Cycling Safety: Shifting from an Individual to a Social Responsibility Model
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Cycling Safety: Shifting from an Individual to a Social Responsibility Model Nancy Smith Lea A thesis subrnitted in conformity wR the requirements for the degree of Masters of Arts Sociology and Equity Studies in Education Ontario lnstitute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto @ Copyright by Nancy Smith Lea, 2001 National Library Bibliothbque nationale ofCanada du Canada Aoquieit-el services MbJiographiques The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive pemiettant P. la National Library of Canada to BiblioWque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or oeîî reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microfom, vendre des copies de cette dièse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/fihn, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propndté du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thése. thesis nor substantial exûacts fiom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celîe-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement. reproduits sans son pemiission. almmaîlnn. Cycling Satety: Shifting from an Indhrldual to a Social Reaponribillty Modal Malter of Arts, 2001 Sociology and ~qultyStudie8 in Education Ontario Inrtltute for *die8 in- ducati ion ot the University of Toronto ABSTRACT Two approaches to urban cycling safety were studied. In the irrdividual responsibility rnodel, the onus is on the individual for cycling safety. The social responsibiiii model takes a more coliecthrist approach as it argues for st~cturallyenabling distriûuted respansibility. The framework was developed using principles from feminist theory which relies on a mon, cornplex unckmtanding ot equality than is currently found in most cycling literature. A suwey adrninistered to 188 people in downtown Toronto, Ontario tested attitudes toward these two approaches and gauged tbe baniers to cycOng for diierent populations. Women and visible minorities expressed the gmatest concems about participating in urban -Jing. Political orientation and cycling status (whether or not iespondents were cyclists) were both found to predict the tendency toward a more social versus an individualistic approach to cycling safety* Nevertheless, th majority of respondents enâorsed aspects of both apploaches. Theoretically and ernpiricaliy grounded policy conclusions are offeted. Abstract Two approaches to urban cycling safety were studied. In the individual responsibility model, the onus is on the individual for cycling safety. The social responsibility model takes a more collectivist approach as it argues for structurally enabling distributed responsibility. The framework was developed using principles from feminist theory which relies on a more complex understanding of equality than is currently found in most cycling literature. A survey administered to 188 people in downtown Toronto, Ontario tested attitudes toward these two approaches and gauged the barriers to cycling for different populations. Women and visible minorities expressed the greatest concerns about participating in urban cycling. Political orientation and cycling status (whether or not respondents were cyclists) were both found to predict the tendency toward a more social versus an individualistic approach to cycling safety. Nevertheless, the majority of respondents endorsed aspects of boih approaches. Theoretically àrid ernpirically grounded policy conclusions are offered. Acknowledgements This thesis would not have been completed without the input and encouragement of many people. During a provocative workshop they led at City Hall in 1997, Li'Lean Gibbons and Nani Reddy planted the seed to explore the individuafistic model of cycling as it manifests itself among different groups. Janet 10, Sheryi tousley, Lesley Wood, Sally McKay and David Tomlinson helped me to formulate my ideas and to conceptualize the research study. Daniel Egan, Andy Clarke, John Williams, William Moritz, and Tim Gleason were instrumental in attaining access to difficult-to-find resources. Nancy MacDougall, Derek Chadbourne and Ben Smith Lea provided data collection assistance and Susana La Rosa assisted in fulfilling the thesis technical requirements. William Michelson provided a critical review of my proposal which resulted in a stronger study. Two people in particular were incredibly generous with their time. Patricia Albanese conducted the pilot studies and offered feedback on methodology and design and Sally McKay read the first draft and provided timely and perceptive input. My sisters Barbara Lea and Sharon Mason provided much-needed moral support as did Nancy MacDougall, Sally