Considering cycling for commuting: the role of mode familiarity

Is the fact that people like cycling the reason for them to cycle? Or is the fact that they do cycle the reason for them to like cycling? Or is a combination of the two? This kind of questions reflect a problem that can be called ‘the cycle of cycling consideration’: in order to consider cycling in the set of possible options to be chosen, an individual needs to have positive beliefs about it, especially in the case of ‘low-cycling contexts’. However, positive beliefs seem unlikely to be formed with low levels of mode familiarity, say, with a low acquaintance with mode features, functioning and images; at the same time, higher levels of familiarity are likely to be reached if cycling is practised over relative threshold levels of intensities and extensively across individual life courses. The problem looks like a chicken-egg recursive cycle, since the latter condition is hardly met in places where cycling is little practised. In fact, inside the current conglomerate of technologies, infrastructures, regulations, user practices, cultural preferences that have grown around the automobile (the current “socio-technical system of urban mobility”, Urry 2004; Geels 2005, 2012) cycling is commonly considered as difficult, unsafe, and abnormal. Consequently, the processes of familiarity forming remain disabled, and, as a result, beliefs cannot rely on mode familiarity as a source of information and influence. Without cycling familiarity, origins of positive beliefs are supposed to rely only on personal traits (affect, values, identities, willingness, etc.), which, in low-cycling contexts, confine the possibility of cycling consideration (and eventual adoption) mainly to ‘cycling enthusiasts’ who are willing to “go against the grain” (Horton & Parkin 2012), as it results from previous research. New research conducted by author provides theoretical insights for a different approach of the cycling consideration problem in which the presence of the new construct of cycling familiarity is hypothesised in the relationship between mode choice behaviour and the set of psychosocial constructs that are supposed to precede it (beliefs and attitudes). Cycling familiarity is conceived as a measure of the real and the perceived relative intensity of use of a bicycle (building upon Diana & Mokhtarian 2009) which may be differently formed for utilitarian or non-utilitarian purposes.