Upgrading local activism for a better city

May 13th was actually a lucky day for the Cycling [Commuters of] Poznań*. On this day the NGO organized an action day for all its members and potential activists. The meeting gathered more than twenty people interested in activism for more sustainable transportation and better cycling policy.

Instead of 6/9 you can put any new, not very well know term e.g. sustainable transport

The variety of the presented and discussed topics was quite substantial:

· values and goals of the NGO

· main actors and decision makers in the city

· team building

· events and project ideas

· infrastructure (good and bad examples)

· TV and radio statements / cooperation with the media

· image of the NGO and cyclists in the city

· cycling fallacies, and

· communicating with the citizens.

The last two sessions of the event were supported by YPBM.

Action day

Stereo… myths

Cycling fallacies (a mix of stereotypes and myths) are very well known content of public discussions in Poland. The more cyclists, bike infrastructure, and dedicated space for cycling, the spicier the public debates. But cycling as a young (reborn) phenomenon is also a frequent element of everyday discussions of the citizens (our friends and family members). Some arguments tend to be repeated:

cyclists are dangerous, there are not many of them (also because of weather conditions and seasons), but they tell others how they should live (by forcing them to abandon their car-oriented lifestyle);
cycling is only for young, strong and healthy people, so that it’s actually quite exclusive and possible only for a very limited number of people.

To fight with this kind of arguments you have to equip yourself with data. Not only you have to know the numbers (taken from studies, databases, analyses, articles) but also their quality, e.g., there’s a great report about commuting behaviours of Polish citizens but the number of surveyed cyclists is only 300.
Once you know the data by heart, you can feel prepared for discussions, consultations or statements in media. But unfortunately today’s society is more emotion-based than data driven. Apart from that some arguments of the opponents are entirely unbeatable: “presented data is fake” or “one can’t compare Poland with Denmark”. No database will help here, the perfect reaction on these comments should be a biting (but non-aggressive) riposte.

Many people say, cyclists are dangerous in traffic

Addressing local actors

Essential for building a positive image of cyclists (activists) and persuading the opponents is the way we communicate with others. After a brainstorming session the group formulated following good practices:

· Be empathetic and force empathy
The most of our adversaries use a car on a daily basis, but we mostly think it’s their choice. On the other hand they don’t use bikes often, so they don’t know our problems.

· Be always polite (never aggressive) but also confident.
On public debates people tend to behave aggressively and they expect violent language as well. Being kind instead of offensive is not only important for our image as activists, but it also surprises the opponents, which should give us some advantage in the discussion.

· Don’t go too far on the scale with adverbs of frequency (avoid words: never/always, not at all/every time, all/nobody)
Sentences containing this kind of vocabulary are false as a rule (examples: Everybody drives too fast / All cyclists misbehave on the road / No pedestrians walk on this pavement)

· Remember: there are as meny interpretations of ‘common good’ as many people there are
Commonwealth is our highest priority. Unfortunately many people understand it as economical welfare and individual autonomy only. Terms like: collective actions, shared areas, an active community are often associated with communism and means of individual transportation and are a sign of prestige and progress.

· Educate but don’t give yourself airs
We are aware that urbanism is our hobby. In most cases we know much more than others about the general idea of a smart, safe and inclusive city. Don’t consider the opponents menace pupils, but rather partners in education process. Nobody likes to be patronized.

· Try to avoid focusing on abstract things
Smart city, sustainable transport, environment, and global costs of accidents are of the highest relevance, but for most people they are of no meaning, try to stick as close to reality as possible: health/fitness and pleasure of individuals.

One of our members raised also the problem of lacking vocabulary in Polish. The word sustainable doesn’t exist in our language, so it has been translated as balanced (equally distributed). This is very misleading — many people expect equality for all types of transportation (if street infrastructure changes in favour of bikes, traffic is being calmed down and number of lanes is being limited, private motor vehicles should become something in exchange).

Peaceful coexistence in traffic is the key to a smart city

Nobody said it will be easy

A smart city needs smart citizens. Citizens, who are engaged and organized, who can act collectively and are willing to learn. Only by humility and self-development the bumpy way to an urban shift can be overcome. Challenge has been accepted. This is not the last word of the YPBM and Poznań cyclists / urban activists alliance. BE(a)WARE!

You can find the presented content here (PDF/PPT- presentation)

*Stowarzyszenie Rowerowy Poznań — Sekcja Rowerzystów Miejskich is a local association in the city of Poznań, existing since 1993 (registered in 1997) which strives to make the city bike friendly. This NGO’s main action areas are: policy making, cooperation with authorities, education, and infrastructure advisory.

The action day was co-organized by the author of this article and participant of the Youth Peacebuilders Multipliers project, as a local action aiming to strenghten democracy.