Are driving standards in the UK getting worse?
Discussion
spud989 said:
Younger generation growing up with constant texting are now drivers
Average hatchbacks can now easily do over 100mph
More cars than ever before
Standards might have got worse or might not - but the factors surrounding it have certainly had a strong influence.
I suspect that some of the above is true. Average hatchbacks can now easily do over 100mph
More cars than ever before
Standards might have got worse or might not - but the factors surrounding it have certainly had a strong influence.
Cars are far better even than when I first started driving in 1994 and even a small shopping car now feels substantial, safe and quite easy to drive. Brakes feel powerful (even if overly-assisted brakes aren't quite as good at actual retardation as the pedal feel suggests) and cheap cars don't slide around the road at the hint of drizzle or a bend like they used to -well, not until ditch finders are fitted when the OEM front tyres wear out.
It does appear to me that red light jumping is more prevalent than it was, but has seemed this way for the past 10 years or so, in my view.
As somebody pointed out earlier, our own perceptions change. I may well have drive a little fast and erratically myself at times 15-20 years ago...
Although I've never been a red light jumper, tail-gater, Facebook-driver or overtaken around blind bends.
Yes, driving standards have deteriorated.
IMO the primary cause has been the proliferation of formal instructions and constraints placed upon drivers (e.g., lower speed limits, stricter enforcement of them, variable limits on motorways, speed bumps and artificial road narrowings, more traffic lights, more streets made one-way, more parking restrictions).
The net effect has been to create the illusion that the driver's primary job is to obey all the formal commands imposed upon him or her: do that, and you the driver have fulfilled your responsibilities.
People do not act more responsibly by having responsibility taken away from them.
flemke said:
Yes, driving standards have deteriorated.
IMO the primary cause has been the proliferation of formal instructions and constraints placed upon drivers (e.g., lower speed limits, stricter enforcement of them, variable limits on motorways, speed bumps and artificial road narrowings, more traffic lights, more streets made one-way, more parking restrictions).
The net effect has been to create the illusion that the driver's primary job is to obey all the formal commands imposed upon him or her: do that, and you the driver have fulfilled your responsibilities.
People do not act more responsibly by having responsibility taken away from them.
Indeed.IMO the primary cause has been the proliferation of formal instructions and constraints placed upon drivers (e.g., lower speed limits, stricter enforcement of them, variable limits on motorways, speed bumps and artificial road narrowings, more traffic lights, more streets made one-way, more parking restrictions).
The net effect has been to create the illusion that the driver's primary job is to obey all the formal commands imposed upon him or her: do that, and you the driver have fulfilled your responsibilities.
People do not act more responsibly by having responsibility taken away from them.
Are driving standards in the UK getting worse?
Yes.
And no.
The answer to this question is both subjective and objective. Without being more specific on what aspects of driving the question refers to, it's a very difficult question to answer, but lets look at the objective answer first.
The UK driving test is harder than it used to be, so if we look at this question purely in terms of the standards required to obtain a full UK car or motorcycle licence, then, without a doubt, driving standards in the UK have improved.
I know many of you won't believe that the driving test is harder, but these days a new driver has to pass a two-part test, the first of which requires an amount of study of the highway code and an amount of practice at hazard perception. The practical test is longer than it used to be, includes an element of "independant" driving and takes place on roads which are much busier than they used to be (more of this later). So yes, without question, the driving test is harder to pass than it used to be, which has resulted in newly-qualified drivers who are, on average, at a better standard than their counterparts 20,30 or 40 years ago.
Whilst we're still on the objective answer, road casualties are also difficult to argue with. 7,000 road fatalities per year in the (pre driving test) 1930s when there were around 1,000,000 vehicles on the road, compared with around 1,300 per year in the 2010s with around 35,000,000 vehicles on the road. On their own, those figures should demonstrate a huge improvement in driving standards over the years.
The casualty figures have, however, been significantly improved by massive improvements in vehicle design, changes to legislation such as seatbelt and drink-driving laws, improved road design, street lighting etc, but somewhere in the mix, an improvement in driving standards has played a part in reducing the number of deaths on the road.
But then we get to the subjective answer. How do we feel about driving standards in the UK? Those of us who have been driving 25+ years generally feel like drivng standards are getting worse year-on-year.
Having given it some considerable thought (I've taken a couple of days to think it through carefully before replying to this thread), I actually don't think that driving standards as a whole are any worse now than they were when I started driving in 1986. But - and this is a big but, so I'll capitalise it, enbolden it etc - BUT there are a lot more bad drivers on the road than there used to be.
