Improving Automotive Safety: The Role of Industry, the Government, and the Driver

  • Kenneth A. Solomon
  • Susan Resetar
Part of the Advances in Risk Analysis book series (AIRA, volume 5)

Abstract

This paper identifies three groups that can improve automotive safety. The three groups are the automotive industry by designing into cars such safety devices as seat belts, roll bars, or air bags; the government by taking such measures as improving road conditions, enforcing seat belt usage laws, or enforcing stricter anti-drunk-driving laws; and finally, the driver by modifying driving habits such as wearing seat belts and not driving while intoxicated.

Of the seven strategies we define for improving automotive safety, this paper argues that “as low as reasonably achievable” (ALARA) is the most applicable risk reduction strategy within the context of improving automotive safety. By applying the ALARA principle to past and proposed safety improvements, we demonstrate that the most lives saved per dollar spent would occur if drivers modified their driving habits.

Key Words

Automotive Safety Regulation Design Driver habit Air bags Seat belts and Drunk driving 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Use of Air Bags Ordered by Dole,“ Los angles Times,Michael Wines, July 13, 1984, pp. 1, 14.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fatal Accident Reporting System 1981, United States Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fatal Accident Reporting System 1980, United States Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Safety Air Cushion Expenditure/Benefit Study, John Z. DeLorean, prepared for Allstate Insurance, Northbrook, Illinois, March 18, 1975.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Statement of William Haddon, Jr., M.D., Public Hearing on Occupant Crash Protection, Alternative for Passenger Cars, given before Brock Adams, Secretary of Transportation, Washington, D.C., April 27, 1977.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Solomon, K. A., C. L. Batten, and C. Phelps, “How Safe Is Reasonable?” Automotive Engineering and Litigation, Volume 1, in G. A. Peters and B. J. Peters (eds.), Garland Law Publishing, New York, 1983.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fatal Accident Reporting System 1976, United States Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Accident Cause Analysis,Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory, PB-212–830, NTIS, July 1972.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fuel System Integrity, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 301–75.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Decade of Research to Vehicle Rear Lighting,University of Illinois, Champaign, HS-021577, August 1979.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    An Extra Brake Light Cuts Rear-End Collisions in Half,“ Highway Loss Reduction Status Report, 15:9, in Property and Liability Insurance Index,Vol. I, Issue 4, June 10, 1980.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    High, Center-Mounted Brake Lights Proposed,“ High Loss Reduction Status Report, in Property and Liability Insurance Index, Vol. I I, Issue 2, February 9, 1981.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rear-End Collisions Reduced, Society of Automotive Engineers, New York, Voevodsky Association, Inc., August 1979.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Small Car Safety in the 80’s,National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Proceedings of the 9th Stapp Car Crash Conference, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, October 20–21, 1965.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Papers presented at the National Road 1972 Monograph Safety Symposium, Canberra, University of Australia, Melbourne, 1972.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Solomon, David, Accidents on Main Rural Highways Related to Speed, Drive, and Vehicle, United States Department of Commerce, July 1964.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Salem, S. A., K. A. Solomon, M. S. Yesley, Issues and Problems in Inferring a Level of Acceptable Risk, The Rand Corporation, R-2561-DOE, August 1980.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Solomon, K. A., and P. F. Nelson, An Evaluation of Alternative Safety Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants, The Rand Corporation, #7, June 1982.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Solomon, K. A., and S. Abraham, “The Index of Harm: A Useful Measure for Comparing Occupational Risks Across Industries,” Journal of Health Physics, Volume 38, March 1980, pp. 375–381.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bumper Sticker or Jail,“ National Enquirer,April 23, 1985, p. 29.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    New Yorkers Buckle Up, Live Longer,“ Los Angeles Times, April 8, 1985.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Deaths Drop 27% After N.Y. Seat Belt Law,“ Los Angeles Times, May 1, 1985.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kenneth A. Solomon
    • 1
  • Susan Resetar
    • 2
  1. 1.Engineering and Applied Science DeptRand CorporationSanta MonicaUSA
  2. 2.System Science DeptRand CorporationSanta MonicaUSA

Personalised recommendations