|
|
Dr. Richard Allsop has extensive experience of research, training and advisory work on road safety and traffic management. He has a first in Mathematics from Cambridge, and a PhD in Optimisation of Traffic Signal Control and a DSc in Engineering from UCL (University College London), where he has been Professor of Transport Studies since 1976 and was Director between then and 1997 of what is now the Centre for Transport Studies. He is a member of the British Government's Road Safety Advisory Panel and chairs its Statistics Group, having previously chaired the group which developed numerical advice to Ministers on the setting of Britain's current road casualty reduction targets. He is a director of PACTS (the British Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety) and is active in the European Transport Safety Council (ETSC) as chairman of its Road Infrastructure Working Party and a member of its Transport Safety Policy Working Party, and chaired the group which produced ETSC's recent paper on assessing risk and setting targets in transport safety programmes.
リチャード・オルソップ博士は交通安全と交通管理の研究、教育、助言で幅広い経験を積んできた。ケンブリッジの数学科で最優秀の成績を収め、UCL(ユニバーシティ・カレッジ・ロンドン)で博士号(交通信号制御最適化)と科学博士号(エンジニアリング)を取得。同カレッジで1976年から交通研究の教授、同年から1997年まで、現在の交通研究センター長を務める。現在、イギリス政府道路安全諮問委員会のメンバーで統計班班長、過去にはイギリスの現在の交通事故死者減少目標設定について閣僚に数値目標を答申する班の班長も務めた。PACTS(イギリス議会交通安全諮問委員会)の委員長であり、ヨーロッパ交通安全評議会(ETSC)でも、道路インフラストラクチャー作業部会の部長および交通安全政策作業部会のメンバーとして活躍している。またリスク評価と交通安全計画の目標設定に関して最近発表されたETSCの文書を作成した班の班長も務めた。
Centre for Transport Studies
University College London
Abstract
Just as Japan's first halving of deaths on the road within less than 10 years from 1970 encouraged efforts in north-west Europe, so the subsequent levelling off and temporary rebound in the annual number of road deaths in Japan is a warning to European countries that have more recently achieved their more gradual first halvings. Both Japan and European countries need to confront the scandal of tolerance of current levels of death and injury on the roads. Road safety professionals and committed advocates of casualty-reducing measures know that deaths on Japan's roads can be halved again and that it makes socio-economic sense to take the steps needed to do so. But decision-makers with other agenda and a public who underestimate the problem need to be convinced.
This is the challenge to change minds. The grounds for seeking to do so can be expressed in terms of the necessity of using the roads as part of everyday life, the disproportionate current level of risk in doing so, and the availability of cost-effective and widely acceptable ways of reducing the risk. The aim of changing minds is to replace tolerance of disproportionate numbers of people being killed and injured on the roads by a strong and lasting motivation to reduce those numbers radically. Changing of minds can be helped by high-level acceptance and promotion of a vision or philosophy of road safety. Translating this into reality requires a wide range of people and interests to act cohesively in many different ways which interact strongly and need to reinforce one another.
This is the challenge to work together. Meeting it can be helped by leadership from a high level in involving all who can contribute to road casualty reduction in developing an explicit road safety strategy which they feel that they own and to which they are committed. With the allocation of appropriate human and financial resources, the strategy can be implemented through a programme of cost-effective and widely acceptable measures to reduce risk by adapting the road system, road vehicles and the ways in which they are used. Although research is continually adding to and refining the range of measures, enough measures to do much of the job are already available and well-tried. Motivation of all concerned to implement the strategy can be helped by setting challenging yet achievable targets.
Adopting a road safety strategy is not a once-for-all task, but the beginning of a continuing process of working together in which the strategy and its implementation are kept under review and regularly updated in the light of monitoring of changing circumstances and of progress towards the targets. Deaths can be halved if enough people and interests want this to happen and will work together to make it happen.
Halving Road Deaths
|
| ・ Misuse of guns | low |
| ・ Spreading disease | low |
| ・ Crime against persons or property | low |
| ・ Misuse of substances | variable |
| ・ Misuse of vehicles | high |
Changing minds means persuading society
Limiting freedom
Some safety measures limit some people’s freedom to use the roads some of the time
Opposing safety measures limits everyone’s freedom to use the roads all of the time
Reducing road deaths is a high priority because
Proportionate concern
Risk of death or injury while using the roads is disproportionate
Our concern about it is not disproportionate
Changing minds can be helped by
a long-term vision or practical philosophy of safer road use
leading to
an effective strategy for the next 5 to 10 years
The Vision Zero
“The long-term goal … that nobody will be killed or seriously injured as a result of a traffic accident within the road transport system”
(Parliament of Sweden 1997)
Farther-reaching visions
“Death and injuries in traffic are unacceptable ? each accident is one too many” (Denmark 2000)
“The ultimate goal of total prevention of traffic accidents and traffic casualties” (Japan Central Traffic Safety Policy Council 2001)
Reservations about the Vision Zero
Limits on spending in the face of other opportunities to reduce suffering
Limits on people’s willingness to forego freedom in using the roads
Safety is for living -
living is more than just staying safe
A more pragmatic vision
“Reducing the risk of death per hour spent using the roads to the average risk of death while engaging in other everyday activities”
Rationale for adopting a road safety strategy
Reducing road deaths requires different people and interests to act cohesively
in ways that interact strongly and need to reinforce one another
This is the challenge to work together
Professional and ethical responsibility for road safety
Interdependence of actions to improve road safety
Potential benefits of formulating and adopting a road safety strategy
Potential benefits of formulating and adopting a road safety strategy
Estimating cost-effectiveness requires monetary values for prevention of death or injury
Working together to formulate and implement a road safety strategy should lead to
Targets can encourage working together if they
They also provide a basis for monitoring
Some issues for discussion today and in the follow-up to this meeting
A clearer focus on direct casualty reduction?
Consider distinguishing betweenA more clearly achievable programme?
Consider setting out more explicitlyAddressing more fully the challenge to work together?
Deaths can be halved
if enough people and interests
are
convinced they want it to happen
and are willing to
work together to make it happen
