Road casualties remain obstinately high, no matter what initiatives are undertaken. This may be because the driver has a “target” level of risk: Any measure to reduce casualties is counteracted by the driver maintaining this level of risk by, for example, driving faster. Some of the most impressive drops in casualty rates have occurred when risky behaviour has been less likely because other factors seem more salient - as in the oil crises of the 1970s.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsJ.G.U.(1988). Risk homeostasis and the purpose of safety regulation. Ergonomics, 31407–428.
2.
ConeybeareJ.A.C. (1980). Evaluation of automobile safety regulations: The case of compulsory seat belt regulation in Australia. Policy Sciences, 12, 27–39.
3.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT. (1990). Transport statistics for Great Britain 1979–1989. London: HMSO.
4.
DoyleO.HirschS. (1983). Railways in Ireland, 1834–1984. Dublin: Signal.
5.
EvansL. (1990). A tentative classification of the principal determinants of road safety. In BenjaminT. (Ed.), Driving behaviour in a social context. Caen: Paradigme.
6.
FullerR. (1988). On learning to make risky decisions. Ergonomics, 31, 519–526.
7.
HermonJ.C. (1989). Chief Constable's annual report. Belfast: Royal Ulster Constabulary.
8.
McKennaF. (1988). What role should the concept of risk play in theories of accident involvement?Ergonomics, 31, 469–484.
9.
NaatanenR.SummalaH. (1976) Road user behaviour and traffic accidents, Amsterdam: North-Holland.
10.
PeltzmanS. (1975). The effects of automobile safety regulation. Journal of Political Economy, 83, 677–725.
11.
Reinhardt-RutlandA.H. (1991) Driving in poor visibility: Limits to perceiving motion. The Police Journal, 64, 22–25.
12.
ROYAL ULSTER CONSTABULARY (1989) Road traffic accident statistics 1988. Belfast: Central Statistics Unit.
WildeG.J.E. (1988). Riskhomeostasis theory and traffic accidents: Propositions, deductions and discussion of dissension in recent reactions. Ergonomics, 31, 441–468.