These quotations, taken from extended fieldwork interviews in Copenhagen, give a great sense of the emotional, embodied identity and cultural aspect of cycling that Copenhageners express when asked why they cycle. Whereas in many other places, cycling in a city is seen as a hazardous activity (Spinney, 2010a; Aldred, 2012) Copenhagen offers a different perspective. ‘Copenhageners’ use of bikes is not defined in terms of risk, but rather in terms of urban everyday life on the move, with the sensuous, kinetic, and emotional power of biking emerging as a key to urban spatiality and vitalism’ (Jensen, 2013: 278). Copenhagen is often described as a model cycling city, whose approach should be duplicated throughout the world, and Copenhagen is without a doubt a city that prioritises vélomobility (City of Copenhagen, 2017). However, the downside is a somewhat self-satisfied cycling narrative in Copenhagen, which, I will argue could also be a barrier to further development of Copenhagen as a cycling city.

This chapter discusses these dilemmas in light of qualitative research conducted with cyclists in Copenhagen. It takes a theoretical position rooted in mobility research, questioning dominant planning paradigms that conceptualise the future of cities and mobilities as a matter of more efficient technologies rather than of social cohesion, integration and connectivity (Urry, 2007; Freudendal-Pedersen et al, 2016).