of individuals without CPR numbers in Denmark. Overall, the CPR is considered as an accurate and reliable content10. The interviews are carried out by an external supplier which can influence the nature of the answers. The type of answers one gives to a potential respondent that is working for the municipality would be probably different from answers given to a private company. Whether the nature of the recipients or the methodology to collect the data, the results seem highly reliable. The interviews made in the Copenhagen area represent 28% of the total interview and 28.3% of all trips.

Figure 5: National Travel Survey. Denmark scale (DTU, 2020)

Figure 6: National Travel Survey. Copenhagen scale (DTU, 2021)

However, the greater Copenhagen (799 033 inhabitants) represents only 14% of the entire population in Denmark (5 840 045 inhabitants)11. These documents are accessible to everyone online. There is no personal data involved. The data must be cited as a scientific reference. The documents are labeled with the DTU logo and I contacted the researcher in charge of the aggregation of the data. I have therefore a confirmation of the authenticity of the documents. As mentioned previously, it seems that there are no agendas and biases. An analysis of the variables could reveal deeper biases, but it is not the point of the research. There is an overrepresentation of the Copenhagen area’s residents among TU’s interviewees (see the analysis on the next page). In theory, the area being denser than the rest of the country, offering better transports options, should influence the results towards more diverse transportation behaviors than the reality.

10 https://www.dst.dk/en/Statistik/dokumentation/documentationofstatistics/the-population/accuracy-and- reliability 11 https://www.dst.dk/en/Statistik/emner/befolkning-og-valg/befolkning-og-befolkningsfremskrivning

4.1.8 Bicycle account 2018 (published in 2019) Copenhagen Municipality The bicycle accounts (cykelregnskab)present since 1995 the development of cycling in Copenhagen is documented in the biennial Bicycle Accounts that have been published since 1995. They contain political goals and KPIs (key performance indicators) and supplementary data that present various topics. They are parts of a series of documents published on regular basis (once a year or once every two years)

Figure 7: Cykelredegørelse 202012, translated from the internet.

Figure 8: Technical and Environmental Administration or TMF13 (Teknik-og Miljøforvaltningen) of Copenhagen Municipality

This document is produced by the Mobility, Climate Adaptation, and Urban Maintenance department or MKB (Mobilitet, Klimatilpasning og Byvedligehold). This department is part of the Technical and Environmental Administration or TMF (Teknik-og Miljøforvaltningen) of Copenhagen Municipality. TMF

12 https://kk.sites.itera.dk/apps/kk_pub2/index.asp?mode=detalje&id=2042 13 https://www.kk.dk/artikel/teknik-og-milj%C3%B8forvaltningen

is responsible for “the City’s environmental and climate activities, development of the traffic area, development of new urban areas and for a number of authoritative functions”14. The bicycle accounts are made every two years The bicycle accounts are presented as an overview of Copenhagen city’s efforts in the bicycle area, as well as of the political adoption goals. The status plus the initiatives that should be initiated to achieve these goals constitute a tool that can be used as both a mean for communication, nationally and internationally (hence the official English translation of the Bicycle Accounts) and a program that contribute to achieving Copenhagen climate plan 2025. The target groups are officially named: Citizens, partners-professionals, the media, and decision-makers. The bicycle accounts should not be confused with the bicycle report (Cykelredegørelse) published every year which is more detailed and focused on the Technical and Environmental Committee (see figures on the previous page) The bicycle accounts use the data from TU. The municipality also runs its own survey to evaluate the satisfaction and expectations of the citizens in the matter of cycling (Interview of Thomas Sick Nickelsen in appendix). We will have a look at the bicycle account 2018 as the bicycle account 2020 has not been published and might be postponed to 2021 due to Covid. The bicycle account is translated into English by the municipality itself. Therefore, it is meant to be understood by internationals. These documents have been produced by the municipality. It is a document that is both political and technical. We can notice the very few references presented. All the numbers are subject to interpretation, but I will take for granted the analysis exposed there. The documents have been downloaded from the municipality website and are labeled from the municipality. The introduction is written by the Lord Mayor and a Mayor. Therefore, the tone is propitious for complacency and self-satisfaction with goals and achievements. The writing style is typical of political individual perspective with the use of 1st person plural pronoun to stimulate the identification of the reader within the completion of these achievements. The tone becomes more neutral as the document unfolds the statistics, themes, and analysis. 5 Analysis

5.1 The recontextualization of the cycling practice Mobility Justice invites us to look at the cycling practice through the angle of sustainability. It is therefore important to recontextualize cycling practices in the field of transportation.

14 https://international.kk.dk/artikel/technical-and-environmental-administration

100.0% 90.0% 80.0% Walking 68.4% 70.0% Cycling 60.0% Car 50.0% Collective road 40.0%

Mileage share Mileage 30.0% Train 20.0% 14.8% Others 8.8% 10.0% 3.7% 3.1% 1.2% 0.0%

Figure 9: Share of mileage by mode. Chart made from table 3 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 6). Reference: author

Table 3 and Table 20b of the Danish National Travel Survey treats the personal mileage and travel time by mode of transports. It shows that on average in the greater Copenhagen danish residents do ten times more kilometers by car than by bike. If we take all modes of transport, citizens make only 8.8% of their mileage per day by bike. The cars (68.4%) and the trains (14.8%) are in the first and second position. In its bicycle account 2018 The municipality confirms that “even though car traffic into and out of the city has only increased by 5% during the same period, it is still the dominant transport mode” (Copenhagen Municipality, 2019, p. 21). Why it is important to focus on mileage? Because when we talk about socio- ecological challenges and therefore gas emissions, it is important to estimate the impact of practices in that matter. Also, when it comes to health benefits, it is the number of kilometers that is important to look at. The mileage constitutes the materiality of the needs in transport. These numbers are confirmed and weighted by table 12 that shows the percentage of the entire mileage done by different modes of transport in the Greater Copenhagen. In the Greater Copenhagen, Danish residents spend most of their personal mileage to commute and for leisure activities. The commuting consists of two categories in the TU survey: Workplace and School/educational. It has its importance since we will see further when I will dig into the difference of behaviors between workers and students. The leisure purpose is composed of activities such as visit family and friends, doing sports, entertainment, allotment, or summer cottage, etc.

16% Workplace 24% Educational

4% Errands 13% Leisure 43% Business

Figure 10: Share of mileage by purpose. Chart made from figure 21 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 17). Reference: author

5.2 Spatial inequalities between the Greater Copenhagen and Copenhagen Municipality

5.2.1 Statistics Commuters modal split per trips (bikes)

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0% Greater Copenhagen Copenhagen Municipality

20.0%

10.0%

0.0% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Figure 11: Commuter modal split per trip (bikes). Comparison between Copenhagen Municipality and the Greater Copenhagen. Chart made from table 25 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 21) and the “Bicycle account 2018”(Copenhagen Municipality, 2019, p. 6); Reference: author

The bicycle report 2020 (Cykelredegørelse 2020 15) based on statistics from 2019 showed that the bike share dropped to 44% in 2019, which is a decrease compared to 2018. The figure n°11 of my research confirms that the Greater Copenhagen and the Municipality follow the same trend and that their cycling share per trip is decreasing. The figure 26 of TU shows the modal split of commuters by journeys with the primary target workplace in the greater Copenhagen. We can see the correlation between the bicycle and collective transports curves. Also, over the last decade, the collective transports and walk curves maintained their level in the shares, where the bicycle’s curve augmented by 7 points to the detriment of the car. Therefore, the cars take less place as the main mode of transport to go to work in the Greater Copenhagen. Commuters modal split per mileage in the Greater Copenhagen (all modes)

