8/11/2019 Running Order: Power and Negotiation in Motion

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/running-order-power-and-negotiation-in-motion 1/1

  Running Order: Power and Negotiation in Motion

Simon Cook, Department of GeographySupervisor: Professor Peter Adey

Power, Belonging and Citizenship

This poster concerns a type of power that is apparent in the

micro-movements of public spaces and is mediated by and

regulated by bodies. Being in-place evokes questions ofbelonging and citizenship. Recent work by Antonsich (2010) and

Staeheli et al   (2012) suggests these concepts are constructeddialogically. This relationship consists of:

• Place-belongingness: a personal, intimate feeling of being at

home in a place.

• Politics of belonging: a discursive resource that constructs,

 justifies or resits forms of socio-spatial inclu sion/exclusion.

I wish to apply such understandings to the space of the streetand the everyday encounters between runners and pedestrians

to consider how runners feel about their right to space and howpedestrians accept or reject that.

Some groups and activities have always been excluded from

cities and public spaces; both physically (Fig. 1) and discursively.

By interrogating the interactions between runners and

pedestrians ideas around mobile hierarchies, dominant rights tospace and passage, and mobile belonging will be brought intofocus.

Perspectives on Negotiating Space

There are no conventions for sharing the space of the street and

solutions for passing-by are made on-the-run. From go-alongand video-ethnographic interviews with runners, three

perspectives on how space should be negotiated emerged.

1. Responsible Runners: Being in the minority of street-users

and possessing a greater velocity made it incumbent tosome runners to bear responsibility. Runners learn to be

attuned to the chances of collision and thus are more likely

to be vigilant against such occurrences.

2. Responsible Pedestrians:  Others argued that pedestrian’s 

relative slowness gifts them an advantage in agility enabling

them to better negotiate passing encounters.

3. Shared Duty:  Most participants in the study advanced theview that the task in a shared one, based on mutual respect

rather than attributes and abilities. 

Negotiation in Motion

Witnessing the moments of encounter reveals a value-action-gap. Three predominant spatial tactics were employed by

runners to negotiate pedestrians (Figs 2-4) that show varyinguses of the runner’s body and tend to place onus to successfully

negotiate passing encounters on runners almost exclusively.

Runners are the ones who most often have to break theirpassage, change route and disrupt their rhythm.

This indicates that runners forego or are denied their right to

passage. On the street, pedestrians appear to top the mobilehierarchy, performing a primacy to space and right to

movement. Runners are second-class mobile subjects.References:• Antonsich, M. (2010) ‘Searching for Belonging – An Analytical Framework’ Geography Compass, 4(6): pp.644–659• Staeheli, L.A., Ehrkamp, P., Leitner, H. and Nagel, C.R. (2012) ‘Dreaming  the ordinary Daily life and the complex

geographies of citizenship’ Progress in Human Geography , 36(5): pp.628–644

Figure 1. Anti-homeless spikes

Figure 2. Picking a side. Runner uses bodily movement to signifyintention and relies on the pedestrian responding a ppropriately

Figure 3. Stepping down. A runner steps off the pavement,choosing to run in the separated space of the carriageway.

Figure 4. Slaloming. The runner weaves their body ar ound otherspace-sharers and objects, forging their own route.