Citation

Ezra H. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2019; 128: 114-131.

Affiliation

Civil Engineeering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. Electronic address: ezra.hauer@utoronto.ca.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2019, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.aap.2019.03.016

PMID

30991290

Abstract

How do the findings of road safety research affect the practice by which the road infrastructure is built and operated? The question is seldom asked. I discuss the complexities of the research-practice symbiosis in the light of two historical anecdotes. These allow me to point out several issues of concern. My general conclusion is that the relationship, as it evolved over time, is unpremeditated and occasionally dysfunctional. Issues of concern are the lightness with which decisions affecting road-user safety can be based on opinion that is unsupported by evidence, that such opinions can trump inconvenient evidence, that research findings can be willfully distorted or disregarded, that questionable results can be given a ring of consensual truth, and that the questions which research asks and what findings get published are at times influenced by external interest. In sum, the concern is that practice is not sufficiently evidence-based. Road users have a right to expect that decisions substantially affecting their safety take into account fact-based expectation of safety consequences. It is therefore time to endow the research-practice relationship with a premeditated and purposeful structure.

Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Language: en

Keywords

Bias; Dysfunction; Ethics; Road-user rights; Standards; Warrants