15 https://kk.sites.itera.dk/apps/kk_pub2/index.asp?mode=detalje&id=2042

80.00%

70.00%

60.00% Walk 50.00% Bicycle

40.00% Car Collect. bus 30.00% Train 20.00% Other 10.00%

0.00% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Figure 12: Greater Copenhagen. Modal split by mileage (all modes). Chart made from the table 8 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 8). Reference: author

Despite an overall augmentation of the mileage whatever the mode of transports, the figure shows that, since 2010, the share of the bike in the modal split decreased. It means that in proportion, not in absolute value, the residents of the Greater Copenhagen bike less than before. This tendency is confirmed for all modes of transport that either decrease or stagnate, Except for the cars that, by way of compensation, have increased their share in the modal split by mileage. Overall, we observe a general stagnation with a slow tendency to decreasing for all modes of transport but cars for the last ten years. The inverse phenomenon is described by the municipality in its bicycle account. The figures presented show how many kilometers are respectively carried out by car or by bicycle on a weekday. The car share figure dropped from 4.73 km in 2017 to 4.71 km in 2018, whereas the bicycle share figure rose from 1.39 million km in 2017 to 1.44 million km in 2018. The two areas experience different trends in cycling practices. Modal split all modes (per trips) With the table 18 of TU, we can proceed the calculation of the modal split of all trips and the modal split of trips to work and education, in the Greater Copenhagen. These results include inner suburbs. The method of calculation will be found in the appendix (see appendixes). With the bicycle account from the municipality, I can estimate the territorial inequalities in cycling. However, the data compared are not from the same year (2018 for the bicycle account and 2019 for TU). Therefore, we compare trends not pure numbers.

Modal Split. All modes. Comparison Greater Copenhagen / Copenhagen Municipality (all trips) Greater Copenhagen

24% 25%

21% Cycling 28% Public Transport Copenhagen City Car 32% 19% 12% Walking

39%

Figure 13: Modal split comparison between Greater Copenhagen and Copenhagen Municipality (all trips). Chart made from the table 18 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 14) and the “Bicycle account 2018” (Copenhagen Municipality, 2019, p. 6). Reference: author

Modal Split. All modes. Comparison Greater Copenhagen / Copenhagen Municipality (Commuting) Greater Copenhagen 12%

6% 27% Cycling 49% Public Transport Copenhagen City 38% 31% Car Walking 18%

19%

Figure 14:Modal split comparison between Greater Copenhagen and Copenhagen Municipality (Commuting). Chart made from the table 18 of TU (DTU, 2019, p. 14) and the “Bicycle account 2018” (Copenhagen Municipality, 2019, p. 6). Reference: author

The figure 11 presents a pretty balanced distribution in the modal split for all trips between Copenhagen city (28%) and the Greater Copenhagen (25%). The main difference is situated between cars and public transports, where the latest loses 7 points and car share gains 7 points. Public transport is still the least preferred by citizens. When it comes to cycling to commute, the numbers become impressive with almost half of the trips made by bike to work or education. The modal shares for trips to work and education become very

interesting as we observe a drop of 11 points between Copenhagen City (49%) and the greater Copenhagen (38%). These points are distributed to walking and the cars. 5.2.2 Cycling policies and strategies The municipality plans to build 62km of “superhighways” for the bicycle. These highways or Supercykelstier are cycle highways, where the commuters’ needs are the highest priority. It takes place at the scale of the Region of Copenhagen and tries to offer bike ride options with fewer stops and increased safety. It is supposed to offer an alternative to the car on distances of more than 5 kilometers. The alternative is also justified by an ecological and healthy mode of transport16. The initiative was based on an analysis of the potentials for long-distance biking trips in the region of Copenhagen. The project was rapidly financed by the region and the state. An annual funding scheme was voted in 2010 for the development of the Cycle Superhighway collaboration. Since then, there is a constant extension of the network over the region. Three of them were created until 2017 when it was decided to create 5 more superhighways. The socio-economic analysis in 2018 confirmed the crucial role of the project. The project is now integrated into the famous Finger plan, a strategic plan for the development of the region that takes its roots in the post-war years from 1945 to 1948 (SØRENSEN & TORFING, 2019).

Figure 15: map of the existing and future cycling highways. Figure 16:Sketch from the first Finger Plan created by the Regional Source: Cycle superhighways bicycle account (REF) Planning Office in 1947 (Danish Ministry of Environment “Finger plan”)

The key numbers of the report show a clear impact in the modal shift with longer trips made by bike than the ones made usually. 14% of the new cyclists used to take their car and the average of the trip is 11km. The gender split seems to be balanced between men and women that benefit from the new opportunity as a mean of transport. A piece of major information is that half of the population of the area drives less than 10km to go to work. The reports demonstrate what seems to be obvious: The closer we get from the municipality of Copenhagen, the bigger are the number of cyclists using the cycle superhighways. It shows the gravitational attraction of the Capital for citizens of the whole region. The documents argue that the increase of cyclists will benefit everyone (car drivers, cyclists, and public transports users). The bicycle strategy 2011-2025 presents a figure showing the number of commuters (work and education), divided by mode and distance. In order to operationalize modal switch (car to bikes), the

16 https://supercykelstier.dk/about/

municipality targeted the 45,000 people who drive 2-10 kilometers, most of them reside outside of the municipality.

Distance 0 – 2km 2 – 4.9km 5 – 9.9km 10 – 14.9 > 15km All

Car 3000 18 000 27 000 23 0000 67 000 138 000

Figure 17: Potential living area for targeted car commuters. Map made on QGIS with the data from opendata.dk17 and the figure 15. Reference: author

This figure was made to show the potential area where live the groups targeted by the municipality. The hatched zone corresponds to the area where people doing 10km by bike in total to go to work or education live (5km one way). The green zone corresponds to those where people do 15km. Despite a relevant objective to focus the group who commute 10km, there is a strong potential in focusing areas that are a bit further.

17 https://www.opendata.dk/

5.2.3 Interviews Thomas Sick Nielsen mentions the context of urban growth and its consequences on former industrial areas like Nordhavn that have been transformed “successfully” The price of the dwelling is very high and competes with the peripheries. In her interview, Natalie Gulsrud confirms that the housing process has exploded over the last ten years. And like Thomas Nielsen, she said that is probably going to go up, that the process is not complete yet. She mentions the affordability gap in the access to dwellings and therefore creates transportation issues. A part of the population is moving out to the suburb. Thomas Sick Nielsen clarified that since the best infrastructures are in the inner city, there will be of course an impact on the access to a well-connected cycling network. Natalie Gulsrud mentioned that there is a plan for new paths to go to the suburb (Cycle Superhighways). Her book “Street Fights in Copenhagen” (HENDERSON & GULSRUD, 2019) showed that policies are important, but planning is not cohesive at the regional scale that it is only based on municipal initiative. The meta or Meso planning level is missing. Thomas Sick Nielsen said that currently, all social classes IN Copenhagen are pretty good transport links. Some areas are a little remote and require cycling through congestion corridors like in Sudhavn, a new development area in the south of Copenhagen. Therefore, it is important to investigate infrastructure and spatial conditions for cycling. There is a lot of inequality with differences in to access cycling options. Some inequalities occur in Copenhagen, but also when you go further. To the question about the reasons behind the spatial conditions that create inequality in access to cycling options, he suggested that several explanations can explain it. People displaced from the city center bring the cycling culture with them but also that the more technical your job is, the less reachable by bike it is. This phenomenon is always backed up by physical elements.

