The Netherlands and Denmark both seem to be these perfect, utopias of great cycling infrastructure and culture. However, both Sjors van Duren of Royal Hskoning DHV (consulting and engineering agency) and Connie Juel Clausen for the city of Odense (transportation engineer) explained that the implementation of these projects, infrastructure, and culture took a lot of hard work convincing stakeholders, the public, and policy makers. Both Sjors and Connie explained their work and how they got these major cycling projects done despite difficulty convincing some groups. I will use this post to explain how I may convince a few potential stakeholder groups of a new cycling program or project they may be hesitant about.  

Politicians –  

Especially in America, I would anticipate politicians to be a stubborn group to convince of a new cycling project. Of course, this is extremely dependent on the project, but both Sjors and Connie used the expertise of being traffic engineers to show the hard numbers to politicians to prove that cycling projects are positive investments. For Connie, it was these cycling campaigns which proved to stakeholders and politicians that a change of cycling culture is possible. For Sjors, it was calculating the amount of people who would switch their commute from car to bike if a major commuter bridge was installed and proved it would reduce city and allow the city 5 more years before needing to expand the highway. The reduction of carbon emissions and environmental impacts of the country is also something of more concern to politicians than citizens. Something else important for convincing politicians that both Connie and Sjors (as well as the professionals on our trip) mentioned is that it is vital to have the support of the citizens and public before taking it into policy.  

Community Members –  

Sjors and Connie both experienced pushback of bicycle infrastructure from the community, however it seemed to be in different ways. Connie worked a lot convincing the public to get on bikes via marketing and campaigns along with the infrastructure implementation. Sjors on the other hand had to convince many of the rural community members that cycling highways were a smart and beneficial project. Both stressed the importance of framing. Framing the cycling project and issue in a way which would convince each group is extremely important. For storeowners, it is that more people will be passing by and seeing their shop, for rural community members, it is communicating that the highways are not loud, busy areas, but are instead meant to minimize the loud, busy car traffic, and for young people its convincing them commuting by bike can be hip and cool. Tailoring your argument to each group is the way to convince different people that a project will be useful and beneficial to them. 

There are some similarities between the tactics I would use to convince each group, but also some major differences. For example, we have noticed here in the Netherlands and Denmark, the main selling point of cycling projects for community members is not sustainability, but rather that this will make the cities cleaner, easier to navigate, benefit health, and allow for more connection. By speaking with these experienced planners and professionals, I have learned that there is major importance in this field for communications and making relationships with people within the field. These communication skills are something I will take with me throughout any career I choose to embark on.  

Hope you all enjoyed this post!

Yours, 

Macy