Symbolic economy of bike rentals in rural and suburban Hong Kong: Capital conversion in competitiveness of traditional and innovative firms

This study examines the symbolic economy emerging around bike rental services in rural and suburban areas of Hong Kong, focusing on the rivalry between traditional bike rental shops and an automated bike-sharing scheme in the New Territories. Employing a Bourdieusian framework, this study examines how symbolic capital, as immaterial power, and economic capital, as material resources, together shape the legitimacy, competitiveness, and resilience of mobility providers within the fluid, porous boundaries of rural and urban spaces. Drawing on a six-month ethnographic study—comprising interviews, ride-alongs, and participant observation—the findings show that bike-sharing services initially struggle with symbolic representation and legitimacy, perceived as disordered byproducts of hyper-capitalist expansion. These services gain legitimacy through urban-focused symbolic strategies, such as branding themselves as part of the public transport system, which naturalises values like efficiency and modernity as universal standards. This process, however, can impose symbolic violence on rural communities by embedding urban priorities as ‘common sense’, marginalising local traditions and disrupting established rural practices. In response, traditional rentals resist this shift by emphasising localised, human-centred services that strengthen rural identity and autonomy, drawing on a habitus rooted to community ties. The dynamic interplay of symbolic and economic capital highlights a deepening rural-urban divide, as divergent habitus shape market dynamics and user perceptions within these contested spaces. This study underscores how symbolic practices shape socio-economic dynamics and competitive advantages in the mobility sector, reinforcing rural-urban disparities. It cautions that efforts to bridge this divide may unintentionally perpetuate symbolic violence. • Examines bike-rental firms' adaptation across urban and rural contexts. • Explores the conversion cycle of symbolic and economic capital in cycling fields. • Analyses socio-spatial distinction in cycling norms and practices. • Highlights local firms' and users' role in preserving rural-urban divides. • Cautions efforts to bridge it risk imposing symbolic violence.