5.3 Gender 5.3.1 Statistics Trips, mileage, and travel time comparison

Table 2: Key figures in Greater Copenhagen. Chart made from the table 2 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 5). Reference: author

Women Men

Average, total number of trips 2.8 2.8 Trips per person, per day

Average, total travel time 56 57 Mins per person, per day

Average, total mileage 27 34 Km per person, per day

- hereof motorized modes 23 30 Km per person, per day

Driving license 76% 85% Share of the population. >= 18yo

The main results show a clear balance between men and women in cycling. On average, they do the same number of trips and the same amount of mileage per person per day. However, the distance traveled in total is less important as motorized modes are used more by men, who possessed more driving licenses in that regard, than women. This imbalance is confirmed with the table 28 of TU that shows the same interval between genders in the use of the car. Modal split (mileage and travel time)

25%

20%

15% Men

10% Women ModalSplit

0% Personal Mileage Travel Time

Figure 18:Gender modal split by mileage and travel time. Chart made from the table 28a of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 22). Reference: author

Women spend more time on the bike than men. Since the women do on average the exact same amount of mileage by bike per day (2.6km), we can imagine that men are faster on the bike than women.

Bicycle accidents However, women (119 accidents) have had 30% more serious accidents than men (92) even though the total of accidents is almost balanced between women (52%) and men (48%). These numbers come from the analysis of the data from Statistik Denmark (Police numbers). We can draw the hypothesis that women are less used to the bike, or they drive in conditions that do not assure their safety.

Casualities, gender. 181 200 185 145 143 133 137142 140 173 150 131 131 130 121127 116 120 111 123 162

100 117 Men Casualities 50 Women

0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Years

Figure 19: Gender. Number total of causalities on the bike in the Greater Copenhagen. Chart made from Denmark Statistic Data. Reference: author

Seriously injured, gender.

150 121 97 119 95 8893 91 95 78 85 100 69 77 76 76 7576 72 103 92 Men 50 71 Casualities Women 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Years

Figure 20: Gender. Numbers of seriously injured in a bike in the Greater Copenhagen. Chart made from Denmark Statistic Data. Reference: author

Slightly injured, gender. 90 80 78 70 57 65 5152 60 4749 47 4446 4345 46 50 42 41 46 55 34 40 29 45 Men

Casualities 30 20 Women 10 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Years

Figure 21: Gender. Numbers of slightly injured in a bike in the Greater Copenhagen. Chart made from Denmark Statistic Data. Reference: author

5.3.2 Cycling policies and strategies

In 2011, in the bicycle strategy 2011-2025, 48% of Copenhagen cyclists said that the main reason they choose the bicycle is that it is the fastest and easiest way to get around. This says a lot about the type of cyclists. The research of speed can characterize the type of cyclists you have or at least that is privileged. Years later, they are still the main reasons (Copenhagen Municipality, 2019). The feeling of being safe on the bike was about 68% in 2011, the objective was to reach 80% in 2015. Today, it is about 77% of cyclists feel safe (Bicycle account 2018, page 10). This goal is almost achieved. 5.3.3 Interviews Marianne Weinreich brought important elements regarding the gender approach of cycling. She affirms that women are more averse to risks than men. The share of women cycling is a good indicator to evaluate the safety of a city’s cycling practices. Despite numbers that witness a balance in the cycling practice in Copenhagen, she remembers that men and women have different trip patterns. For instance, men cycle longer distances, women do more trips. She regrets that for the last 20 years she has been working in the mobility sector, still, no one talks about gender. The gender aspect is still very present. Women associate way more sustainability with a bicycle than men. Through this paper, we find that there is a narrative behind driving a car. There are some social dimensions. What it is to be a successful guy? There are different social experiences. It can be about the emotional link between men and cars. You advertise the car for men and vacuum for women. Pop-up bicycle lanes during corona have seen more women riding their bikes. It is a good example of how policies can address on purpose or not some gender inequalities.

5.4 Income 5.4.1 Statistics Average mileage comparison (bicycles and all modes)

4 3.8

3.5 3.3 3.3

2.5 2.2 1.9 2

1.5 Mileage Mileage per day

0.5

0 <= 150 000 151 - 250 000 251 - 350 000 351 - 500 000 > 500 000 income Groups

Figure 22: Bicycle. mileage per day per income groups. Chart made from the table 37 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 28). Reference: author

Chart Title 60

20 Mileage Mileage per day

0 <= 150 000 151 - 250 000 251 - 350 000 351 - 500 000 > 500 000 income groups

Walk Bicycle Car Collective Road Train Total

Figure 23: All modes of transport. Mileage per day per income group. Chart made from the table 37 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 28). Reference: author

The income group that earns less than 150 000 Danish Kroner and the one that earns between 151 000 and 250 000 Danish Kroner are making less mileage. The latest (1.9 kilometers per day) does almost half of the daily mileage of the richest group (3.6 kilometers per day). This table demonstrates that it is indeed the

richest that bike the most (in mileage). Overall, the richest travel way more than the poorest, using way more diversified mode of transports. Modal split per mileage

12%

10%

4% Share of of Share mileage personal 2%

0% <= 150 000 151 - 250 000 251 - 350 000 351 - 500 000 > 500 000 income Groups

Figure 24: Bicycle. Modal split per mileage per income group. All modes of transport. Chart made from the table 37a of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 28). Reference: author

The modal split per kilometers shows a different ranking. The richest group is actually the one that, in the percentage of all the mileage done, has the lowest bike share. In other words, it means the share of their personal mileage dedicated to bikes is less important than the one of all the other groups, especially the poorest. This perfectly illustrates the limitation of the analysis of the modal split as the only way to evaluate the bicycle practice. In that table, we can see that the modal split is clearly in favor of the poorest in the use of the bike as this mode represents for the lowest income group the highest share in all income groups. But we put in perspective with the mileage done, we realize that because the richest travel more, their mileage in biking is bigger than the poorest. The gender question should be also approached with the income groups and occupation groups if it is imbalanced among them. 5.4.2 Cycling policies and strategies

The bicycle account 2018 treats very briefly the approach through income groups (COPENHAGEN MUNICIPALITY, 2019, P. 26). It presents only the share of families with cars based on disposable income. Unsurprisingly there is a link between citizen’s income and access to cars. The richest have more cars than the poorest. Without writing it, the municipality suggests, that the richest are the ones using more their cars (and therefore less their bike?). It is an incomplete approach as the analysis of TU demonstrated. The richest are the ones doing the most mileage per individual with cars but also with bikes. The bicycle account 2018 also mentions the role of integration of the bike with the vulnerable areas. However, opening an area works both ways in a matter of flux. Residents are able to reach a well-connected

bicycle lane, but it makes also the area more accessible in the other way. The question of gentrification is raised. The City of Copenhagen’s report on the effects of lower car use splits the population into five quintiles that represent each of the 20% of the population per income, from the lowest to the highest. Among all the conclusions made by the report, few items particularly caught my attention: - High-income groups are more likely to reside in the suburbs - High-income groups travel more often to/from/in the central municipalities than low-income groups - Suburban high-income groups commute about 12 times more to the center by car than the lowest income groups - Suburban high-income groups travel about 25% longer than suburban low-income groups 5.4.3 Interviews Thomas Sick Nielsen comes up to urban growth and affirms, like Natalie Gulsrud that it is taking place in the very dense urban corpse for the last two decades. The prices increased and the expensive places where wealthy people live offer very good cycling options. It is part of the dynamic.

Marianne Weinreich mentioned that in Denmark you do not use your cycle because you cannot afford a car. Actually, the higher the income the more likely Copenhagen you are to use a bicycle and have “sustainable” mobility. 5.5 Age 5.5.1 Statistics Average mileage comparison

3.5

2.5

1.5 Mileage day per Mileage

0.5

0 6-17 yo 18-30 yo 31-50 yo 51-65 yo >= 66 yo Age Groups

Figure 25: Bicycle. Mileage per day per age group. Chart made from the table 31 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 24). Reference: author

The table 31 shows a clear gap between the age groups’ mileage made per day by bike. Between 18 to 65 years old, people do between 2.7 and 3.6km per day on average, whereas the youngest (6-17yo) and the oldest (66+) drive only between 1.6 and 1.1km per day. Overall we observe that the 18-65 years old groups are the ones traveling the most during the day. We can see also that these to last groups are also the ones that travel the less among the age groups. Modal split per mileage

12%

10%

4% Sahre of of Sahre personalm mileage 2%

0% 6-17 yo 18-30 yo 31-50 yo 51-65 yo >= 66 yo Age Groups

Figure 26: Bicycle. Modal split per mileage, per age group. Chart made from the table 31a of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 24). Reference: author

However, the table 31a shows these results. It presents the modal split per kilometers by age group. We can see that the percentage dedicated to bicycles is between 8 and 10% from 6 to 65 years old, which is balanced. Only the +66 years old have 6% of their total mileage made by bike. The conclusion is that the oldest are therefore the ones that use the less the bike in proportion (table 31a) and in absolute value (table 31). 5.5.2 Cycling policies and strategies

The municipality approaches the question of age through the question of safety (COPENHAGEN MUNICIPALITY, 2019, P. 10). The feeling of being safe on the bike was about 68% in 2011, the objective was to reach 80% in 2015. Today, it is about 77% of cyclists feel safe (Copenhagen Municipality, 2019, p. 10) Even though this goal is almost achieved, the municipality proposes both a better monitoring of accidents with a pilot project of ambulances’ data and the goal “Vision Zero” that implies zero cyclists’ fatalities in 2025. Although praiseworthy, this goal is not declined with clear strategies to reduce the number of casualties. Also, as we saw before, it is particularly the number of seriously injured cyclists that is increasing and concerning, especially among women.

In 2011, in the cycling strategy 2011-2025 (COPENHAGEN MUNICIPALITY, 2012, P. 4), the municipality advocated for partnerships to address cycling challenges around integration and health. The

communication tool should be used to target groups with the potential to cycle more. There is the premise of this idea that integration and health should be promoted through local actors which was confirmed during the interview with Cycling Without Age. The Cycle Superhighways bicycle account 2019 reports that 26% of the citizens of the capital region do not meet the requirement from the World Health Organization (WHO) that recommends a minimum of 30 minutes of physical activity per day (CYCLE SUPERHIGHWAYS, 2019). The report presents the health benefit of biking. It has a direct impact on health, especially the risk of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and breast and colon cancer. This is relevant as we identified that the oldest was the one cycling the less. The population is aging and is more sedentary. The development of cycling options for long-distance can affect positively the generational inequality in cycling. “Mobility in Copenhagen must be greener and more efficient in order to stimulate growth, contribute to a carbon-neutral city, and to a good life for Copenhageners.” The introduction of the Action Plan for Green Mobility associates first the mobility, ecological challenges, and efficiency with economic growth (COPENHAGEN MUNICIPALITY, 2013) The carbon emission reduction and the Copenhageners’ life improvement come after. The green mobility package, which consists of five themes (Urban Development, Green means of transport, transport system, incentive, and innovation), does not contain any references to equity or inequality. More than not being at the core of the mobility package, it is not even part of it. Yet, the vision affirms the necessity for everyone to have access to green and healthy transports choices but struggles to translate it into concrete goals. Although precise, the other goals disregard completely the reduction of inequalities in cycling. Even when the municipality recognized the importance to focus on children's cycling incentives, they seem not to see them as direct users of bikes. They affirm that developing their sensitivity to biking will have an impact on their transport behavior later in life but also will indirectly reach their parents and question their own mobility. As we have seen, the numbers of trips and mileage done by the youngest are very low. It is, therefore, restrictive to see the children only either potential future adult users or as a means to reach adults, but not as individuals with the right to cycle freely now.

With its dedicated budget “En by for alle” in 2017 (COPENHAGEN MUNICIPALITY, 2017B), The municipality supported initiatives for Copenhageners with disabilities. The budget was made notably to improve accessibility to traffic. The project goal was to create an understanding of what factors makes a city a good place to live and grow old. Regarding the infrastructures, there is a focus on restoring on improving specific roads in Copenhagen. However, there are no arguments on how this participates in “a city for everyone”. Some consultancy companies like CoUrban, benefited from the budget “En by for alle” to develop a project with elders: Senior Friendly Copenhagen - A City for All18. They also worked with Cycling Without Age on a project called “Health-promoting urban development for seniors”19 (original title Sundhedsfremmende byudvikling for ældre). It confirmed this fusion of initiatives and expertise from the civil society to investigate these questions.

18 https://courban.co/project/cityforall/ 19 https://courban.co/project/dragor/

5.5.3 Interviews Thomas Sick Nielsen points the level of bicycle traffic that can create inequalities among age groups. It can be very uncomfortable to bike for Young children and elders. It can feel unsafe to cycle without skills. You may have inequalities that are maybe not socioeconomics but aged related maybe. It is not comfortable to cycle if you are a young child or an old person. The level of traffic can create inequalities. In Copenhagen, children don’t cycle a lot but also children have short travel distances. It can feel unsafe to cycle without skills. Thomas Sick Nielsen advocates for a better intersection between generational and gender perspectives of cycling practice. Gender issues have not been investigated specifically in the segment of the old persons. Pernille Bussone is part of a cycling initiative, Cycling Without Age (CWA) that brings elders on a trishaw to cycle the city and chatting with them. During the interview, she explained how the demand for age inclusion bike initiative is growing despite the corona situation. She mentions the importance of promoting innovative cycling devices to tackle some inequalities. She takes the example of the electric bikes that allows her to carry around two peoples on a bike, which she would have never been able to do it without electric assistance. It is very inclusive. Among the 5 principles of CWA, one particularly caught my attention: Slowness. The informant says that people are puzzled about that. People are curious and listen to it. Slowing down stimulates the senses. The discussion and interaction become possible. The discussion tends to go to safety. You do not have to go fast. We forgot completely the beauty of slowness. The project took place in a specific situation. It was not completely random. There was a national project: Millions for Elders that aimed to stimulate initiatives around elders’ conditions. The founder of CWA contacted the municipality of Copenhagen. He was working with a company that used to work with people looking for new work purposes in their life. Then the municipality founded the first 5 bikes. Also, the project started in 2011, when the bicycle strategy 2011-2025 was adopted. The municipality of Copenhagen does not provide any type of funding. Municipalities become members of CWA, from which they get inspiration and knowledge. There are other initiatives like them, and that the municipality supports or stimulates (Team Twins). Pernille Bussone regrets that a lot of officials still see it as a social project rather than a mobility project. 5.6 Occupation

