Gaining Traction on Social Aspects of E-Biking: A Scoping Review

Allison McCurdy, Elizabeth E. Perry (), Jessica E. Leahy, Kimberly J. Coleman, Joshua Doyle, Lydia A. Kiewra, Shelby A. Marocco, Tatiana A. Iretskaia, Madison M. Janes and Mikael Deliyski
Additional contact information
Allison McCurdy: Department of Community Sustainability, Michigan State University, 480 Wilson Rd., East Lansing, MI 48824, USA
Elizabeth E. Perry: Department of Community Sustainability, Michigan State University, 480 Wilson Rd., East Lansing, MI 48824, USA
Jessica E. Leahy: School of Forest Resources, University of Maine, Orono, ME 04469, USA
Kimberly J. Coleman: Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT 05405, USA
Joshua Doyle: Department of Community Sustainability, Michigan State University, 480 Wilson Rd., East Lansing, MI 48824, USA
Lydia A. Kiewra: Department of Community Sustainability, Michigan State University, 480 Wilson Rd., East Lansing, MI 48824, USA
Shelby A. Marocco: Department of Community Sustainability, Michigan State University, 480 Wilson Rd., East Lansing, MI 48824, USA
Tatiana A. Iretskaia: Department of Community Sustainability, Michigan State University, 480 Wilson Rd., East Lansing, MI 48824, USA
Madison M. Janes: Department of Community Sustainability, Michigan State University, 480 Wilson Rd., East Lansing, MI 48824, USA
Mikael Deliyski: Department of Community Sustainability, Michigan State University, 480 Wilson Rd., East Lansing, MI 48824, USA

Sustainability, 2024, vol. 16, issue 17, 1-19

Abstract: E-biking is alluring for its various physical, environmental, and financial benefits and the ability to travel farther and faster, and being physically easier to ride than astride an analog (traditional) bicycle. E-bikes are also a source of controversy, especially in places where analog bicycles have been allowed but e-bikes represent a “slippery slope” of technology permissions and/or in situations where the function of e-bikes may increase concerns about safety. Despite an increase in use and conversation about such use, academic literature focused on e-bikes’ social aspects remains sparse. The objective of this work is to describe the existing literature on the characteristics of social aspects of e-biking, particularly in leisure contexts. Analyzing the literature on e-bike social research is crucial considering e-bikes’ rapid rise in popularity and potential effects on access, inclusion, leisure, and sustainability. As e-bike prevalence and use increases worldwide, it is important to understand what topics characterize the existing e-bike literature, and, particularly in leisure-focused studies, to ascertain where studies may lend insight toward aims of inclusive and sustainable access, and related policy considerations. The Integrated Recreation Amenities Framework (IRAF) provides a conceptual framework for considering this question, as it focuses on the topical, spatial, and temporal scales of outdoor leisure-related activities toward sustainable conditions and explicitly provides an opportunity for emergent and case-specific factors to be considered alongside established ones. In this work, we explore the following: (1) How are e-bikes discussed across disciplines? and (2) How are e-bikes discussed in leisure-focused articles? Using a scoping review approach, we analyzed a corpus of 279 peer-reviewed articles relevant to the social aspects of e-bikes. Primarily using the IRAF for conceptual framing, our results center the geographies and contexts, topical areas, interdisciplinarity, and emergent additional social considerations of e-biking in general and in leisure-specific studies. The results enable us to connect interdisciplinary topic discussions and suggest where foundational and connective studies are warranted. This can inform decision making related to e-bike adoption, encourage multi-scalar thinking, and extend interdisciplinary research.

Keywords: bicycling; Integrated Recreation Amenities Framework; interdisciplinarity; leisure; outdoor recreation; electric bicycle; e-bike; leisure; safety; sustainable transport (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/17/7397/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/17/7397/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:17:p:7397-:d:1465486

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().