How can this be? How can driving standards have improved, but there has also been an increase in bad drivers?
It's purely down to numbers. There has always been a proportion of drivers who are aggressive, inattentive, careless, ignorant, stuipid or downright bloody-minded. As the number of vehicles on the road increases, the number of "those" drivers correspondingly increases. The behaviour of "those" drivers also seems to escalate based on how heavy or light the traffic is.
This leads to the misconception that driving standards are different in different parts of the country. Drive up to Northern Scotland, for instance, and you'll feel as though you're in the land of the excellent driver - you'll encounter very low levels of muppetry and you'll thoroughly enjoy the experience. You might come across the odd one or two clowns, but one or two won't ruin your day will they?
Drive inside the M60 at peak times and you'll feel like you've found another level of pergatory. Every few minutes you'll be cut up, hacked up, brake tested, swerved at and generally subjected to a mental battering by loads of idiots who seem like they're off their medication.
Are there more bad drivers on the roads of Greater Manchester than Northern Scotland? Yes, of course. But that's not the right question to ask.
The right question should be is there a higher proportion of bad drivers in Greater Manchester than there are in Northern Scotland? I believe the answer is no - the one or two you might encounter in the Highlands equates to a similar proportion of bad drivers that you encounter in Manchester - it's just that there are far less vehicles on the road in Northern Scotland, so the perception is that driving standards are better there (or any other low population area of the UK).
So thats my take on it. Driving standards are not getting worse, but there are more bad drivers on the road.
At least they're usually easy to spot!
Yes.
And no.
The answer to this question is both subjective and objective. Without being more specific on what aspects of driving the question refers to, it's a very difficult question to answer, but lets look at the objective answer first.
The UK driving test is harder than it used to be, so if we look at this question purely in terms of the standards required to obtain a full UK car or motorcycle licence, then, without a doubt, driving standards in the UK have improved.
I know many of you won't believe that the driving test is harder, but these days a new driver has to pass a two-part test, the first of which requires an amount of study of the highway code and an amount of practice at hazard perception. The practical test is longer than it used to be, includes an element of "independant" driving and takes place on roads which are much busier than they used to be (more of this later). So yes, without question, the driving test is harder to pass than it used to be, which has resulted in newly-qualified drivers who are, on average, at a better standard than their counterparts 20,30 or 40 years ago.
Whilst we're still on the objective answer, road casualties are also difficult to argue with. 7,000 road fatalities per year in the (pre driving test) 1930s when there were around 1,000,000 vehicles on the road, compared with around 1,300 per year in the 2010s with around 35,000,000 vehicles on the road. On their own, those figures should demonstrate a huge improvement in driving standards over the years.
The casualty figures have, however, been significantly improved by massive improvements in vehicle design, changes to legislation such as seatbelt and drink-driving laws, improved road design, street lighting etc, but somewhere in the mix, an improvement in driving standards has played a part in reducing the number of deaths on the road.
But then we get to the subjective answer. How do we feel about driving standards in the UK? Those of us who have been driving 25+ years generally feel like drivng standards are getting worse year-on-year.
Having given it some considerable thought (I've taken a couple of days to think it through carefully before replying to this thread), I actually don't think that driving standards as a whole are any worse now than they were when I started driving in 1986. But - and this is a big but, so I'll capitalise it, enbolden it etc - BUT there are a lot more bad drivers on the road than there used to be.
How can this be? How can driving standards have improved, but there has also been an increase in bad drivers?
It's purely down to numbers. There has always been a proportion of drivers who are aggressive, inattentive, careless, ignorant, stuipid or downright bloody-minded. As the number of vehicles on the road increases, the number of "those" drivers correspondingly increases. The behaviour of "those" drivers also seems to escalate based on how heavy or light the traffic is.
This leads to the misconception that driving standards are different in different parts of the country. Drive up to Northern Scotland, for instance, and you'll feel as though you're in the land of the excellent driver - you'll encounter very low levels of muppetry and you'll thoroughly enjoy the experience. You might come across the odd one or two clowns, but one or two won't ruin your day will they?
Drive inside the M60 at peak times and you'll feel like you've found another level of pergatory. Every few minutes you'll be cut up, hacked up, brake tested, swerved at and generally subjected to a mental battering by loads of idiots who seem like they're off their medication.