5.6.1 Statistics Occupation groups comparison per mileage

4 3.4 3.5

3 2.5 2.5 Students

2 1.5 Earners

Mileage 1.5 1 Unemployed 1 Pensioners 0.5 0 Occupation groups

Figure 27: Occupation groups, bicycle mileage per day. Chart made from the table 34 of TU (DTU, 2021, p. 26). Reference: author

The unemployed and the pensioners are the ones making less mileage per day. Occupation groups, modal split per mileage comparison

20%

15% 11% Students 9% 9% 10% Earners 6% Unemployed 5% Pensioners

Shareof personal mileage 0% Occupation groups

Figure 28: Occupation groups, bicycle modal share (Personal mileage). Chart made from the table 34a (DTU, 2021, p. 26). Reference: author

However, the table 34a shows that students in percentage spend more of their mileage on bikes than all the other groups. According to Copenhagen Municipality, 160 000 students20 live in Copenhagen. It represents 20% of the population of the greater Copenhagen (799 033 inhabitants). I could not find so far if this number is for the city, the region, or the Greater Copenhagen. I will assume it is “only” Copenhagen city and will expand my analysis upon that. Despite a high modal share per mileage for commuting to work and education by bike, we observe in the table 16 of the DTU survey “Journeys, distance and travel time by primary purpose” that only 4% of the total personal mileage per day dedicated to commuting to education or school. This result is to be put into

20 https://international.kk.dk/artikel/copenhagen-facts

perspective with the figure 18b showing that when they can, students (including pupils from 10 years old) use more walking (24%) and particularly cycling (43%) to commute as a primary purpose. This could mean two things: The students counted by the municipality study in Copenhagen but do not live there or on the contrary students live close enough to their schools and university, such as they don’t have to travel too much distance. The second option is the most relevant as it is unlikely that the students live outside such a big area for any type of reasons and commute to study within this area. 5.6.2 Cycling policies and strategies Very early in the Bicycle Strategy 2011-2025, the municipality endeavors to develop its notion of what is a bicycle-friendly city. On the contrary to the “green mobility” document which binds strongly green mobility with economic growth, reducing the cycling strategy to mainly business-oriented goals, this document integrates goals such as healthier citizens, more space, and less noise. It is only eventually, that the cycling practices benefit, almost indirectly, to the reduction of congestion and pollution, and health issues. They emphasize a “higher quality of life” and the “accessibility” to any type of activities (job places, sports facilities, nature, or shopping). It is so far the only mention that the document made about taking into consideration different activities and therefore occupation groups. The municipality led a children’s transport habits study in the city of Copenhagen. The study found out that 66% of them use physically active transports to go to school. But they do not take into consideration the student from the university. It is also insufficient as they do not explain what the share of cyclists among them is. As we have seen before in the TU results analysis that the mileage done by students was low compared to workers. The campaign “En by for alle” in 2017, pursued the creation of “a city with space for children, movement and housing for both young people and refugees” (Copenhagen Municipality, 2017b, p. 2). The budget focused notably on the creation of bicycle paths and the extension of specific roads. It is presented as these investments will contribute to better accessibility to everyone. However, there is no justification or argumentation on how these investments participate fully. What are the indicators? Why did they choose these paths and not the others? Do they communicate only about those but they also invest in others parts of the city? It looks like there is a decorrelation between the target of the program ‘En by for alle” and its execution. 5.6.3 Interviews None of the interviews provided material to operate in the analysis.

5.7 Analysis summary Note: The results by columns are independent in relation to each other. They do not invite for comparison between items.

Table 3: Analysis summary table

Statistics (DTU and Statistics Denmark) Document analysis (cycling policies and strategies) Expert Interviews

The Greater Copenhagen and the Municipality follow the same The Cycle Superhighways strategy is to offer an alternative to the The displacement of population to suburbs and the better quality of trend as their cycling share per trip is decreasing. car on distances of more than 5 kilometers. The alternative is also bicycle infrastructure in the inner city create inequalities to access well- Spatial justified by an ecological and healthy mode of transport21. connected cycling network

There is a balance distribution in the bicycle modal split for all In 2011, the municipality targeted the 45,000 people who drive 2- The plan for new paths to go to the suburb (Cycle Superhighways) trips between Copenhagen city (28%) and the Greater Copenhagen 10 kilometers to commute, most of them reside outside of the is meant to address the spatial inequalities (25%). municipality., there is a strong potential in focusing areas that are a bit further.

There is a big difference (11 points) between the bicycle modal split There is a lot of inequality with differences in to access cycling for commuting in Copenhagen City (49%) and the greater Copenhagen options. (38%). These points are distributed to walking and the cars

The meta or Meso planning level is missing.

The main results show a clear balance between men and women in The municipality almost achieved its goal of 80% of the cyclists In Denmark, in the mobility sector, no one talks about gender Gender the number of kilometers done per day... feeling safe on a bike. Women are more averse to risks than men.

Women spend more time on the bike than men. It is likely that men Women associate way more sustainability with a bicycle than men. are faster on the bike than women. There is a narrative behind driving a car

Women have had 30% more serious accidents than men in 2019 Pop-up bicycle lanes during corona have seen more women riding (119 accidents / 92 accidents) their bikes. It is a good example of how policies can address on purpose or not some gender inequalities.

We can draw the hypothesis that women are less used to bikes and they drive in conditions that do not assure their safety.

The richest that bike the most (in mileage). Overall, the richest The municipality says that the richest are the ones using more their The prices increased and the expensive places where wealthy Income travel way more than the poorest, using way more diversified mode of cars (and therefore less their bike?), implying that they can be a target to people live offer very good cycling options. It is part of the dynamic of transports. accelerate the modal shift urban growth

However, the share of highest income groups’ personal mileage The municipality emphasizes the role of integration of the bike The higher the income the more likely you are to use a bicycle and dedicated to bike is less important than the one of all the other groups with the vulnerable areas have “sustainable” mobility.

21 https://supercykelstier.dk/about/

The richest travel more, whatever the mean of transports High-income groups are more likely to reside in the suburbs

The youngest (6-17yo) and the oldest (+66yo) drive the less The municipality wishes to develop ambulances’ data and the goal The level of traffic creates inequalities. It is not comfortable to bike Generational “Vision Zero in 2025 for young children and elders. It can feel unsafe to cycle without skills.

The oldest are therefore the ones that use the less the bike in the In 2011, the cycling strategy introduced the idea that integration Need to explore intersections between gender and generational proportion of trips and in absolute value (mileage) and health should be promoted through local actors perspective of cycling practices.

Cycle Superhighways direct impact on health, especially risk of Municipalities demands for age inclusion projects is raising cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and breast and colon cancer

Complete absence of generational goals in the green mobility visions The necessity to slow down to enable other activities while biking (chatting, observing, smelling,). The sense of safety is also primordial

The children are seen only as potential future adult users or a means to The municipality financed the cycling initiatives around age reach adults, but not as individuals with the right to cycle freely now. inclusion

The budget “En by for alle” benefited to local initiatives in A lot of officials still see it as a social project rather than a mobility Copenhagen with mobility and age. project

The unemployed and the pensioners are the ones making the less mileage There is almost no mention of the need for different occupation groups in Occupation per day the strategy and policy documents.

