Abstract
American cities devote significant resources to the implementation of traffic safety countermeasures that prevent pedestrian fatalities. However, the before–after comparisons typically used to evaluate the success of these countermeasures often suffer from selection bias. This paper motivates the tendency for selection bias to overestimate the benefits of traffic safety policy, using New York City’s Vision Zero strategy as an example. The NASS General Estimates System, Fatality Analysis Reporting System and other databases are combined into a Bayesian hierarchical model to calculate a more realistic before–after comparison. The results confirm the before–after analysis of New York City’s Vision Zero policy did in fact overestimate the effect of the policy, and a more realistic estimate is roughly two-thirds the size.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.