Are there more bad drivers on the roads of Greater Manchester than Northern Scotland? Yes, of course. But that's not the right question to ask.
The right question should be is there a higher proportion of bad drivers in Greater Manchester than there are in Northern Scotland? I believe the answer is no - the one or two you might encounter in the Highlands equates to a similar proportion of bad drivers that you encounter in Manchester - it's just that there are far less vehicles on the road in Northern Scotland, so the perception is that driving standards are better there (or any other low population area of the UK).
So thats my take on it. Driving standards are not getting worse, but there are more bad drivers on the road.
At least they're usually easy to spot!
Good post R.U.
My first lesson was in a VW.Beetle in Rotterdam in 1968.To me it is the amount of traffic on our roads.To many cars and not enough space for all of us.
More pressure on drivers to get to a place quickly.I drive on the continent a few times a year and regarding standards can't say it differs from the U.K.
My first lesson was in a VW.Beetle in Rotterdam in 1968.To me it is the amount of traffic on our roads.To many cars and not enough space for all of us.
More pressure on drivers to get to a place quickly.I drive on the continent a few times a year and regarding standards can't say it differs from the U.K.
Up until July last year I walked to work and prior to that I worked from home and took the train, so just did about 15k miles a year to meetings, trips at weekends, driving to test days etc. We've now moved house to be closer to my wife's work and I'm driving about 35k-40k miles a year. To put my post's comparisons with the past in context, I passed my test in November 1994, so have been driving just over 20 years and my comparisons are over that period.
R U Local makes some very good points above which are well worth reading, but I think that driving standards have dropped, yes. Here's my summary from my ~700 miles a week:
What I find annoying is that the above three things I've bulletpointed make the UK a pretty horrible place to drive now. You've no idea what anyone round you is going to do, so have to constantly change your plans and stopping distances etc, and you can't help but incur the wrath of angry people. I'd go so far as to say that the UK is the worst country to drive in. Other countries have drivers who make more mistakes and have a lower standard of driving (Greece for example), but generally they're not as aggressive and hot headed. It's the UK's combination of poor driving standards, impactience and aggression that gets to me.
R U Local makes some very good points above which are well worth reading, but I think that driving standards have dropped, yes. Here's my summary from my ~700 miles a week:
- Indicating: The proportion of people indicating and indicating properly has dropped markedly in my opinion. I've noticed this so much that I've done some brief counts on my daily commute and I reckon about 10% of people that I see changing lanes or negotiating junctions when I need to know what's happening (that was my criteria in my counts - that I was there to need indicating to) don't indicate at all, 85-90% indicate at the same time as they start to move and less than 1% indicate properly, which is something I see about once every couple of days. About 10 years ago when a friend of mine was training to be a driving instructor, we were waiting for a friend near a roundabout and decided to do a count for ten minutes of indicating, and about the figures were depressing, but definitely not as bad as now. Back then you'd see people indicating properly a few times a day. The only upshot of this is it allows you to spot unmarked police cars easily
- Lack of courtesy: I define this as general politeness, rather than things in the Highway Code. For example, if I'm cruising along in lane one at 70mph with someone matching my speed behind me, there's a 50mph lorry up ahead and I indicate to change lanes; a common discourteous action is for the guy behind me to suddenly accelerate round me to make sure he gets ahead of me. Not against the HC, but rather impolite (no change of speed or course, but I have to make a change to my plan). Another one is in the same situation when I'm in lane 2 and there's a stream of cars in lane 3 and then a sizeable gap that I fit into - people at the back of such a gap often accelerate hard when I indicate to stop me getting out (and no, I haven't just undertaken them!); that's actually no problem as in dong so they create an even bigger gap behind them for me to use, but nevertheless it's a selfish 'me first!' attitude. The other thing is when there are people waiting to cross the road and it's raining and cold and cars in a 30mph limit going nowhere fast fail to slow and let the poor guy complete at least half his crossing to a traffic island - almost nobody seems to do this anymore. Finally, something I'm seeing more and more is when I meet someone on a narrow lane and they pass a passing place but I have none to use, they won't pull into that passing place, they'll just drive straight at me and stop, expecting me to climb on the verge or reverse to where the lane is wider, even though they had (and still have just behind them) a passing place.
- Aggression: I'm hearing a lot more horns used in anger and fists out of windows than I used to. A good time to notice this is my regular walk at lunchtime, which I've been doing in the same village where I now work since 2001.
