IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rmobxx/v17y2022i6p780-794.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sacrificing entitlement for self-preservation: ‘privatising vulnerability’ as a cyclist in Dublin

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Egan

Abstract

In this paper, I present and explain the process of ‘privatising vulnerability’ that cyclists in Dublin engage in as a means of coping with structural conditions of ‘precarious entitlement’ to public space. First, I introduce and situate my study in relation to seminal work exploring cycling mobilities. Second, I describe the context of the study – Dublin, Ireland. Third, I explain the classical grounded theory methodology and approach to qualitative interview data collection employed throughout the research. Fourth, I briefly posit the core category of the grounded theory – precarious entitlement – so that privatising vulnerability can be understood as a process of response and one element of ‘precarious entitlement theory’. Fifth, I delineate the process of privatising vulnerability, and its four variations: anticipating disregard, waiving entitlement, tolerating transgression, and precautionary transgressing. Sixth, I conclude that privatising vulnerability can be understood as a process of pragmatic adaptation and submission to conditions of domination – in particular, to the spatial domination of automobility. Following these perspectives, I delineate the unique contributions privatising vulnerability can make to understandings of cycling experience and practice and toward wider matters of mobility justice.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Egan, 2022. "Sacrificing entitlement for self-preservation: ‘privatising vulnerability’ as a cyclist in Dublin," Mobilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(6), pages 780-794, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rmobxx:v:17:y:2022:i:6:p:780-794
    DOI: 10.1080/17450101.2021.1985379
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17450101.2021.1985379
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17450101.2021.1985379?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rmobxx:v:17:y:2022:i:6:p:780-794. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rmob20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.