Citation

Wieser B. Soc. Stud. Sci. 2017; 47(2): 300-304.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2017, SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/0306312716681521

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Why did the recumbent bicycle never become a dominant design, despite the fact that it was faster than the safety bicycle on the racetrack? Hassaan Ahmed et al. argue in their recently published paper that the main reason for the marginalization of the recumbent bicycle was semiotic power deployed by the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI). Here, I demonstrate that the authors drew their conclusions from an incomplete application of the Social Construction of Technology (SCOT) framework. Understanding the diffusion of alternative bicycle designs requires considering more than speed, and more than the UCI as a powerful actor. The recumbent bicycle was fast, but rather tricky to ride, and was not really feasible for the transport needs of the working classes, which constituted the most relevant social group of bicycle users during the 1930s.

KEYWORDS: Bicycles; Bicyclists; Bicycling

Language: en