{"title":"“这不是不尊重——这是把你置于危险之中”:在自行车研究和政策领域,当正确遇到风险时","authors":"R. Egan, M. Philbin","doi":"10.1080/13698575.2022.2138278","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In the field of cycling studies, explicit and implicit theories of risk are frequently used for the purposes of research design, data collection, data analysis, and policy. In this article, we argue that this field may benefit from theories and concepts that speak to – but go beyond – theories of risk, and more directly focus on matters of right and recognition. Drawing on grounded theory research involving interviews with 28 cyclists in Dublin, Ireland, we analyse the ‘risk talk’ from five participant accounts through an application of the rights-orientated perspective of precarious entitlement theory. We argue for its utility as a theory, specifically as a complementary alternative to risk-focused approaches. First, we illustrate how precarious entitlement goes beyond the conceptual limits of understanding cycling experience from perspectives of ‘risk’ and ‘safety’, by consolidating a concern with ‘right’ and ‘risk’. Second, we illustrate how interpreting particular cycling practices as patterns of submission and social struggle (privatising vulnerability and provoking responsibility) can transcend individualised interpretations of such practices as ‘risk management’ and ‘risk-taking’. In the discussion, we consider the value of this theory in relation to existing research in this field, with reference to socio-cultural risk theory. In conclusion, we argue for a more transparently rights-based approach to cycle policy in light of the dominance of a specific variety of risk discourse that arguably obscures a consideration of rights to use public space and what a realisation of such rights might require from both the public and the state.","PeriodicalId":47341,"journal":{"name":"Health Risk & Society","volume":"21 1","pages":"199 - 215"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘It’s not disrespect – it’s putting you at risk’: when right meets risk in the field of cycling research & policy\",\"authors\":\"R. Egan, M. Philbin\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13698575.2022.2138278\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In the field of cycling studies, explicit and implicit theories of risk are frequently used for the purposes of research design, data collection, data analysis, and policy. In this article, we argue that this field may benefit from theories and concepts that speak to – but go beyond – theories of risk, and more directly focus on matters of right and recognition. Drawing on grounded theory research involving interviews with 28 cyclists in Dublin, Ireland, we analyse the ‘risk talk’ from five participant accounts through an application of the rights-orientated perspective of precarious entitlement theory. We argue for its utility as a theory, specifically as a complementary alternative to risk-focused approaches. First, we illustrate how precarious entitlement goes beyond the conceptual limits of understanding cycling experience from perspectives of ‘risk’ and ‘safety’, by consolidating a concern with ‘right’ and ‘risk’. Second, we illustrate how interpreting particular cycling practices as patterns of submission and social struggle (privatising vulnerability and provoking responsibility) can transcend individualised interpretations of such practices as ‘risk management’ and ‘risk-taking’. In the discussion, we consider the value of this theory in relation to existing research in this field, with reference to socio-cultural risk theory. In conclusion, we argue for a more transparently rights-based approach to cycle policy in light of the dominance of a specific variety of risk discourse that arguably obscures a consideration of rights to use public space and what a realisation of such rights might require from both the public and the state.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47341,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Risk & Society\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"199 - 215\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Risk & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13698575.2022.2138278\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Risk & Society","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13698575.2022.2138278","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
‘It’s not disrespect – it’s putting you at risk’: when right meets risk in the field of cycling research & policy
Abstract In the field of cycling studies, explicit and implicit theories of risk are frequently used for the purposes of research design, data collection, data analysis, and policy. In this article, we argue that this field may benefit from theories and concepts that speak to – but go beyond – theories of risk, and more directly focus on matters of right and recognition. Drawing on grounded theory research involving interviews with 28 cyclists in Dublin, Ireland, we analyse the ‘risk talk’ from five participant accounts through an application of the rights-orientated perspective of precarious entitlement theory. We argue for its utility as a theory, specifically as a complementary alternative to risk-focused approaches. First, we illustrate how precarious entitlement goes beyond the conceptual limits of understanding cycling experience from perspectives of ‘risk’ and ‘safety’, by consolidating a concern with ‘right’ and ‘risk’. Second, we illustrate how interpreting particular cycling practices as patterns of submission and social struggle (privatising vulnerability and provoking responsibility) can transcend individualised interpretations of such practices as ‘risk management’ and ‘risk-taking’. In the discussion, we consider the value of this theory in relation to existing research in this field, with reference to socio-cultural risk theory. In conclusion, we argue for a more transparently rights-based approach to cycle policy in light of the dominance of a specific variety of risk discourse that arguably obscures a consideration of rights to use public space and what a realisation of such rights might require from both the public and the state.
期刊介绍:
Health Risk & Society is an international scholarly journal devoted to a theoretical and empirical understanding of the social processes which influence the ways in which health risks are taken, communicated, assessed and managed. Public awareness of risk is associated with the development of high profile media debates about specific risks. Although risk issues arise in a variety of areas, such as technological usage and the environment, they are particularly evident in health. Not only is health a major issue of personal and collective concern, but failure to effectively assess and manage risk is likely to result in health problems.