When they can, students (from 10 years old) use more walking (24%) and particularly cycling (43%) to commute as a primary purpose.

students live close enough to their schools and university, such as they don’t have to travel too much distance

6 Discussion

6.1 A half-hearted tone theory The search for speed and efficiency in biking corresponds to the image of an international and vibrant city that want to compete internationally, to bring the “world-class” (HOFFMANN & LUGO, 2014) in, and locally with the outskirt to bring back the wealthiest inhabitants that deserted the city following the multiple crises the city faced. The cost and ecological considerations are the 4th and 6th on 6th reasons for people to bike in Copenhagen (COPENHAGEN MUNICIPALITY, 2019). The bike tends to replace the car as the key object of the ideology of capitalism: Speed, individual control of time and space, personal freedom and that identity expresses itself through consumption choices. These key objects characterize the neo-liberal dream (GRIECO & URRY, 2011). The research demonstrated that the children are seen only as potential future adult users or a means to reach adults, but not as individuals with the right to cycle freely. In addition, I demonstrated the constant focus on the commuters’ numbers as the only way to evaluate a good cycling practice. The elders are also concerned grandly by the lack of cycling activities. It is the only group category that ranked the last for cycling practices both in proportion (mileage modal share) and in absolute (mileage total). It depicts an image of the ideal cyclist as an adult, worker, fast and healthy. This representation corresponds to the idea of the “World-class” (HOFFMANN & LUGO, 2014), and its diffusion participate in the construction of an ideal “mobile man” in the liberal city, holder of the universal knowledge (RECCHI & FLIPO, 2020). It is not a coincidence it is a “man” that is at the core of the neo-liberal dream and not a “human”. As this research showed, and despite encouraging numbers, there are strong gender differences in cycling patterns. The men seem to embrace more this culture of speed and multiple mobilities. Certainly, it is a vision, not a clear goal to achieve. But the lack of interest for other members of the society that might use cycling for other purposes and patterns than those describe there, demonstrates the incompletion of the approach. This bright vision of the future absorbs all other dimensions of cycling practices and leaves no room for identifying and tackling inequalities, setting the ground for social and cultural disorganization (RECCHI & FLIPO, 2020). The results feed the theory of mobility justice as it demonstrates that there is not yet a clear definition of what are the “uneven mobilities” and do we call “justice” in cycling. Is a cycling practice “just” if all the groups do the same mileage per day or year? Is it “just”, if the groups have the same bike modal share regardless of the absolute numbers? Let us have a look at the students that are of the groups that bike the less mileage per day. They do it probably because they have a shorter distance to education than commuters to the workplace. Should we hope that they do more mileage to go to education? These contradictions and limits link together the problem of sustainable transportation goals with social justice issues and politics of mobility as presented by Mimi Sheller (SHELLER, 2020). In the Mobility Justice theory, the notion of “Uneven mobilities” carries spatial understandings of unequal mobilities. It explores the different access to environmental mobility solutions between centers and its peripheries but associates the latest often with low and middle classes. The results show that in Copenhagen this opposition of wealthy city center and poor outskirt is not clear yet. Indeed, over the last ten years, the gap between the inner city and the outskirt regarding the cycling modal shares for all trips and, also, for commuting did not expand. However, the urban growth is displacing the most disadvantaged population to the suburbs, the informants confirmed that this dynamic was at stake in Copenhagen. This phenomenon will probably increase the inequalities in access to cycling options.

The theory corpus of mobility justice advocates for meso-level strategies and planning to address transportation justice. The research demonstrated that, in the matter of mobility, the only strategy that crossed the borders of the municipality was the Cycle Superhighways. This point is particularly interesting as we can observe the velleities to adopt strategies that go beyond the municipal borders. With the highways, Copenhagen’s bicycle accounts and reports are at the core of a strategy to monitor the goals in the matter of cycling. Associated with the climate plan goals for Copenhagen from 2011, the Bicycle Accounts constitute a powerful tool. However, this tool still lacks a clear metropolitan range that only a meso-level strategy for the bicycle in the Greater Copenhagen could provide. The results about the gender cycling practices advocate for the right to claim space for women. Despite a practice that sees equal numbers of kilometers made by bike between men and women, my study shows that women have more accidents than men and that they are more averse to risks on bikes. The lack of a gender approach in addition to the absence of women in the mobility sector questions the right of this group to claim their space in the mobile city mainly build by and for men. The theory of mobility justice might not be adjusted to the investigation of that phenomenon. The egalitarian approach of gender cycling issues hides the different practices and patterns between men and women. It calls for some methods of research to integrate the observation of the “reality” in which women live the city with a bike. 6.2 Disparate methods but consistent results I will start to state that it was very difficult to investigate the field of cycling for few reasons. The question of inequalities in a country that presents itself to the world as highly egalitarian is not the easiest approach to adopt. It is particularly the case as a foreign English speaker since the documents I had access to, were mainly written in English and therefore addressed usually to an international audience. The content of these documents often treats lightly the subject of cycling. They often brand more Copenhagen, rather than describing the clear goals, indicators, and parameters of how to approach the questions around cycling. The investigation from a Danish speaker's perspective might give other results. Secondly, the growing interest in cycling in Copenhagen and Denmark, in general, restricted access to key resources for research. Indeed, I faced many refusals to my requests for interviews with an expert from the Municipality or from the DTU, the two institutions that are at the core of my data. In all cases, it was because they were overwhelmed with students' demands for interviews, internships, and requests. It led me to make an assemblage of methods that do not articulate the way they should be. While the results will raise the interests of all the readers, their extraction and their interpretation are subject to questioning whether it helps to directly answer the research question. Ideally, I would have interviewed experts from the municipality, especially from the bicycle program and the cycle superhighways department as they are the heart of the cycling strategy in Copenhagen. 7 Conclusion

Biking will probably never replace entirely the cars in metropolitan cities, and it is probably for the better. It would be a luxury prerogative of some privileged part of the population living in city centers. But not one’s of all the hundred thousand sometimes millions of people living in the metropolitan region. The transportation justice framework does not advocate for cycling for all at any cost but for fair access to this sustainable means of transportation insofar of our needs. The types of travel, the disabilities, the age,

