Renaissance Bicycles is a big fan of using the bicycle for basic transport. Utility cycling, bike commuting, city biking, cycling for transportation — whatever you want to call it — really brings out the essence of the bicycle.  Sure, we Americans think bikes are for sports or recreation (or for children), but what we often overlook is that the bicycle is simply the most efficient machine to move us short distances.

Over and over there are “insightful” studies that basically read Bikes = Good, Cars = Bad.  From this myopic view, it seems silly — nay foolish — not to use a bicycle for it’s original purpose.  But what we don’t often recognize is the legitimate fear that cycling entails for many.  In other words, all of our proclamations (and sometimes smugness) about how bikes will save the World fall on the deaf ears of those too scared to ride.

The irony of this blog entry is that if you are reading it, it may not be relevant to you.  You have probably already partaken in the quenching Kool-Aid that is cycling, and most likely already have a heightened appreciation for the bicycle (or at least Renaissance Bicycles).  But what you may not have is an appreciation for why many people do not — and will not ever — throw a leg over a bike for their errands.

In an enlightening five part series, David Horton of Lancaster University teams with Copenhagenize.com to further the lessons from his Understanding Walking and Cycling academic project.  Using the sword of sociology, Horton puts forth his thoughts and opinions regarding the origins, propagation, and conundrum that is the “Fear of Cycling”:

• Fear of Cycling – Part 01 – Introduction
• Fear of Cycling – Part 02 – Constructing Fear of Cycling / Road Safety ‘Education’
• Fear of Cycling – Part 03 – Helmet Promotion Campaigns
• Fear of Cycling – Part 04 – New Cycling Spaces
• Fear of Cycling – Part 05 – Making Cycling Strange

Thanks to Copenhagenize.com for making this series possible.