Thousands of Road Users Killed Annually by Topsy-Turvy US Policy

Views:
 
     
 

Presentation Description

US traffic safety policy is killing tens of thousands of additional people on our roads every year. This occurs because we ignore the findings of 70 years of scientific research. The author's 2004 book "Traffic Safety" described the situation as "The Dramatic Failure of US Safety Policy". This presentation shows that enormous amounts of recent data confirm our adherence to the same disastrous course. In the last 7 years China has reduced its traffic deaths by 39%. It has taken the US 37 years to achieve the same reduction. Other countries have policies that are ORDINARILY FOOLISH. US policies are not ordinarily foolish. They are EXTRAORDINARILY FOOLISH. This is because US safety policy continues to maximize litigation earnings and the resulting political contributions, while ignoring science, knowledge, or even common understanding. This results in placing priorities almost perfectly opposite to where safety benefits are greatest.

Comments

Presentation Transcript

Slide 1: 

Topsy-Turvy US Safety Policy Continues to Kill Thousands of Road Users Dr. Leonard Evans President, Science Serving Society Bloomfield Hills, Michigan Devoted to adding reason and knowledge to public policy Science Serving Society .com The Eye and the Auto Detroit, MI 2011-09-(12–14) (This presentation 09-12-Mon-(2:00–2:30 pm) Make sure sound is switched on to hear audio commentary.

Slide 2: 

Study builds on material in Particularly chapter titled The Dramatic Failure of U.S. Safety Policy .. his chapter “The Dramatic Failure of U.S. Safety Policy” is the showstopper Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)

Slide 3: 

Chapter conclusions were based on comparing US safety performance with that in 3 comparison countries Data Sources This study compares US safety performance with that in 27 countries  The International Road Traffic and Accident Database (IRTAD)  US Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS)  Other recent data

Slide 4: 

Questions addressed in this study  Do earlier conclusions based on data thru 2002 persist?  Are earlier claims that three comparison countries were not “special” validated by other countries?  Are conclusion validated with even more clarity and confidence?

Slide 5: 

United States maximum value 54,589 in 1972

Slide 8: 

President Clinton's successful 1992 election campaign slogan provides answer Why did fatalities in US and other countries decline so steeply in last few years? “It's the economy, stupid” We know for certain it is not mainly due to:  vehicles  roads

Slide 9: 

US data

Slide 13: 

Other measures examined in same way as the relative to 1979 comparisons:  changes since 2002  deaths per 1000 vehicles (US best in world in 1970s – now ranked 17)  deaths per billion km - data available only for few countries (US best in world in 1970s – now ranked 11)  Findings always similar – USA is outlier, pervious 3 comparison countries are unremarkable  Graphs of other measures in Appendix at end of this presentation

Slide 14: 

Measure we now examine in detail: Percent reduction in road traffic deaths since reaching maximum value

Slide 16: 

China MAXIMUM of 109,381 deaths in 2002 67,759 deaths in 2009 33,808

Slide 18: 

Sweden MAXIMUM of 1,313 deaths in 1966 287 deaths in 2010

Slide 19: 

This is 78.1% below Sweden’s all time high of 1313 in 1966 Sweden had 287 traffic deaths in 2010 If US total had fallen by 78.1% from its high, US total would be 11,932 (and not 32,788) More than 20,000 additional Americans are being killed annually because US does not match Swedish decline

Slide 20: 

S ome good news  32,788 US traffic deaths in 2010 lowest since 1949  Some small signs that US is at long last beginning to take more notice of importance of driver behavior factors

Slide 21: 

S ome good news  32,788 US traffic deaths in 2010 lowest since 1949  Some small signs that US is at long last beginning to take more notice of importance of driver behavior factors  ... and of other countries

Slide 22: 

In the assessment of one safety researcher (Evans 2004, 389–408), the lag between percentage reductions in fatality rates in the United States and reductions achieved in other countries in recent decades reflects a “dramatic failure of U.S. safety policy” (Evans 2004, 390). Under the failed policy, “U.S. safety priorities have been ordered almost perfectly opposite to where technical knowledge shows benefits are greatest” (Evans 2004, 389). In particular, the author argues, policy has concentrated on regulation of vehicle design and safety features, which are of lesser value, and has neglected countermeasures aimed at altering the driver behavior factors that are the major determinants of risk. National Academies SPECIAL REPORT 300, page 25

Slide 23: 

 US safety performance dramatically worse than that of other industrialized countries  US policies are not ordinarily foolish. Summary  Their policies are "ordinarily foolish"  Larger fatality declines in other countries define what is “normal”  US policies are not ordinarily foolish. They are "extraordinarily foolish”  Priorities almost perfectly opposite to where safety benefits are greatest  Aggressively reject science, or even common understanding

Slide 24: 

What does US traffic safety policy achieve? Enormously increases litigation earnings and resulting political contributions

Slide 25: 

Conclusions  US performance is still well described as: The Dramatic Failure of US Safety Policy Ongoing American tragedy due to “ignorance in action” Earlier conclusions validated with even greater clarity

Slide 26: 

Appendix Graphs for five measures (the two analyzed in detail in the presentation, plus three listed without further analysis) No sound commentary or animation timings – click to advance at your own pace Please cite as: Leonard Evans, Topsy-Turvy US Safety Policy Continues to Kill Thousands of Road Users. Presented to The Eye and the Auto International Conference, Detroit, MI, Sept 12-14, 2011. www.ScienceServingSociety.com/TEATA.ppt Note: I plan to post on www.ScienceServingSociety.com the criteria for selecting the 28 countries, all the data plotted in the graphs, and more