are all factors that will influence our means of transports. We should re-address what do we want to address through the cycling strategies and the sense we give to mobility. As such, my research question targeted the capacity of the Municipality of Copenhagen to address mobility justice issues in cycling practices. The research methods explored the cycling practices in Greater Copenhagen and the City of Copenhagen, sometimes trying to compare the two entities, and identified how the municipality is approaching the question through its strategies and policies. The results showed that behind the outstanding numbers, the cycling strategies and visions focus essentially on the commuters and exclude other groups. It limits the cycling practices to the productivity sphere, ensuring an efficient mode of transport to work or education. It excludes other usages of cycling more diversified like sports practices, leisure activities, or social interactions. The elders and the youngest are the ones that cycle the less and would probably benefit the most from adopting this sustainable mode of transport that would tackle some health and social issues. However, in the case of the elders, it seems that politicians address the question with a social perspective instead of mobility. More surprisingly the highest income groups are the ones that cycle the most, but they also drive their car the most as they live predominantly in the suburbs. This phenomenon takes place in a historical context that has seen Copenhagen losing inhabitants, often the wealthiest, until the 2000s. The urban renewal that took place since boosted by economic growth tends to flip around the trend by pushing to the periphery the lowest income groups that now are the groups that cycle the less in mileage. The cycling practice is also plateauing, may be decreasing, and actors call for diversifying the types of cycle mobility that would take better take into consideration the different needs. In order to maintain a high level of cycling in the Capital, the strategies and policies of cycling should be overseen at the metropolitan scale with a clear structure or institution defining goals and visions. The pandemic is also a good opportunity to reflect on the internationalization of Copenhagen and its effects on the cyclists’ stereotypes branded through the actual strategies. I will finish with these wise words quoted from an informal exchange with Klaus Bondam as the former Mayor of Technics and Environment at the Municipality of Copenhagen and actual director of the Danish Cyclist federation: “Cycling is accessible to most; it brings people on the streets and create basis for dialogue and eye contact. Everyday cycling can be seen as one of the most democratic ways of urban mobility” Before thinking about making this mode of transport efficient, we should maybe think about making it more democratic. 7.1 Recommendations Multiple recommendations can be made following this research. Policies, strategies, and research First, I call for further research to explore multiple definitions of justice in mobility. Indeed, the contemporary challenges invite us to define more thoroughly the reasons for cycling. A better understanding and diffusion of the cycling benefit but also its limits will help defining clear goals to achieve. As mentioned before, the bike will never replace cars entirely, not in our contemporary societies at least. There is a need to shift from a pure ecological paradigm to understand the practice of cycling or at least to crosscut its ontologies with those that integrate socio-economic dimensions.

At the institutional level, an office or a structure should associate all the municipalities of the Greater Copenhagen to reflect on the bicycle strategy that cannot be anymore the only prerogative of Copenhagen Municipality. The Cycle Superhighways who collaborate with 30 municipalities is a beginning but stands alone in the regional mobility landscape In the matter of policies and strategies, the biennial Bicycle Account is a good tool but should incorporate a better socio-spatial analysis to identify what I call the “cyclists’ reservoirs” to trigger specific areas or populations to release their flow of cyclists and, consequently, reduce the use of cars. It is therefore important to target specific goals and set the indicator to evaluate their achievement. In this topic, the current evaluation of the cycling practice through the modal split per trip limiting and misleading. The modal split per kilometers shows another reality of who is mobile and who is no. It identifies more accurately the social inequalities in the access to a healthy and ecological mode of transports. Even though we might not want everyone to do the same number of kilometers, leading us to a frightening uniformization of the individuals’ behavior, we want them to realize a minimum of kilometers that should be stated as a clear goal. Finally, like Thomas Sick Nielsen mentioned in his interview, practitioners should think about the diversification of the cycling networks and not focus only on commuting. Different types of cycling routes would be more attractive to people with different conditions and needs. We should provide more ease and diversified green cycling network and not get stuck in one model.

8 Bibliography

Bauman, A., Allman-Farinelli, M., Huxley, R., & James, W. P. T. (2008). Leisure-time physical activity

alone may not be a sufficient public health approach to prevent obesity – a focus on China. Obesity

Reviews, 9(s1), 119–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-789X.2007.00452.x

Bereitschaft, B. (2020). Gentrification and the evolution of commuting behavior within America’s urban

cores, 2000–2015. Journal of Transport Geography, 82, 102559.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2019.102559

Böcker, L., & Anderson, E. (2020). Interest-adoption discrepancies, mechanisms of mediation and socio-

spatial inclusiveness in bike-sharing: The case of nine urban regions in Norway. Transportation

Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 140, 266–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2020.08.020

Böcker, L., Anderson, E., Uteng, T. P., & Throndsen, T. (2020). Bike sharing use in conjunction to public

transport: Exploring spatiotemporal, age and gender dimensions in Oslo, Norway. Transportation

Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 138, 389–401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2020.06.009

Brown, C. (2016). A Silent Barrier to Bicycling in Black and Hispanic Communities. 3.

Carroll, J. (2020). What drives the gender-cycling-gap? Census analysis from Ireland. Transport Policy, 8.

Church, A., Frost, M., & Sullivan, K. (2000). Transport and social exclusion in London. Transport Policy,

7(3), 195–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0967-070X(00)00024-X

Copenhagen Municipality. (2012). The City of Copenhagen’s Bicycle Strategy 2011-2025 (p. 16).

https://kk.sites.itera.dk/apps/kk_pub2/index.asp?mode=detalje&id=823

Copenhagen Municipality. (2013). Action Plan for Green Mobility (p. 32).

https://kk.sites.itera.dk/apps/kk_pub2/index.asp?mode=detalje&id=1123

Copenhagen Municipality. (2017a). Copenhagen, City of Cyclists. Facts & Figures 2017.

https://international.kk.dk/sites/international.kk.dk/files/velo-city_handout.pdf

Copenhagen Municipality. (2017b). En By for alle—A city for everyone one (p. 9) [Budget].

https://www.kk.dk/sites/default/files/uploaded-files/budget17_faktaark.pdf

Copenhagen Municipality. (2019). Bicycle Account 2018: Copenhagen City of Cyclists (p. 32).

https://kk.sites.itera.dk/apps/kk_pub2/index.asp?mode=detalje&id=1962

Cresswell, T. (2010). Towards a Politics of Mobility. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space,

28(1), 17–31. https://doi.org/10.1068/d11407

Cycle Superhighways. (2019). Cycle Superhighways—Bicycle Account 2019 (p. 32).

https://supercykelstier.dk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Cycle-superhighway-bicycle-account-

2019-UK-final-2.pdf

Descamps, P. (2020). Copenhagen, cycle city. Le Monde Diplomatique.

https://mondediplo.com/2020/03/13copenhagen-bikes

DiCicco-Bloom, B., & Crabtree, B. F. (2006). The qualitative research interview. Medical Education, 40(4),

314–321. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02418.x

DTU, C. F. T. Analytics. F. D. T. (2020). Danish National Travel Survey, Datasets [Data set]. DTU, Centre

for Transport Analytics. Formerly DTU Transport. https://doi.org/10.11581/DTU:00000034

DTU, C. F. T. Analytics. F. D. T. (2021). Danish National Travel Survey—Copenhagen area. Datasets

[Data set]. DTU, Centre for Transport Analytics. Formerly DTU Transport.

https://doi.org/10.11581/DTU:00000034

Flanagan, E., Lachapelle, U., & El-Geneidy, A. (2016). Riding tandem: Does cycling infrastructure

investment mirror gentrification and privilege in Portland, OR and Chicago, IL? Research in

Transportation Economics, 60, 14–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2016.07.027

Florida, R. L. (2005). Cities and the creative class. Routledge.

Fuller, D., & Winters, M. (2017). Income inequalities in Bike Score and bicycling to work in Canada.

Journal of Transport & Health, 7, 264–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2017.09.005

Geoghegan, P. (2016, October 5). Blame it on the bike: Does cycling contribute to a city’s gentrification?

The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/oct/05/blame-bike-cycling-contribute-

city-gentrification

Goodman, A., & Aldred, R. (2018). Inequalities in utility and leisure cycling in England, and variation by

local cycling prevalence. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 56,

381–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.05.001

Grieco, M., & Urry, J. (Eds.). (2011). Mobilities: New perspectives on transport and society. Ashgate.

