The marginalisation of bicycling in Modernist urban transport planning Till Koglin n , Tom Rye 1 Lund University, Department of Technology and Society, Box 118, 22100 Lund, Sweden article info Available online 7 October 2014 Keywords: Transport planning Bicycle planning Mobility Vélomobility Modernism abstract This article deals with the scientific factors that have contributed to the dominance of motorised transport and the development of theoretical approaches in transport planning. Connections are made to modernism and to the theories within the field of transport planning that have created today's transport systems. Connections are then made to the field of bicycle planning. It is argued that there is a lack of theoretical research in bicycle planning that built on empirical studies. This has contributed to the bicycle often being marginalised in transport systems. Moreover, it is argued that new theoretical research could have a similar effect on bicycle planning as it has had on motorised transport planning. Although there is theoretical research about bicycling, such as vélomobility research, such research does not tend to theorise about bicycle planning. The idea put forward in this article is that theoretical knowledge from the field of mobility studies could be a first step in that direction. This article draws on the politics of mobility and research in vélomobility and develops a theoretical ground for transport planning that takes bicycling into consideration. & 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction In many cities cycling receives little attention from transport planners and is a marginalised mode of transport. Motorised modes of transport take much more space in cities and within transport planning. In this article this situation is analysed with the help of critical theory, as put forward by Marcuse (2002) [1964]. This article argues that the theory-free pragmatism of applied research is quite problematic when considering bicycle planning. Thus, new theory for bicycle planning, the politics of vélomobility, is developed, which is grounded in Cresswell's (2010) theory of the politics of mobility. In transport planning, sustainable transport is often connected to increased walking and bicycling and to the increased use of public transport. Walking and bicycling are often seen as self-evident in the discourses of sustainable transport and sustainable urban development. Moreover, both walking and cycling have many health benefits, since these are active modes of transport (Garrard et al., 2012). Thus, research on cycling and an increase in cycling can be seen as both a contribution to a sustainable transport system and to achieving better public health (Haines et al., 2010). However, the analysis of planning for walking and bicycling does not normally go beyond best-practice and policy studies, the road safety aspects of cycling, or the basic idea that cities need to increase bicycling and provide better infrastructure for cyclists (Banister, 2005, 2008; Banister and Hickman, 2006; Kenworthy, 2006; Pucher and Buehler, 2012). Hence, the focus in bicycle research has most often been on the analysis of empirical evidence rather than on theoretical issues. Although the work by authors such as Pucher and Buehler includes some theoretical considerations, we argue that it does not contribute to a larger theoretical understanding of bicycle planning. Whilst research in the field of mobility and vélomobility has contributed to the theoretical understanding of bicycling and thus people's mobility patterns (e.g. Spinney (2007), Aldred (2013) or Pesses (2010)), this can be seen more as theoretical research about understanding cycling and mobility than as a theoretical view on planning for cycling. The existing literature, therefore, does not contribute directly to the theoretical development of the structured activity of planning for cycling. In this article we seek, in contrast (but also as a complement) to more empirically-informed work to develop a theoretical framework for bicycle planning that builds on applied and empirical research in order to make cycling a more core element of transport planning and therefore a transport mode that is equal to its motorised counterparts. We argue that this lack of theoretical understanding has led to the Contents lists available at ScienceDirect journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jth Journal of Transport & Health http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2014.09.006 2214-1405/& 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. n Corresponding author. Tel.: þ46 46 222 91 58. E-mail addresses: till.koglin@tft.lth.se (T. Koglin), tom.rye@tft.lth.se (T. Rye). 1 Tel.: þ46 46 222 91 94. Journal of Transport & Health 1 (2014) 214–222