Pathway towards sustainability or motorization? A comparative study of e-bikes in China and the Netherlands

Abstract

Faced with globally pressing sustainability challenges, the e-bike provides a potentially sustainable mobility alternative. Yet, a growing consensus among researchers is that the environmental and social impacts of e-bikes are context dependent. Previous studies indicate different e-bike pathways in two major e-bike markets. In China, e-bikes seem to be a stepping stone to further motorization. In the Netherlands, e-bike use partially substitutes car use, thereby advancing sustainability. However, little is known about why e-bikes serve different pathways. We address this research problem by employing social practice theory to unpack e-bike practices according to three interdependent elements of materials, competences, and meanings. In doing so, we shed light on the more complex and nuanced dynamics in everyday mobility practices around e-bikes. The findings suggest that in China hostile cycling conditions and positive cultural associations of automobility feed to a vicious circle toward car-based motorization. In the Netherlands, the e-bike provides a viable option for those locked into car practices. Despite these differences, evidence from the two countries indicates that dissatisfactions with elements of car practices may redirect people to e-bike practices. Policy needs to direct toward overcoming structural barriers in domains where individuals have limited agency. Furthermore, this comparative study illustrates that differentiated focus is needed when applying practice theory. Given that the average carbon footprint per capita is lower in the Global South than in the Global North, the focus should be on maintaining existing sustainable practices in the Global South while substituting unsustainable practices in the Global North.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 22 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.