What I find annoying is that the above three things I've bulletpointed make the UK a pretty horrible place to drive now. You've no idea what anyone round you is going to do, so have to constantly change your plans and stopping distances etc, and you can't help but incur the wrath of angry people. I'd go so far as to say that the UK is the worst country to drive in. Other countries have drivers who make more mistakes and have a lower standard of driving (Greece for example), but generally they're not as aggressive and hot headed. It's the UK's combination of poor driving standards, impactience and aggression that gets to me.
Edited by RobM77 on Friday 17th April 11:03
waremark said:
I am surprised. It must be pointed out that as each of us gets both older and more experienced our perceptions change. My perception is that speeds are significantly lower than they used to be. I put this down to the extent of the enforcement regime as well as the all pervasive reduction in limits. Most people drive extremely safely as confirmed by the accident stats.
An example re speeding; I tend to accelerate away from junctions / lights quite briskly up to the posted limit, and quite frequently find myself quite far ahead of the person behind me - but then they catch me up in no time at all, which means they would have needed to exceed the speed limit to do so.I also pass through a 20 zone on my way to work every day, and frequently find people catching up with me rather quickly - again - they must be exceeding the posted limit to do this.
Part of my journey is an unclassified country road with a posted 50 limit. Again - I have people catching me up rapidly - they have to speed to do this!
And in all of the above cases, once I have been caught up, I am tailgated closely (sometimes dangerously so) and as others have stated in this thread, you almost feel as if the person behind you is trying to push you to exceed the limit.
As for the accident stats - I suspect these are only low because the modern car is safer, not the driver.
Put any of these drivers in a 25 year old car without ABS etc. and I'm willing to bet that the accident rate will rise dramatically.
TonyRPH said:
waremark said:
I am surprised. It must be pointed out that as each of us gets both older and more experienced our perceptions change. My perception is that speeds are significantly lower than they used to be. I put this down to the extent of the enforcement regime as well as the all pervasive reduction in limits. Most people drive extremely safely as confirmed by the accident stats.
An example re speeding; I tend to accelerate away from junctions / lights quite briskly up to the posted limit, and quite frequently find myself quite far ahead of the person behind me - but then they catch me up in no time at all, which means they would have needed to exceed the speed limit to do so.I also pass through a 20 zone on my way to work every day, and frequently find people catching up with me rather quickly - again - they must be exceeding the posted limit to do this.
Part of my journey is an unclassified country road with a posted 50 limit. Again - I have people catching me up rapidly - they have to speed to do this!
And in all of the above cases, once I have been caught up, I am tailgated closely (sometimes dangerously so) and as others have stated in this thread, you almost feel as if the person behind you is trying to push you to exceed the limit.
As for the accident stats - I suspect these are only low because the modern car is safer, not the driver.
Put any of these drivers in a 25 year old car without ABS etc. and I'm willing to bet that the accident rate will rise dramatically.
SK425 said:
I'm not sure your and waremark's perceptions are contradictory. Some people do not adhere to speed limits so if you do adhere you can expect to be caught up by those people. At the same time, some people do adhere to speed limits so as speed limits are reduced one would expect those people to drive slower.
You are correct. I should have quoted my post that he quoted as well.TonyRPH said:
An example re speeding; I tend to accelerate away from junctions / lights quite briskly up to the posted limit, and quite frequently find myself quite far ahead of the person behind me - but then they catch me up in no time at all, which means they would have needed to exceed the speed limit to do so.
I also pass through a 20 zone on my way to work every day, and frequently find people catching up with me rather quickly - again - they must be exceeding the posted limit to do this.
Part of my journey is an unclassified country road with a posted 50 limit. Again - I have people catching me up rapidly - they have to speed to do this!
And in all of the above cases, once I have been caught up, I am tailgated closely (sometimes dangerously so) and as others have stated in this thread, you almost feel as if the person behind you is trying to push you to exceed the limit.
I've noticed this a lot. People seem to accelerate extremely slowly, but aim for a speed around 10mph higher than the speed limit (note that I didn't quote a percentage; most people seem to do 40mph in a 30 limit and 80mph in a 70!). I frequently leave people for dead coming off roundabouts and traffic lights, even when I'm chilling out, driving at what I call a slow pace and in my daily driver (a diesel!). This applies both to normal drivers just trying to get from A to B and even drivers who appear to be in a hurry - sometimes people are all over your bootlid on a straight at 60mph and then as soon as you get to a corner or an acceleration zone like a slip road you leave them for dead. Weird.I also pass through a 20 zone on my way to work every day, and frequently find people catching up with me rather quickly - again - they must be exceeding the posted limit to do this.
