Vision Zero and Impaired Driving: Near and Longer-Term Opportunities for Preventing Death and Injuries

Crash causation, countermeasures, and policy - Editorial

This editorial is both an introduction to the papers that make up this special issue (on the Relationship between Crash Causation, Countermeasures, and Policy) and an attempt at drawing conclusions. To assist the reader, we begin with a brief description of the subject matter of each paper. As expected, the authors tackle different aspects of this general topic and often differ in their conclusions. We follow up by asking: Are in-depth crash causation studies helpful? Can the need for understanding causation be defended? Does the Swiss Cheese Metaphor require revision? What are the building blocks on which the crash injury prevention programs rest? Can one really avoid comparing costs and benefits? These are some of the issues we raise and discuss. We end by offering for consideration a realistic model to link causes, countermeasures, policy, and responsibility for public safety.

Are crash causation studies the best way to understand system failures - Who can we blame?

The search for common and serious single causes of road crashes naturally leads to a concentration on the road user. This is supported by a legal framework in the search for the main cause and the suspect for this cause. In prevention, we havefor decades been more inclined to look for systematic improvements of all elements of the road transport system, and we direct the recommendations for actions towards system designers, organizations, products and services. In this paper the discussion about causation and prevention is broadened in the light of Vision Zero and its approach to prevention of serious and fatal injuries. We also discuss the Swedish judicial system and why the prevention approach has not been legislated or even generally accepted. Occupational health and safety legislation and road rules are compared, as well as how sustainability practices and reporting are tools to apply prevention where organizations have a natural sphere of influence that could mitigate deaths and serious injuries within value chains. It is recommended that we stop using the term causation as it is only directing actions in one direction. There is a risk that the focus on causation, in particular single causes, will deviate actions away from robust prevention countermeasures such as increased seat belt use, relevant speed limits, and well functioning roundabouts and median barriers. Furthermore, there is also a risk that important preventative actions from organizations are overlooked.