Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by simplyluke 35 days ago
The problem is that other countries have seen nearly identical trends in vehicle market share trending towards larger vehicles and have seen sustained declines in pedestrian fatalities. John Burn-Murdoch went deep on this in the FT a couple of years ago (archive link at bottom).

> Most of the explanations commonly put forward for why US roads remain so deadly focus on broad structural factors such as vehicle size or time spent on the road, but a review of the evidence suggests this may be mistaken. Last year’s improvement is a case in point. Two reasons often cited as key causes of poor US performance both worsened: the total number of miles driven by Americans increased, and US cars continued to grow larger. Yet fatal collisions still declined.

> Adding to the evidence that this is not a dominant factor, car sizes in Canada, Australia and New Zealand have traced similar paths to the US without resulting in a spike in fatalities.

> Another theory is that the rise of homelessness in the US may be pushing pedestrian deaths higher. A recent study found that there had indeed been a marked rise in traffic-related deaths among the homeless, but this, too, can only explain a small portion of the overall rise.

> Instead, an underrated factor seems to be not American cars but American drivers [...] The determining factor seems to be different attitudes to safety, with Americans twice as likely as Canadians or Europeans to say they find it acceptable to use a phone while driving.

https://archive.is/Lggyg#30%

4 comments

Where I live you don't touch a phone while driving. Heavy fines and both human and camera based survellience. I think it is excellent and has surely saved lives. Driving is the thing you don't need to multitask.
Nah thats the same everywhere. Stroads and piss poor urban design, largely due to objections from stubborn fire departments chasing the wrong metrics and refusing to downsize, are a compelling case.
I think it is a combination of both really. If you drive around europe, especially southern europe, it is a white knuckle driving situation a lot of the time. Narrow roads, windy with no embankment, unprotected cliffsides with a pile of hatchbacks on the bottom. Pulling out a smartphone is a death sentence. In the us everything is wide, straight, and embanked, leading to a false sense of confidence where you might open up that smartphone for a minute thinking it is fine. Then we get those dashcam recordings on reddit of people slowly driving off the road and realizing it about 5 seconds too late when all four wheels are already off the pavement and the car is about to flip end over end.
Read the linked article (or even the quoted portion). Americans have a very different attitude of the acceptability of using those phones.
>Stroads and piss poor urban design, largely due to objections from stubborn fire departments chasing the wrong metrics a

Save some blame for the shortsighted environmentalists. They are a huge part of why everything is so stupidly spaced out. Most of the site plans that were normal until the 1970s are just outright illegal now. These people would rather see you impoverished by rent driven sky high from scarcity than let a filthy landlord develop the whole lot without "expensive to the point of nonstarter" mitigations or accept that maybe the municipality will have to upgrade a culvert here or there. I work in a skyscraper and even it has token green space that's clearly just bullshit they chucked in to make the runoff calcs work. You can't even use it for anything because it's a planter/ditch, so the whole place is still effectively concrete jungle and they have a fence around it so nobody falls.

i'm not sure why you're being downvoted. there is a lot of research on this, the "natural experiments" have shown that road design explains a lot of the difference in injury rates between US and EU cities.
While vehicle sizes are indeed trending upward in Australia and Europe, giant SUV and especially giant truck penetration in both countries is still far behind US levels, and particularly in Europe are unlikely to ever reach the same figures (good luck parking your Ford F-9000 Testosteroneo in Rome or Paris).
It is not just the big cities. You go downtown even in small towns and the roads tend to be so narrow that a big SUV becomes a liability more than a vehicle. Without mentioning that I'm not even sure parking stalls fit big US cars lengthwise and they barely do widthwise
> While vehicle sizes are indeed trending upward in Australia and Europe, giant SUV and especially giant truck penetration in both countries is still far behind US levels

Many big SUVs are flat out illegal in Europe, you’d need a small truck license. It’s hard to comprehend how large American cars are unless you’ve lived in both places.

For example:

we took an Uber to the airport for our annual pilgrimage back home. We had 4 suitcases this time because new babies need gifts. In USA we got picked up by a sedan and everything fit in the trunk. In Europe we rented an SUV and had to break down the rear seats to fit everything.

I'm not sure that's true, although I don't know which SUVs you mean. I don't know all regulations in all countries in Europe, but think in principle they're all the same. So with the B permit, which is for basically cars, you can drive a vehicle up to 3.5 tons, which can be something like Iveco Daily 35S. It's basically a small truck, a popular rent a car option when moving to a new apartment/house.
I can't speak to Australia, and yeah, western Europe has a lot less big trucks, but Canada has as many large 4x4 trucks as anywhere in the US in my experience and has seen decreasing deaths. The times article touches on this but the most they can explain of the increase in deaths from vehicle size is 10%. It's a problem, but it's far from being able to explain the full issue.
I too am unconvinced bigger truck/vehicle means things are getting of control. It's terrible how the NYT article has no facts on overall road deaths, so here I state one for everyone: Occupant deaths have a clear falling trend. So while pedestrian deaths are climbing, the overall deaths are still trending downward, and I shouldn't have to defend that the overall count is more important than the pedestrian subset.
That can be very easily explained as "bigger cars are safer for their occupant and deadlier to the person getting hit by them".

I do think you need to defend your assertion, because the difference between a driver and a pedestrian is that the driver "knew the risks" while the risks were imposed on the pedestrian.

Many accidents are single vehicle and the vast, vast majority don't involve pedestrians.
> So while pedestrian deaths are climbing, the overall deaths are still trending downward, and I shouldn't have to defend that the overall count is more important than the pedestrian subset.

A better question is why is the US the only developed country that’s seen pedestrian deaths increase over the past 10-15 years. Every other developed country has seen both occupant and pedestrian deaths decrease over the same time period, and has seen a larger combined drop in deaths than the US. And to be clear, I’m talking about deaths per mile driven, not absolute counts, so the size of the US is already factored into the numbers.

You do need to justify it. There is a great moral hazard prioritizing the driver's safety over pedestrians, since the driver is most in control of the danger. There is very little a pedestrian can do to protect themselves from a driver on their phone who mounts the sidewalk.
Fixing on the pedestrian safety yields higher death counts overall. It is justified in quantity.
How do you reconcile your viewpoint with the non-pedestrian vehicular death rate in Europe? Do you think the reason deaths are so much lower there is because Europeans are unconcerned with pedestrians?
Apples and oranges. EU roads and cities are not US roads and cities and never will be.
I see. So you believe that if Europeans designed their streets to be less safe for pedestrians, like they are in the U.S., then their overall vehicular death rate would go down. Is that right?