McKay, Sandra Rechico and Wallace Robinson. Carole Yellin's wise council was invaluable. Marlene Scardamalia was understanding and supportive of my educational venture which took me away from my job one day a week for three years. Angela Miles was a lifesaver when she agreed to be on my committee and her tramformative perspective was greatly appreciated. My supervisor Margrit Eichler was a wonderful mix of firm when 1 lagged, gentle when I became discouraged and always insightful and galvanizing. The spirit and dedication of members of Advocacy for Respect for Cyclists was inspirational and motivated me to continue with this work. Finally, my husband Ben was patient, supportive and never lost faith that I could accomplish what I started. Without him this would not have been possible. iii Table of Contents Abstract ii Acknowledgements iii List of Tables v Introduction vii 1. Literature Review 1 2. Cycling Education: Can the Pedagogy Become More Transformative? 26 3. Methodology 37 4. Attitudes Toward Two Models of Cyding: Individual and Social Responsibility 44 5. Who is Willing to Cycle? 74 Conclusion and Proposais for Change 96 Appendix A. Definitions 1O3 Appendix B. Cycling Survey 1O4 Appendix C. Code Book 1O7 References 111 List of Tables Table 1. Support for Social Cycling lmprovements by Sex Table 2. Support for Social Cycling lmprovements by Sex & Cycling Status Table 3. Support for Personal Cycling lmprovements by Sex Table 4. Support for Personal Cycling lmprovements by Sex & Cycling Status Table 5. Support for No Cycling lmprovement by Sex & Cycling Status Table 6. Support for Social Cycling lmprovements by Visible Minority Status Table 7. Support for Social Cycling lrnprovements by Visible Minority Status & Cycling Status Table 8. Support for Personal Cycling Improvements by Visible Minority Status Table 9. Support for Personal Cycling lmprovements by Visible Minority Status 8 Cycling Status Table 10. Support for No Cycling lmprovement by Visible Minority & Cycling Status Table 11. Support for Social Cycting lmprovements by Political Orientation Table 12. Support for Social Cycling lmprovements by Political Orientation & Cycling Status Table 13. Support for Petsonal Cycling lmprovements by Political Orientation Table 14. Support for Personal Cycling fmprovements by Political Orientation & Cycling Status Table 15. Support for No Cycling lmprovement by Political Orientation & Cycling Status Table 16. Sex Differences in Political Orientation Table 17. Support for Cycling lmprovements by Political Orientation & Sex Table 18. Visible Minority Status Differences in Political Orientation Table 19. Support for Cycling lmprovements by Political Orientation 8 Visible Minority Status Table 20. Support for Social Cycling lmprovements by Environmental Concern Table 21. Support for Social Cycling lmprovements by Environmental Concern & Cycling Status Table 22. Support for Personal Cycling lmprovements by Environmental Concern Table 23. Support for Personal Cycling lmprovements by Environmental Concern 8 Cycting Status Table 24. Support for No Cycling lmprovement by Environmental Concern & Cycling Status Table 25. Willingness to CyclelCycle More by Cyclist Type 8 Sex Table 26. Personal Cycling Concerns by Cyclist Type & Sex Table 27. Personal Cycling Concern "1 need to carry passengers andlor heavy loads which is difficult by bicycle" by Cyclist Type & Sex Table 28. Personal Cycling Concern 'None of my close friends andlar family members cycle" by Cyclist Type & Sex Table 29. Personal Cycfing Concern "My appearance is important and it's hard for cyclists to look nicen by Cyclist Type 8 Sex Table 30. Social Cycling Concerns by Cyclist Type & Sex Table 31. Social Cycling Concern "Reducing the amount and speed of motor vehicle traffic would improve cycling in Torontowby Cyclist Type & Sex Table 32. Respondents not Comfortable Cycling on Major Roads without Bicycle Lanes by Cydist Type & Sex Table 33. Willingness to CyclelCycle More by Cyclist Type & Visible Minority Status Table 34. Wllingness to CyclelCycle More by Visible Minority & Immigrant Status Table 35. Personal Cycling Concerns by Cyclist Type & Visible Minority Status Table 36. Personal Cycling Concern "1 need to carry passengers and/or heavy loads which is difficult by bicyclen by Cyclist Type & Visible Minority Status Table 37. Social Cycling Concerns by Cyclist Type & Visible Minority Status Table 38. Social Cycling Concern "1 live too far from most places 1 need to go to bike there" by Cyclist Type & Visible Minority Status Table 39. Respondents not Comfortable Cycling on Major Roads without Bicycle Lanes by Cyclist Type & Visible Minority Status Table 40. Willingness to CyclelCycle More by Cyclist Type & Age Table 41. Respondents