Gross, N. (2018). Is Environmentalism Just for Rich People? The New York Times.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/14/opinion/sunday/yellow-vest-protests-climate.html

Hamidi, Z., Camporeale, R., & Caggiani, L. (2019). Inequalities in access to bike-and-ride opportunities:

Findings for the city of Malmö. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 130, 673–

688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.09.062

Harvey, D. (2003). The right to the city. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27(4),

939–941. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0309-1317.2003.00492.x

Haustein, S., Koglin, T., Nielsen, T. A. S., & Svensson, Å. (2020). 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

Haustein, S., Kroesen, M., & Mulalic, I. (2020). Cycling culture and socialisation: Modelling the effect of

immigrant origin on cycling in Denmark and the Netherlands. Transportation, 47(4), 1689–1709.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-019-09978-6

Henderson, J., & Gulsrud, N. M. (2019). Street fights in Copenhagen. Bicycle and car politics in a green

moblity city. Routledge.

Hoffmann, M. L., & Lugo, A. (2014). Who is ‘World Class’? Transportation Justice and Bicycle Policy.

4(1), 17.

Horton, D. (2006). Environmentalism and the bicycle. Environmental Politics, 15(1), 41–58.

https://doi.org/10.1080/09644010500418712

Kimmelman, M. (2018). France’s Yellow Vests Reveal a Crisis of Mobility in All Its Forms. The New York

Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/20/world/europe/france-yellow-vests-social-

mobility.html

Kirschbaum, E. (2019). Copenhagen has taken bicycle commuting to a whole new level. Los Angeles Times.

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2019-08-07/copenhagen-has-taken-bicycle-

commuting-to-a-new-level

Lubitow, A., Tompkins, K., & Feldman, M. (2019). Sustainable Cycling for all? Race and Gender–Based

Bicycling Inequalities in Portland, Oregon. City & Community, 18(4), 1181–1202.

https://doi.org/10.1111/cico.12470

Lusk, A. C., Anastasio, A., Shaffer, N., Wu, J., & Li, Y. (2017). Biking practices and preferences in a lower

income, primarily minority neighborhood: Learning what residents want. Preventive Medicine

Reports, 7, 232–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2017.01.006

Menz, W., Bogner, A., & Littig, B. (2009). Introduction: Expert Interviews – An Introduction to a New

Methodological Debate. In Interviewing Experts. Palgrave Macmillan.

Mooney, S. J., Hosford, K., Howe, B., Yan, A., Winters, M., Bassok, A., & Hirsch, J. A. (2019). Freedom

from the station: Spatial equity in access to dockless bike share. Journal of Transport Geography,

74, 91–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2018.11.009

Nielsen, T. A. S., Mulalic, I., & Christiansen, H. (2016). Drivers of Cycling Mode-share: Analysis of Danes

Travel Behavior 1996-2013. Transportation Research Procedia, 14, 2284–2288.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2016.05.244

Oldenziel, R., Emanuel, M., & Albert de la Bruhèze, A. A. (2016). Cycling Cities: The European

Experience; Hundred Years of Policy and Practice. Foundation for the History of Technology.

Olsen, J. R., Mitchell, R., Mutrie, N., Foley, L., & Ogilvie, D. (2017). Population levels of, and inequalities

in, active travel: A national, cross-sectional study of adults in Scotland. Preventive Medicine

Reports, 8, 129–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2017.09.008

Prati, G. (2018). Gender equality and women’s participation in transport cycling. Journal of Transport

Geography, 66, 369–375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2017.11.003

Prati, G., Fraboni, F., De Angelis, M., Pietrantoni, L., Johnson, D., & Shires, J. (2019). Gender differences

in cycling patterns and attitudes towards cycling in a sample of European regular cyclists. Journal

of Transport Geography, 78, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2019.05.006

Pritchard, J. P., Tomasiello, D. B., Giannotti, M., & Geurs, K. (2019). Potential impacts of bike-and-ride on

job accessibility and spatial equity in São Paulo, Brazil. Transportation Research Part A: Policy

and Practice, 121, 386–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.01.022

Rambøll. (2021). Gender and (Smart) mobility (p. 60) [Green paper]. https://ramboll.com/-

/media/files/rgr/documents/markets/transport/g/gender-and-mobility_report.pdf

Recchi, E., & Flipo, A. (2020). Spatial Mobility in Social Theory. SocietàMutamentoPolitica, Vol 10, 125-

137 Pages. https://doi.org/10.13128/SMP-11051

Reid, C. (2019). Copenhagen Plans Greater Restrictions On Car Use As Cycling Surges To 49% Of

Commuter Journeys. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2019/05/28/copenhagen-

plans-greater-restrictions-on-car-use-as-cycling-surges-to-49-of-commuter-

journeys/?sh=3ac958ac3a9f

Rosas-Satizábal, D., Guzman, L. A., & Oviedo, D. (2020). Cycling diversity, accessibility, and equality: An

analysis of cycling commuting in Bogotá. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and

Environment, 88, 102562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2020.102562

Shaw, C., Russell, M., Keall, M., MacBride-Stewart, S., Wild, K., Reeves, D., Bentley, R., & Woodward,

A. (2020). Beyond the bicycle: Seeing the context of the gender gap in cycling. Journal of Transport

& Health, 18, 100871. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2020.100871

Sheller, M. (2018a). Mobility Justice—The Politics of Movement in an Age of Extremes. Verso.

Sheller, M. (2018b). Theorising mobility justice. Tempo Social, 30(2), 17–34.

https://doi.org/10.11606/0103-2070.ts.2018.142763

Sheller, M. (2020). Mobility justice—Handbook of Research Methods and Applications for Mobilities. In

M. Büscher, M. Freudendal-Pedersen, S. Kesselring, & N. Grauslund Kristensen, Handbook of

Research Methods and Applications for Mobilities (pp. 11–20). Edward Elgar Publishing.

https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788115469.00007

Sheller, M., & Urry, J. (2016). Mobilizing the new mobilities paradigm. Applied Mobilities, 1(1), 10–25.

https://doi.org/10.1080/23800127.2016.1151216

Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2019). The Copenhagen Metropolitan ‘Finger Plan’: A Robust Urban Planning

Success Based on Collaborative Governance. In E. Sørensen & J. Torfing, Great Policy Successes

(pp. 218–243). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198843719.003.0012

Taylor, W. C., Poston, W. S. C., Jones, L., & Kraft, M. K. (2006). Environmental Justice: Obesity, Physical

Activity, and Healthy Eating. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 3(s1), S30–S54.

https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.3.s1.s30

Verlinghieri, E., & Schwanen, T. (2020). Transport and mobility justice: Evolving discussions. Journal of

Transport Geography, 87, 102798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102798

Von Huth Smith, L., Borch-Johnsen, K., & Jørgensen, T. (2007). Commuting physical activity is favourably

associated with biological risk factors for cardiovascular disease. European Journal of

Epidemiology, 22(11), 771–779. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-007-9177-3

Wang, M., & Zhou, X. (2017). Bike-sharing systems and congestion: Evidence from US cities. Journal of

Transport Geography, 65, 147–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2017.10.022

Watts, J. (2018). Macron’s U-turn on eco-tax rise gives green lobby fuel for thought. The Guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/dec/04/macron-u-turn-on-eco-tax-rise-gives-

green-lobby-fuel-for-thought

Wengraf, T. (2001). Qualitative Research Interviewing: Biographic Narrative and Semi-structured

Methods. SAGE.

Yu, C.-Y. (2014). Environmental supports for walking/biking and traffic safety: Income and ethnicity

disparities. Preventive Medicine, 67, 12–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.06.028