Conclusion This research analysed the different facets of utility cycling in Switzerland, using the example of commuting. We took as our starting point the concept of the cycling system, or velomobility, which underlines the importance of taking into account all elements—not only material and technical but also social, political and symbolic— which influence this practice. From this perspective, we argued that cycling—in terms of volume, frequency, distance, motivation, etc.—depends on the coming together of two potentials. The first of these is motility [11–13] or, more precisely, the indi- viduals’ cycling potential. It is built around access (‘to be able to’ use a means of transport), skills ((‘to know how to’ cycle for utility reasons) and appropriation (‘to want to’ cycle). Individuals’ appropriation of cycling depends on their perception of that mode and of its particularities, which can be interpreted as a confluence of three fundamental dimensions of mobility: movement, meaning and experience in a context of power in regards to the dominant system of automobility [6]. The second of the two potentials is the territory’s hosting potential, or its degree of bikeability, which relates to the spatial context, the available infrastructure and amenities (bicycle urbanism), as well as social and legal norms and rules. In order to identify a large sample of bicycle commuters, we focused on the bike to work scheme, which each year brings together people who commit to cycling to their place of work as often as possible during the months of May and/or June. Nearly 14,000 people completed an online questionnaire addressing the dimensions of velomobility. This database does not take into consideration those people who are not economically active (the sample includes no children, homemakers or retirees and very few students) or who cycle for other reasons (in particular, leisure or sport). The data nonetheless allow us to better understand utility cycling and to unpack and analyse the various dimensions. Switzerland is very much mid-table in comparison with other Western countries; the modal share of cycling (around 7%) is higher than that observed in Latin and English-speaking countries, but lower than that observed in the North of Europe [17]. In recent years, the practice of cycling has become more urban. Substantial © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 117 P. Rérat, CyclingtoWork, SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62256-5 118 Conclusion growth rates can be observed within large and medium-sized cities, although many disparities still exist between them. Cycling has also become a political objective, and cities and cantons alike are beginning to develop action plans to promote the practice. In a public vote held in September 2018, about three quarters of voters elected to include the—non-binding—principle of promoting cycling in the federal constitution. The present study makes it possible to extend these debates by proposing an in-depth analysis of utility cycling. The conclusion brings together a summary of the empirical chapters, and identifies the key lessons that can be taken away from this research. The Wide Variety of Uses of Utility Cycling The participants in bike to work are characterised by an over-representation of the middle age categories, graduates, city dwellers, and residents of German-speaking Switzerland. This is explained by the varying propensities to participate in bike to work (depending on the size and type of business, the location of the places of employment and residence, the importance accorded to cycling in the different territories, etc.) and also to practice utility cycling. A great diversity is observed in terms of use as well as in terms of equipment, motivations and barriers. Cycle trips are often understood to involve travel, which takes place over a limited distance, and which is only undertaken in good weather. In reality, bicycle usage is much more diverse. Six in 10 participants cycle to work the majority of the time, while one-tenth see it as an opportunity to try out utility cycling. Less than a quarter of respondents only cycle in summer, and the data show that the seasonality of the practice is correlated with the length of the commute. The distances covered are relatively long, which can be explained by the challenge presented by the scheme but also by the emergence of ‘long-distance’ bike commuters and the growth in the number of e-bikes. The traditional threshold of 3–5 kms that is often mentioned in planning in Switzerland is clearly to be redefined. For the majority of participants, cycling is an integral part of their mobility. A typology of cyclists in six categories—systematic, leisure, individual, utility, commuter and occasional cyclists—shows various combinations in terms of frequen- cies and reasons for cycling. The likelihood of belonging to these categories varies between social groups, as illustrated by differences in gender, age, type of household and residential location. Another trend that increases cycling potential in terms of territorial coverage is intermodality, i.e. the combination of cycling with public transport, which is practised in different ways by around 15% of the sample. More generally, the population under study is diverse in its use of different means of transport. One-tenth of participants can be described as exclusive cyclists; they do not have access to a car or a public transport pass. However, the majority are multimodal in the sense that they combine different means of travel depending on the activities they are engaged in or on the time of year. Public transport is the most Conclusion 119 common other form of mobility; the number of annual public transport passes is higher among the participants than among the Swiss working population. Conversely, the motorisation rate is much lower, despite almost all of the cyclists having a driving licence. The above results demonstrate the need to put the term ‘cyclist’ into context, or at least to use it with caution [19]. Indeed, this term ignores the diversity of people who use bicycles for travel and tends to restrict the identity of a group of people to a means of transport. The variety of uses but also of motivations and barriers, as well as the emergence or strengthening of certain trends (increasing popularity of electrically assisted bicycles, combination with public transport, etc.), are fundamental variables. They offer new potentialities to be integrated into the policies promoting active mobility and territorial development. These results finally echo the calls to take into account the diversity of cyclists in terms of both research and policy (planning and promotion). It is necessary to disaggregate the analysis and to identify groups with similar practices in order to reveal the various ways in which people use bicycles and to better understand the factors and needs associated with each group [8, 16]. Cycling to Work: Not Only a Utilitarian Movement but also an Embodiment of Meanings and Experiences that Constitute Crucial Bicycle commuters highlight three main ranges of motivation. The first refers to well-being: the benefits of cycling can be physical (doing exercise, keeping fit) and mental (disconnection from work, pleasure, sensory experience, etc.). For some, commuting by bike is a way to squeeze an enjoyable and physical activity into a daily routine characterised by time constraints. While less present in the literature on bicycle commuting, the experience of cycling—mediated through the senses— stands out as being a crucial motivation in which the commuting time is seen not as wasted but as valuable. The pleasure linked to the experience of riding a bike refers to a ‘hedonistic sustainability’, in the words of Bjarke Ingels [9]. The second type of motivation is independence. This relates to certain practical elements of cycling (freedom and flexibility) compared with the constraints of other modes of transportation (congestion, timetables, etc.). The third body of motivations is civic engagement. Cycling here embodies citizenship and is a way to promote respect for the environment on a global scale (in a context of climate change) as well as the local scale (reclaiming the quality of city life and reconnecting with the environment). The first two of these ranges of commuters’ motivations are intrinsic but intersect political issues. For example, exercise relates to public health issues, and cycling may alleviate traffic and public transport congestion and reduce the emission of pollutants and greenhouse gases. Cyclists are, here again, far from being a homogenous group and give a varying degree of importance to the three ranges of motivations mentioned 120 Conclusion above. A part of this diversity is highlighted by the four categories I identified among Swiss commuters: active, civic, individualist and enthusiast cyclists. These groups are receptive to varying combinations of arguments, which are in turn explained by gender, life course position and residential location (other variables are likely to have an effect but could not be tested, such as attitudes, physical condition or lifestyle). Both the practice of the conventional bike and of the e-bike refer to similar moti- vations. It might have been expected that criteria such as respect for the environment, doing exercise or saving money would be rated lower for e-bikers, and time-saving higher. But this is not the case. This could be explained by the fact that e-bikers are more likely to have a car and thus to compare cycling with travelling by car. Thus by reaching groups (couples with children, people in the second part of their career) and spaces (suburban and rural areas) that are more motorised, the e-bike expands the practice of cycling as a complement or alternative to automobility. This study is based on a population of users mainly employed in the service sector and in a country with an intermediate level of modal share of cycling in comparison with other Western countries.