Pedalling with Lefebvre along the bike-lanes of Seville: why we should not assume that public infrastructures necessarily restrict the right to the city

Abstract

The notion —clearly inspired by Lefebvre— according to which public works have per se a coercive character that curtails the inhabitants’ right to the city, should not be applied when evaluating certain infrastructures which actually improve the livability of the urban space, such as those promoting urban cycling. Considering this possible error, it is necessary to examine the repeated exceptions that Lefebvre himself enunciates throughout his work when he characterizes some types of urban intervention that, when fulfilling certain conditions, contribute to the resignification and reappropiation of urban space. We here pursue not only to enumerate these notes by Lefebvre, but to illustrate them taking as a model an urban intervention of great repercussion such as the infrastructure for the promotion of urban cycling in the city of Seville in the first decade of the 21st century, and applying such Lefebvrian contributions to its characteristics. In the confrontation of the different space-producing strategies, some infrastructures —such as the one addressed in this case study— guarantee the right to the city, instead of being, as could be argued from a superficial reading of Lefebvre’s analysis, an element that restricts that right.