User talk:BrettEMay
Introduction on Talk Page Assignment[edit]
Hi, I'm Jenni and I'm in your Intro to Public Admin class this semester! I'm introducing myself on your talk page as a part of this assignment.
Jennifer Meyer (talk) 15:57, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Annotated Bibliography[edit]
Brett
1. Johansson, Roger. "Vision Zero – Implementing a policy for traffic safety." Road Safety Division (2009).
The main point of this article is to outline the safety philosophy inherent in present road- and street design, trace the origin of this philosophy, and to present the principles for a new design of streets and roads. It will be argues that the differences in the present road design are the main cause of the global road safety crisis, clearly indicating its man-made nature. It gives a brief description of the decision process leading to the establishment of Vision Zero as Sweden’s Traffic Safety Policy in 1997. Following an analysis of the problem, suggestions are made for finding solutions. The solutions are based on some of the principles in Vision Zero. They include a new basic mechanism for creating error-tolerance in the road system, and new design principles for road- and street design. Roads redesigned with median barriers have an 80% reduction in fatalities. Streets with 30km/h design speed show similar results. This indicates that measures derived from Vision Zero strategy are effective but that large scale implementation has not yet been done. http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.libproxy.txstate.edu/eds/detail/detail
2. Rosencrantz, Holger. "Vision Zero – Is it irrational?" Transportation Research Part A: Policy & Practice. (2007): 559-567.
The article implies that no person should be killed or seriously injured as a consequence of road traffic. Since its (Vision Zero) adoption in 1997, the goal has been seriously criticised. In 2007, performance of the first interim target will be evaluated and a new interim target will be set. This article summarises the experiences from working with the goal and analyse the criticism that has been put forward against it. The most common criticism is that Vision Zero is an irrational goal. In order to evaluate this criticism, the article compares Vision Zero with an independently developed list of adequacy criteria for rational goal-setting. Ultimately, it is concluded that according to these criteria, Vision Zero is not irrational. http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.libproxy.txstate.edu/eds/detail/detail?vid=12&sid=2bcc08a0-ad41-44a6-a8e0-1d4fb6bcdfea%40sessionmgr4002&hid=4213&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#AN=24423143&db=eih
3. Giambrone, Andrew. "D.C. Kicks Off Vision Zero Initiative to Stop Traffic Deaths." Washington Post 16 July 2015. print.
This article gives a detailed summary on the city of Washington D.C.’s plans for both present and future implementation of the once Swedish concept, Vision Zero. Its ultimate goal is to eliminate traffic deaths through “three E’s”—engineering, enforcement, education—and the effective use of data. D.C.’s commitment to Vision Zero was announced earlier this year (2015) as part of the Mayors’ Challenge for Safer People and Safer Streets, a national program. Since then, District officials have made some progress towards drafting a plan, with a full and public version that was scheduled to be revealed in September of 2015. Through D.C.’s implementation, an upwards of 20 district agencies are predicted to aim to implement Vision Zero by 2024. http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2015/07/16/d-c-kicks-off-vision-zero-initiative-to-stop-traffic-deaths/
