Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorElvik, Rune
dc.coverage.spatialNorwaynb_NO
dc.date.accessioned2019-06-28T07:38:21Z
dc.date.available2019-06-28T07:38:21Z
dc.date.created2017-06-22T12:33:14Z
dc.date.issued2017-06-13
dc.identifier.citationAccident Analysis and Prevention. 2017, 106 (September), 166-172.nb_NO
dc.identifier.issn0001-4575
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2602695
dc.description.abstractIn several papers, Hauer (1988, 1989, 2000a, 2000b, 2016) has argued that the level of safety built into roads is unpremeditated, i.e. not the result of decisions based on knowledge of the safety impacts of design standards. Hauer has pointed out that the development of knowledge about the level of safety built into roads has been slow and remains incomplete even today. Based on these observations, this paper asks whether evolutionary theory can contribute to explaining the slow development of knowledge. A key proposition of evolutionary theory is that knowledge is discovered through a process of learning-by-doing; it is not necessarily produced intentionally by means of research or development. An unintentional discovery of knowledge is treacherous as far as road safety is concerned, since an apparently effective safety treatment may simply be the result of regression-to-the-mean. The importance of regression-to-the-mean was not fully understood until about 1980, and a substantial part of what was regarded as known at that time may have been based on studies not controlling for regression-to-the-mean. An attempt to provide an axiomatic foundation for designing a safe road system was made by Gunnarsson and Lindström (1970). This had the ambition of providing universal guidelines that would facilitate a preventive approach, rather than the reactive approach based on accident history (i.e. designing a system known to be safe, rather than reacting to events in a system of unknown safety). Three facts are notable about these principles. First, they are stated in very general terms and do not address many of the details of road design or traffic control. Second, they are not based on experience showing their effectiveness. Third, they are partial and do not address the interaction between elements of the road traffic system, in particular road user adaptation to system design. Another notable fact consistent with evolutionary theory, is that the safety margins built into various design elements have been continuously eroded by the development of bigger and faster motor vehicles, that can only be operated safely if roads are wider and straighter than they needed to be when motor vehicles were smaller and moved slower.nb_NO
dc.language.isoengnb_NO
dc.publisherElseviernb_NO
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleCan evolutionary theory explain the slow development of knowledge about the level of safety built into roads?nb_NO
dc.title.alternativeCan evolutionary theory explain the slow development of knowledge about the level of safety built into roads?nb_NO
dc.typeJournal articlenb_NO
dc.typePeer reviewednb_NO
dc.rights.holder© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.nb_NO
dc.description.versionsubmittedVersionnb_NO
cristin.unitcode7482,2,1,0
cristin.unitnameSikkerhet og tiltak
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextpreprint
cristin.qualitycode1
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.aap.2017.06.008
dc.identifier.cristin1478205
dc.source.journalAccident Analysis and Preventionnb_NO
dc.source.volume106nb_NO
dc.source.issueSeptembernb_NO
dc.source.pagenumber166-172nb_NO
dc.relation.projectNorges forskningsråd: 210486nb_NO


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal