Vision Zero

One visible campaign of the New York City mayor Bill de Blasio has been Vision Zero, an attempt to reduce road deaths in the city.

I applaud this, and find it a good example of the sort of thing mayors can influence. There are many dimensions to such an issue, and a mayor can pull them together as a united team and also add profile.

It is a great issue to choose. Who could argue against improving road safety? In many countries, a traffic accident is the most likely cause of death among people aged 5-50. If we reach five and can manage to avoid that fate, then we might even be halving our chances of not living a full life. In the US, sadly, that might not quite be true, because so many people die from shootings and stabbings. But reducing the traffic risk is a wonderful goal.

It is also an attainable goal. Key to the Vision Zero concept is that a traffic accident is never just an accident, and is always avoidable, by a combination of smarter human decisions and a more forgiving infrastructure. Once we take the step of accepting that accidents don’t happen, and also stop the practice of putting a monetary trade-off value on a human life, then the logical conclusion is that zero road deaths is possible and that we should do all we can to achieve it.

In Shell, along with many other corporations, we took a similar path with workplace safety, over a sustained period from about 1990 to the present, with impressive results. There were always cynics. Safety became an industry of its own, immune to cutbacks and criticism, and seemingly filling the environment with their mantras. Others felt that the leaders were driven by litigation risk rather than valuing the lives of staff: I did not believe this, and, even if it were true, the travails of BP show that even such cynical motivation had a value.

I am not a natural dogmatist, and at times felt the safety mantra became a bit mindless, but I was swayed during my last years in the major projects department. There I saw for myself the stunning correlation between projects with a strong safety record and those with good economic outcomes. That convinced me that creating a good safety culture had benefits beyond safety itself.

Vision Zero started in Sweden in the 1990’s. That is no surprise, for the Swedes value safety and life and have the discipline to learn and follow good practice. They already were European leaders before Vision Zero, despite the considerable handicap of their climate and issues with alcoholism. Various European countries took up the mantle since, and now some US cities have followed suit, not before time, since the US track record for read related deaths is very poor compared with Europe, perhaps because of the libertarian tendencies of a large minority of drivers.

The way the campaign is visible around the city is impressive. I looked up the list of specific initiatives. That is impressive too for its length and for how comprehensive it is. As always in the US, there are challenges when it comes to corralling together overlapping or separate legislative bodies. In New York there are also challenges relating to historical union practices.

I do however wonder if there some missed opportunities. The initiative list had a flavour of being copied across from other cities and countries, with local amendments driven more by administrative challenges than by the specific driving and pedestrian issues facing New Yorkers. In other words, it might be somewhat back-office led rather than customer led.

One opportunity might be the practical driving test. To gain a New York driving licence, the practical element involves driving a few blocks for about 12 minutes. I find this wholly inadequate, even though the examiners are no doubt experienced assessors. Main roads and expressways are truly scary here: why are they not assessed? It must be to save money on examiners – just the sort of false economy that Vision Zero is designed to weed out.

Then there is infrastructure. The main reason expressways are so scary is because they are not just crowded but also flawed in structure. I can understand how that happened – land is at a premium and New Yorkers love practical compromise over dogma. But the result is plainly dangerous, and more than necessarily so.

Street lighting on expressways, especially around junctions, is pitiful. Signage is inconsistent. For much of the year potholes necessitate high-speed lane and speed adjustments. Road works seem to go on for years and entail narrow lanes and rapid driver adjustments. Worst of all, in many places there are simply not long enough entry lanes. Until I know a road very well, I find many faster roads akin more to a funfair or grand prix than a safe driving experience.

Now longer entry lanes would be expensive and sometimes infeasible. But a lot of the other issues could be dealt with at relatively low cost. Given the way the network is, I am actually amazed that I don’t witness many more deadly smashes than I do. Yet the Vision Zero initiatives only seem to scratch the surface of this issue.

Then there are the drivers, and here I have an idea. Campaigns are good to raise awareness. More cameras and more police will catch some offenders. But this is all likely to be incremental. The fact is that maybe 5% of New York drivers are completely reckless and thoughtless. These will be immune to campaigns, and relying on police and cameras will not deter or punish them often enough.

So why not take a leaf from elsewhere in the modern economy and rely on other drivers? Nowadays we would not use a hotel or restaurant without contributing to trip advisor. A similar app could help us rate our fellow drivers.

I suggest a very simple interface working by sms. The app prevents you from typing an sms while actually driving, so only pedestrians, passengers or drivers in parked cars can use it. You type in the number plate of another vehicle and then a code. 1 could be a general compliment. 2 could signal reckless driving. And 3 could signal selfish driving, such as cutting in a long line or double parking.

DMV, police and insurance companies would collect the data. Only a large of identical entries would be considered significant, so there is no risk of people abusing the system by targeting friends or enemies. Some professional drivers already invite feedback with numbers to call on the back of their trucks, so the method is already somewhat established. The result would be a step change in reliable feedback about the driving habits of all of us. Our driving safety score could become as important as our credit score.

Insurance companies would surely pay for the development of the app, and receive a payback by adjusting premia based on a better knowledge of risk. In my view, police and vehicle authorities should also be able to act on the data, so long as the weight of evidence is conclusive enough. Just like with trip advisor, there would be some rogue entries, but with a large enough sample over a long enough time period these could be safely ignored.

Such an app could transform road safety, and be the flagship initiative for Vision Zero. In an earlier life I might have tried to monetise this idea, but I have realised that I will not get around to it until it is too late, so I offer it up to interested parties. Why not go for it, Bill de Blasio? Or Progressive, or Geico?