Modernity, mobility, and acceleration : Cycling as the blind spot in Swedish transport innovation
(2023) In Urban, Planning and Transport Research: An Open Access Journal 11(1).- Abstract
- As climate ambitions have increased, questions regarding the sustainability of transport systems have been placed on the transport innovation agenda. Yet the relationship between economic competitiveness and sustainability agendas in national innovation policy is an uneven one. We aim to unpack this relationship by analysing the position of cycling in Swedish innovation policy, focusing on the funding of projects within the field of sustainable mobility. We apply a critical theoretical approach and build on Hartmut Rosa’s critical work on modernity and acceleration, Sheller and Urry’s theories on mobilities – including contributions from followers to this field – and critical innovation studies. The result of our analysis for cycling is... (More)
- As climate ambitions have increased, questions regarding the sustainability of transport systems have been placed on the transport innovation agenda. Yet the relationship between economic competitiveness and sustainability agendas in national innovation policy is an uneven one. We aim to unpack this relationship by analysing the position of cycling in Swedish innovation policy, focusing on the funding of projects within the field of sustainable mobility. We apply a critical theoretical approach and build on Hartmut Rosa’s critical work on modernity and acceleration, Sheller and Urry’s theories on mobilities – including contributions from followers to this field – and critical innovation studies. The result of our analysis for cycling is threefold. First, the conceptualisation of ‘progress’ does not help to place cycling high on the innovation agenda. Second, the bicycle and cycling have difficulties appearing as ‘new’, in contrast to the car and driving. Third, the unreflexivity regarding automation, digitisation, and sharing prevents taking account of negative effects on cycling and obstructs a fundamental questioning of automobility. In our conclusion, we propose a different view of progress, of which the current interpretation seems to be preventing innovation policy from having a stronger sustainability agenda. An alternative interpretation of progress logically also questions the role and primacy of technological novelties. (Less)
- Abstract (Swedish)
- As climate ambitions have increased, questions regarding the sustainability
of transport systems have been placed on the transport innovation agenda. Yet the relationship between economic competitiveness and sustainability agendas in national innovation policy is an uneven one. We aim to unpack this relationship by analysing the position of cycling in Swedish innovation policy,
focusing on the funding of projects within the field of sustainable mobility. We apply a critical theoretical approach and build on Hartmut Rosa’s critical work on modernity and acceleration, Sheller and Urry’s theories on mobilities – including contributions from followers to this field – and critical innovation studies. The
result of our analysis for... (More) - As climate ambitions have increased, questions regarding the sustainability
of transport systems have been placed on the transport innovation agenda. Yet the relationship between economic competitiveness and sustainability agendas in national innovation policy is an uneven one. We aim to unpack this relationship by analysing the position of cycling in Swedish innovation policy,
focusing on the funding of projects within the field of sustainable mobility. We apply a critical theoretical approach and build on Hartmut Rosa’s critical work on modernity and acceleration, Sheller and Urry’s theories on mobilities – including contributions from followers to this field – and critical innovation studies. The
result of our analysis for cycling is threefold. First, the conceptualisation of ‘progress’ does not help to place cycling high on the innovation agenda. Second, the bicycle and cycling have difficulties appearing as ‘new’, in contrast to the car and driving. Third, the unreflexivity regarding automation, digitisation, and sharing prevents taking account of negative effects on cycling and obstructs
a fundamental questioning of automobility. In our conclusion, we propose a different view of progress, of which the current interpretation seems to be preventing innovation policy from having a stronger sustainability agenda. An alternative interpretation of progress logically also questions the role and primacy of technological novelties. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/9550c05d-903c-4a23-9ea5-3dd2d64b934b
- author
- van der Meulen, Janet LU ; Mukhtar-Landgren, Dalia LU and Koglin, Till LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2023
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- in
- Urban, Planning and Transport Research: An Open Access Journal
- volume
- 11
- issue
- 1
- pages
- 36 pages
- publisher
- Taylor & Francis
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85173676752
- ISSN
- 2165-0020
- DOI
- 10.1080/21650020.2023.2261534
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 9550c05d-903c-4a23-9ea5-3dd2d64b934b
- date added to LUP
- 2023-10-12 09:54:46
- date last changed
- 2024-01-03 22:45:29
@article{9550c05d-903c-4a23-9ea5-3dd2d64b934b,
abstract = {{As climate ambitions have increased, questions regarding the sustainability of transport systems have been placed on the transport innovation agenda. Yet the relationship between economic competitiveness and sustainability agendas in national innovation policy is an uneven one. We aim to unpack this relationship by analysing the position of cycling in Swedish innovation policy, focusing on the funding of projects within the field of sustainable mobility. We apply a critical theoretical approach and build on Hartmut Rosa’s critical work on modernity and acceleration, Sheller and Urry’s theories on mobilities – including contributions from followers to this field – and critical innovation studies. The result of our analysis for cycling is threefold. First, the conceptualisation of ‘progress’ does not help to place cycling high on the innovation agenda. Second, the bicycle and cycling have difficulties appearing as ‘new’, in contrast to the car and driving. Third, the unreflexivity regarding automation, digitisation, and sharing prevents taking account of negative effects on cycling and obstructs a fundamental questioning of automobility. In our conclusion, we propose a different view of progress, of which the current interpretation seems to be preventing innovation policy from having a stronger sustainability agenda. An alternative interpretation of progress logically also questions the role and primacy of technological novelties.}},
author = {{van der Meulen, Janet and Mukhtar-Landgren, Dalia and Koglin, Till}},
issn = {{2165-0020}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{1}},
publisher = {{Taylor & Francis}},
series = {{Urban, Planning and Transport Research: An Open Access Journal}},
title = {{Modernity, mobility, and acceleration : Cycling as the blind spot in Swedish transport innovation}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21650020.2023.2261534}},
doi = {{10.1080/21650020.2023.2261534}},
volume = {{11}},
year = {{2023}},
}