Part of my journey is an unclassified country road with a posted 50 limit. Again - I have people catching me up rapidly - they have to speed to do this!
And in all of the above cases, once I have been caught up, I am tailgated closely (sometimes dangerously so) and as others have stated in this thread, you almost feel as if the person behind you is trying to push you to exceed the limit.
The straight-line-tailgater-slow-cornering driver is common around here too, often in fairly potent machinery.
The obvious answer is that anybody can drive on a straight line and people like to follow others (often far too closely). Most people don't understand cornering beyond a "turn the wheel" level, though.
The obvious answer is that anybody can drive on a straight line and people like to follow others (often far too closely). Most people don't understand cornering beyond a "turn the wheel" level, though.
MC Bodge said:
The straight-line-tailgater-slow-cornering driver is common around here too, often in fairly potent machinery.
The obvious answer is that anybody can drive on a straight line and people like to follow others (often far too closely). Most people don't understand cornering beyond a "turn the wheel" level, though.
Yes! I see the same thing - they'll be at or near the speed limit, arrive at a bend and brakes go on.The obvious answer is that anybody can drive on a straight line and people like to follow others (often far too closely). Most people don't understand cornering beyond a "turn the wheel" level, though.
I find that the worst perpetrators for fast in a straight line / slow though bends are generally women in either a Fiat 500, or a Mini Cooper. The ones in the Fiats in particular seem to think they are racing drivers.
R_U_LOCAL said:
Whilst we're still on the objective answer, road casualties are also difficult to argue with. 7,000 road fatalities per year in the (pre driving test) 1930s when there were around 1,000,000 vehicles on the road, compared with around 1,300 per year in the 2010s with around 35,000,000 vehicles on the road. On their own, those figures should demonstrate a huge improvement in driving standards over the years.
The casualty figures have, however, been significantly improved by massive improvements in vehicle design, changes to legislation such as seatbelt and drink-driving laws, improved road design, street lighting etc, but somewhere in the mix, an improvement in driving standards has played a part in reducing the number of deaths on the road.
Fwiw:The casualty figures have, however, been significantly improved by massive improvements in vehicle design, changes to legislation such as seatbelt and drink-driving laws, improved road design, street lighting etc, but somewhere in the mix, an improvement in driving standards has played a part in reducing the number of deaths on the road.
In an attempt to take out some of the statistical "noise", instead of looking at fatalities, I looked at total accidents for the period 1990-2010. This way, I reckoned, one would filter out the effect of changes to passenger safety (airbags, etc) and improved emergency medical treatment.
From 1990 to 2010 in UK, adjusting for population increase, the number of accidents declined by roughly 45%.
In order to filter out changes to vehicle safety (ABS, improved tyres, etc) I then compared UK decline to US number. Again adjusting for population change, comparable accidents in US declined roughly 35% in same period.
Subjectively I must say that, notwithstanding the big decline in the US accident rate, the standard of driving in the US in the last 25 years has gone from mediocre to atrocious.
Back in the UK, the most surprising statistics were:
- although from 1990-2010 the total road fatalities fell from 5217 to 1850 (those numbers were, btw, higher and lower respectively than the moving averages for their periods; in trend, the gap between them was roughly 400 narrower).
- Out of that total decline of 3367,
- the number of pedestrian fatalities fell from 1694 to 405,
- the number of cyclist fatalities fell from 256 to 111, and
- the number of motorbiker fatalities fell from 659 to 403.
In sum, out of a total decline of 3367 fatalities, 1690 of that decline involved victims who were not inside a car, truck or bus. In fact, over the last 45 years, consistently about 50% of road fatalities have been of pedestrians, cyclists and bikers.
The fascinating thing about the consistency of those changes is that, although they may be fewer pedestrians nowadays than there were 25 years ago (or more recently - in the last 12 years the number of pedestrian fatalities has halved), surely there has been an increase in the numbers of people cycling, yet the % decline in cyclist fatalities has been of the same magnitude as the % decline in car and truck fatalities.
Why would that be? Some because road engineering and accommodations for pedestrians and cyclists have improved. Some because motor vehicles have better brakes, tyres, lights and ABS. Both those effects would tend to benefit motorists as well as pedestrians and cyclists. Likewise improvements to emergency medical care.
