On constituting cyclists as ‘hazards’

Abstract

‘Hazard perception’ has become an integral part of novice driver education and training. Cyclists are often identified as one of many ‘hazards’ to look out for. We speculate that constituting cyclists as ‘hazards’, something that presents a danger or threat, may foster negative attitudes toward cyclists. Rather than accepting cyclists as ‘hazards’, our study examined the conditions that have made it possible to identify cyclists as ‘hazards’ in novice driver preparation. Informed by Michel Foucault's work on discursive practices, the analysis focused on the ‘road safety’ literature (1900–2017), the changing context in which road safety knowledge has been produced and the implications for the production of road space. This literature is important given the authority of scientific knowledge in western societies and its role in managing and governing populations. We found a shift in the middle of the twentieth century from drivers being identified as ‘hazards’ to drivers being identified as perceivers of ‘hazards’. At this time, researchers began studying drivers for their ability to recognise hazards: cyclists were routinely listed among the ‘hazards’ drivers should perceive. Out of 200 articles published on drivers' ‘hazard perception’ since the 1960s, one third categorised cyclists as ‘hazards’. Such research has informed the development and implementation of ‘hazard perception’ tests and, following Foucault, it participates in producing road space and shaping how drivers can think about themselves and other road users. While ‘scientific’ studies constitute cyclists as potential threats or sources of harm they lend authority to negative views of cyclists. We suggest ‘traffic participation’ as a more inclusive approach to driver education and training.