4. Thompson, Geoff Kees. "'Vision Zero' can make Philly streets safer for all." The Inquirer 13 July 2015. Print.
According to this article, the Vision Zero movement has spread throughout the world addressing two primary causes that lead to severe car crashes: poorly enforced traffic laws and poorly designed streets and intersections. Cities that have implemented Vision Zero strategies have not only seen reductions in deaths and injuries, but have begun changing the discourse on traffic violence. New York City, which treats the issue as a public-health crisis, has stepped up enforcement and seeks punishment for negligent drivers. This has meant increased accountability for drivers, including police vehicles, public transportation, and large delivery trucks. As a result, traffic deaths and injuries are on the decline. The article pushes to transform the streets from places of fear to vibrant public spaces that safely accommodate multiple users, not just motorized vehicles. Public safety is one of the most vital roles of government, and it is critical to recognize the impact that poorly planned infrastructure has in undermining this role. Proper funding for the Streets Department is crucial to increasing traffic safety. Currently the agency in Philly is repaving streets on a 15-year schedule, but this timetable delays implementation of safer-street infrastructure that the Planning Commission has previously planned for and future interventions Vision Zero legislation can help shape. http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/thinktank/314585651.html
Vision Zero Beginning[edit]
The Swedish Approach to Road Safety
Introduction: Vision Zero is a Swedish-born policy with a vision to reduce traffic related fatalities to zero hence the name, Vision Zero. Thousands of Americans die every year due to traffic fatalities and the lack of road infrastructure so, Vision Zero was brought to America in hopes to achieve the same success that Europe has. Cities like New York, Portland and Austin have adopted some sort of Vision Zero policy and have seen much success. Through scholarly articles and journals we intend to dive into the idea of where Vision Zero came from, where the success of Vision Zero stands today and the affect its’ had in major cities and why it’s important in todays’ society.
The responsibility of road safety has traditionally been placed on the individual road user rather than on the designers of the system. Road safety has tended to focus on encouraging good behaviour by road users via licensing, testing, education, training and publicity. Sweden is among those countries with the lowest number of traffic fatalities in relation to its population. However, in spite of this excellent record, in 1997 the Swedish Parliament introduced a new approach to road safety called “Vision Zero”. Vision Zero is based on a refusal to accept human deaths or lifelong suffering as a result of road traffic accidents (Elvik and Amundsen, 2000). It requires moving the emphasis away from reducing the number of accidents to eliminating the risk of chronic health impairment caused by road accidents. Vision Zero in Sweden requires fatalities and serious injuries to be reduced to zero by 2020.
The 1990 Swedish National Traffic Safety Programme set a target of less than 600 fatalities for traffic safety by 2000. In 1993, the Road Safety Office merged and became the Swedish National Road Administration (SNRA). In 1994 the SNRA, now responsible for national traffic safety work, presented a National Traffic Safety Programme for the period 1995–2000. A new target of 400 fatalities for the year 2000 was adopted. This original target was achieved in 1994. The intentions of the National Traffic Safety Programme, with ten sub-targets for traffic behaviour, were not reached but abandoned with the discussion of the Vision Zero concept. An interim target of reducing the number of road accident fatalities from 600 in 2000 to 270 in 2007 was adopted as a move towards the Vision Zero target. The annual number of fatalities has remained constant during the period 1994 to 2004. In 2004, there were 480 deaths (EC, 2004).
Vision Zero requires a paradigm shift in addressing the issue of road safety (Rechnitzer and Grzebieta, 1999). It requires abandoning the traditional economic model where road safety is provided at reasonable cost and the traditional transport model in which safety must be balanced against mobility. At the core of the Vision Zero is the biomechanical tolerance of human beings. Vision Zero promotes a road system where crash energy cannot exceed human tolerance. While it is accepted that crashes in the transport system occur due to human error, Vision Zero requires no crash should be more severe than the tolerance of humans. The blame for fatalities in the road system is assigned to the failure of the road system rather that the road user (Wadhwa, 2001).
Vision Zero is based on the ethical imperative that (Tingvall and Haworth, 1999): “It can never be ethically acceptable that people are killed or seriously injured when moving within the road system.”
Accidents have to be prevented from leading to fatalities and serious injuries by designing roads, vehicles and transport services in a way that someone can tolerate the violence of an accident without being killed or seriously injured. Common long-term disabling injuries and non-injury accidents are outside the scope of the vision. Vision Zero is estimated to achieve a possible reduction in the number of fatalities by a quarter to one third over a ten-year period (SNRA, 2003).
Vision Zero strategic principles are:
• The traffic system has to adapt to take better account of the needs, mistakes and vulnerabilities of road users. • The level of violence that the human body can tolerate without being killed or seriously injured forms the basic parameter in the design of the road transport system. • Vehicle speed is the most important regulating factor for safe road traffic. It should be determined by the technical standards for roads and vehicles so as not to exceed the level of violence that the human body can tolerate. The approach is: • To create a road environment that minimises the risk of road users making mistakes and that prevents serious human injury when designing, operating and maintaining the state road network. • To set an example in the SNRA’s own operations through the quality assurance (from a road safety perspective) of journeys and transports in all areas of activity, both those undertaken in-house and those contracted. • To analyse accidents that have resulted in death or serious injury in traffic and, where feasible, initiate suitable measures so as to avoid the repetition of such accidents. • To stimulate all players within the road transport system to work resolutely towards achieving mutually targeted objectives and conduct the work on road safety in close co-operation with all players within the road transport system. • To take advantage of, and further develop, the commitment of the general public to safer traffic.
Vision Zero emphasises what the optimum state of the road should be rather than possible ways of reducing current problems. The main change instigated by Vision Zero is a new way of dividing responsibilities for road safety. Rather than emphasising the responsibility of the road user alone, Vision Zero explicitly states that responsibility is shared both by the system designers and the road user:
1. The designers of the system are always ultimately responsible for the design, operation and use of the road transport system and thereby responsible for the level of safety within the entire system. 2. Road users are responsible for following the rules for using the road transport system set by the system designers. 3. If road users fail to obey these rules due to lack of knowledge, acceptance or ability, or if injuries occur, the system designers are required to take necessary further steps to counteract people being killed or seriously injured.
In 1999, a short-term action plan was launched by the Swedish government, containing 11 points aimed at strengthening and stimulating traffic safety work in accordance with Vision Zero principles (Ministry of Industry, Employment and Communications, 1999):
1. A focus on the most dangerous roads (e.g. priority for installing centre-guardrails for eliminating head-on collisions, removing obstacles next to roads, etc.) 2. Safer traffic in built-up areas (e.g. a safety analysis of street networks in 102 municipalities led to reconstruction of streets; the efforts are continuing.) 3. Emphasis on the responsibilities of road users (e.g. creating more respect for traffic rules in particular with regard to speed limits, seat belt use, and intoxicated driving.) 4. Safe bicycle traffic (e.g. campaign for using bicycle helmets, a voluntary bicycle safety standard.) 5. Quality assurance in transport work (e.g. public agencies with large transportation needs will receive traffic safety (and environmental impact) instructions on how to assure the quality of their own transportation services and those procured from outside firms.) 6. Winter tyre requirement (e.g. a new law mandating specific tyres under winter road conditions.) 7. Making better use of Swedish technology (e.g. promoting the introduction of technology - available or to be developed - that relatively soon can be applied, such as seat belt reminders, in-car speed adaptation systems (ISA), alcohol ignition interlocks for preventing drinking and driving, and electronic driver licences.) 8. Responsibilities of road transport system designers (e.g. establishment of an independent organisation for road traffic inspection is proposed by a commission of inquiry on the responsibilities of the public sector and the business community for safe road traffic.) 9. Public responses to traffic violations (e.g. a commission of inquiry is reviewing existing traffic violation rules in the light of the Vision Zero principles and of ensuring due process of law.) 10. The role of voluntary organisations (e.g. the government is evaluating the road safety work of the 'Nationalföreningen för trafiksäkerhetens främjande' (National Society for Road Safety (NTF)) and its use of state funds.) 11. Alternative forms of financing new roads (e.g. possibilities are studied for other forms of supplementing public financing of major road projects.) 10 In the autumn of 2001 the Government presented an infrastructure plan, where the traffic safety work will fulfil the 2007 target. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mel29g (talk • contribs) 15:54, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Welcome!
|
November 2015[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Vision Zero, but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Hi, I see that your edits are for a class. Nevertheless there is, believe it or not, a high standard here at Wikipedia. Sentences like "It was recommended that the creation of a task force could gain progression toward the overall goal and outcomes of Vision Zero" and things that you have written on Vision Zero seriously do not belong here. Please review the links I provided above for how you can contribute in a meaningful way to the Wikipedia Project. Simply adding material that has already justly been removed without discussion can get you in wiki-trouble. Cheers. JesseRafe (talk) 07:25, 23 November 2015 (UTC)