But what of airbags, seatbelts, side impact protection and the like? They would be of no benefit to pedestrians or cyclists. Because they are, one presumes, of meaningful benefit to car occupants, why has that not resulted in a bigger improvement in fatalities numbers for car occupants than the improvement enjoyed by cyclists and pedestrians?
I'm not sure what might explain some of these relationships, but I have always found that the numbers tell a story - it's just a matter of figuring it out.
There are so many factors involved that it is virtually impossible to tell, the cycling deaths figure is surprising as cycling seems to have increased substantially over the last 20 years with the Olympics/Tour de France popularity boost, perhaps the publicity from such events that encourages people to go cycling also boosts the perception of motorists who take more care round cyclists?
The scrapage scheme may have helped road safety a bit by taking large numbers of less safe/poorer maintained cars off the roads and replaced with more modern cars.
The scrapage scheme may have helped road safety a bit by taking large numbers of less safe/poorer maintained cars off the roads and replaced with more modern cars.
I find the roads in general are not too bad, most sensible occasional nutter but nothing too bad. Lorry drivers on the whole are good but spoilt by a few utter goyts, same goes for most vehicles bar certain very specific combinations of model/brand/driver that both indicate and prove to be a winning (losing?) combination for trouble.
I do however notice the driving standards can decline massively in very specific areas. I have to regularly drive through a certain area in Leeds in which the driving standards plummet and it's akin to what I can only presume some large Indian cities are like (not a commentary on any specific racial group just the only example I can think of, perhaps Russian roads are another?).
Absolutely no understanding or notice taken to road markings and especially hatched box junctions seem to indicate a waiting area for people trying to turn in one direction or another while blocking traffic from moving along the main roads seems mandatory while stopping a clear 5 feet beyond any give way line at a junction is a must even if it causes traffic to have to swerve around them.
I do however notice the driving standards can decline massively in very specific areas. I have to regularly drive through a certain area in Leeds in which the driving standards plummet and it's akin to what I can only presume some large Indian cities are like (not a commentary on any specific racial group just the only example I can think of, perhaps Russian roads are another?).
Absolutely no understanding or notice taken to road markings and especially hatched box junctions seem to indicate a waiting area for people trying to turn in one direction or another while blocking traffic from moving along the main roads seems mandatory while stopping a clear 5 feet beyond any give way line at a junction is a must even if it causes traffic to have to swerve around them.
I'm in North Yorkshire and drive predominantly here and in West Yorkshire. Generally speaking I find people courteous and friendly. But I do believe you largely get what you give in life.
The best life tip I ever took was from the Penguins in Madagascar.
"Smile and wave boys, smile and wave."
Once you realise your priorities aren't necessarily everyone else's priorities and accept that, life is much calmer.
As an aside though, having done a few European tours, I will say people are largely s
te on motorways in this country.
The best life tip I ever took was from the Penguins in Madagascar.
"Smile and wave boys, smile and wave."
Once you realise your priorities aren't necessarily everyone else's priorities and accept that, life is much calmer.
As an aside though, having done a few European tours, I will say people are largely s
te on motorways in this country.
An open question, ISTM, is whether driving courtesy is part of driving standards.
On average, US drivers are much more courteous ("nicer" to fellow road users) than German drivers are. At the same time, German drivers are much more skilful (car control, situational awareness and observation). On both counts, I think, British drivers are somewhere in the middle, although in Britain maybe 5% of drivers seem to have a bullying, anti-social, gratuitously aggressive attitude that is rarer in Germany and US.
flemke said:
The fascinating thing about the consistency of those changes is that, although they may be fewer pedestrians nowadays than there were 25 years ago (or more recently - in the last 12 years the number of pedestrian fatalities has halved), surely there has been an increase in the numbers of people cycling, yet the % decline in cyclist fatalities has been of the same magnitude as the % decline in car and truck fatalities.
Why would that be? Some because road engineering and accommodations for pedestrians and cyclists have improved. Some because motor vehicles have better brakes, tyres, lights and ABS. Both those effects would tend to benefit motorists as well as pedestrians and cyclists. Likewise improvements to emergency medical care.
But what of airbags, seatbelts, side impact protection and the like? They would be of no benefit to pedestrians or cyclists. Because they are, one presumes, of meaningful benefit to car occupants, why has that not resulted in a bigger improvement in fatalities numbers for car occupants than the improvement enjoyed by cyclists and pedestrians?
I'm not sure what might explain some of these relationships, but I have always found that the numbers tell a story - it's just a matter of figuring it out.
I've some theories on why these figures have gone the way that they have. They are only theories based on my own experience, but I'd put money on someone more clever than me being able to prove them via statistics.Why would that be? Some because road engineering and accommodations for pedestrians and cyclists have improved. Some because motor vehicles have better brakes, tyres, lights and ABS. Both those effects would tend to benefit motorists as well as pedestrians and cyclists. Likewise improvements to emergency medical care.
But what of airbags, seatbelts, side impact protection and the like? They would be of no benefit to pedestrians or cyclists. Because they are, one presumes, of meaningful benefit to car occupants, why has that not resulted in a bigger improvement in fatalities numbers for car occupants than the improvement enjoyed by cyclists and pedestrians?
I'm not sure what might explain some of these relationships, but I have always found that the numbers tell a story - it's just a matter of figuring it out.
Pedestrian accidents have, I believe, reduced due to four main factors - traffic volume, changing social habits, redesigned town centres and paedophiles (bear with me on this one!).
Traffic volume is an obvious one if you think about it - as the volume of traffic increases, the average speed of moving traffic decreases - particularly at peak times when there are more pedestrians on the road - and slower moving traffic is, of course, safer for pedestrians.
People's social habits have changed dramatically in the last 10 years, thanks mostly to the introduction of the Licensing Act 2003. The new act removed traditional licensing hours (11pm for pubs and 2am for clubs) and allowed premises to apply for whatever hours they wanted. If no-one objects under the new act, premises could potentially get 24 hour licences. 24 hour pub licences are actually quite rare, but town centre pubs and clubs now commonly stay open until 4, 5 and 6am.
These later licensing hours have encouraged people to drink at home until much later and then go out much later - its very common for people to only start arriving in town centres at 11pm, 12pm and even 1am, ready to start their night out.
In road accident terms, this means that drunken pedestrians (along with children, drunks are the most vulnerable pedestrians) are wandering around the roads much later in the night/morning when there are far fewer vehicles on the road. Less vehicles + drunken pedestrians = less pedestrian accidents.
Alongside the changes to licensing hours, more and more town centres have become traffic-free. Pedestrianising town centres has also made the night-time economy areas much safer for drunken pedestrians. In addition, the proliferation of out-of-town shopping centres, and the massive rise of internet shopping has seen people's shopping habits change dramatically, with a further seperation between traffic and pedestrians.
On to paedophiles - or to be more accurate, the increase in people's fear of paedophiles. I don't believe there has been a huge increase in the number of nonces, but their activity has been publicised much more in recent years and this has resulted in a perception that there has been a huge increase in nonce activity.
When I was a child, we'd be allowed to play out in the street in the evenings without any fear of being grabbed off the street by Jimmy Saville, and we'd be allowed to walk to school on our own without any thought that Gary Glitter might be hiding behind a hedge.
These days, parent's fears for their children mean that they simply do not let their little darlings walk to school any more, even if it's only a few hundred yards away. Its the same reason parking outside schools has become such an issue in recent years. Rightly or wrongly, parents are far more protective these days and this has dramatically reduced the number of children (and especially primary age children) walking to and from school or playing in the street. When you do see young children walking to school, it's often in the form of a "walking bus" where they're all together, wearing high-viz and accompanied by one or more adults.
So, a number of different social factors seem to me to have had the unintended consequences of reducing pedestrian casualties.
As for cyclists, I think it's just the one factor which has reduced fatalities - the increase in helmet use. My boss is a keen cyclist - the type who spends a couple of grand on a carbon bike and lycra and dosen't think twice about doing 100 miles in a day. 20 years ago, he'd have worn one of those daft little cotton caps with the folded-up peak which cyclists used to use. These days he wears a streamlined racing helmet.
On Christmas day he was knocked from his bike by an inattentive driver who turned right across his path. He was thrown over the car and landed on his head, splitting his helmet in two. If he'd worn a cap he'd be dead - no doubt. In fact, he chipped a couple of vertebrae and was back in work on 2 January. So the increased acceptability of cycle helmets has made a huge difference and I struggle to understand why successive governments have failed to legislate for compulsory cycle helmet use.
The subject of nationality and driving standards is a whole other world of opinion and I could probably write another book on that subject alone.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff