Citation

Brown I. IATSS Res. 1992; 16(2): 124-128.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1992, International Association of Traffic and Safety Sciences, Publisher Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

To various conflicts between considerations of mobility, safety, and environmental issues constitute well-recognized social dilemmas, in that each of them represents a conflict between "individual rationality"" group rationality". However, these conflicts occur at different societal levels. The behavioral feedback loops between these levels, which are essential to any resolution of the various conflicts between mobility, safety, and environmental considerations, or therefore either extremely ineffective, are completely missing. Mobility and safety, for instance, are classic examples of the "commons dilemma", in which the majority of the feedback to individual road users persuades them that they will gain in the short term by behaving antisocial he and is therefore becomes their dominant strategy. The overall result is the "deficient equilibrium", in which no individual is motivated to change their behavior (hence the "equilibrium"), get most, or all, individuals would prefer it if no one had to behave antisocially in order to maximize system safety and mobility (hence the "deficiency"). This deficient equilibrium can be seen at other societal levels; for example, as different modes of transport compete for resources and for custom, and as conflicts arise between societal and political objectives. However, it tends to exist as "with in-level" problems, whereas the only hope for solutions lies in consideration of "between Haifa level" feedback loops and in improved understanding of the decision bias is operating at the different levels. Psychological research has not been particularly helpful in producing solutions to social dilemmas as complex as those which are now represented by conflicts between transport mobility, safety, and the environment. By setting out these dilemmas in hierarchical form, it is hoped to identify more clearly the scope for countermeasure development and implementation.