𧞠Method, not Madness - MM#628
The best methods are not always the most accurate, but they are always the most useful.
Good day my good friend.
The three loves of my life are my family, my friends, and football. When all else has gone wrong in my life, football acted as my means of escapism. Like any fan, my mood at a weekend could be determined by the results of my favourite team - Manchester United. While the last decade has been far from the highs of the Alex Ferguson era, watching football still has brought me joy.
But, at the weekend, you read stuff like this, and it all becomes very frustrating:
Manchester United have been forced to change their travel plans for [Saturday nightâs] game against Newcastle United at St Jamesâ Park due to bad weather and technical problems. Erik ten Hagâs side were due to fly to Newcastle for [Saturdayâs] Premier League fixture at 8pm GMT but will now travel by coach.
St Jamesâs Park is two and a half hours away from Old Trafford by coach. Rail wasnât really an option as the Transpennine Route was shut due to engineering works. But no, they chose to fly.
I mean, why worry about a climate crisis when you can instead worry about player conditioning or whatever other reason is given for stupidly short flights by Premier League teams?
Not that it all mattered anyway. Another dreary, laboured performance by the Red Devils led to the inevitable result. I would say that the footballing Godâs are punishing the team for their lack of climate awareness, but considering the performances this season I find that unlikely!
If you like this newsletter, please share it with someone else who you think will love it. The main way my audience grows is through your recommendations. I will love you forever if you do. âşď¸
James
P.S. Public service announcement for the rest of the month. This week and next week will be the last of my âregularâ newsletters for the year. During the week of 18th December I will be running a Christmas Quiz, with regular questions on Monday, a picture round on Wednesday, and the answers on the Friday (all just for fun). After that, no newsletter will be published again until Monday 8th January 2024.
đ The method matters, but so does consistency
Last week, an interesting report was published by the Department for Transport into contributory factors into fatal collisions on the UK road network in 2021. What this report did was compare the allocation of âcontributory factorsâ behind fatal road collisions between two different methods.
The first method is one well-used by transport professionals: STATS19. To summarise this, on the scene of collisions a trained police officer makes observations and records what they consider to be the contributory factors to the collision. Police officers receive training on how to do this, and there is guidance in the way of 113-page instruction book on how to complete it.
This method enables the collision to be recorded, and some data collected on the main factors behind the collision without seeking to ascribe blame. The data quality is variable, however. A police officer is far more likely to attend a collision which is fatal or have serious injuries, compared to minor shunts which result in slight injuries. Not to mention that however well you train them, police officers will record things things differently to each other. Regardless, if you have ever had to quote a road safety statistic, it has come from STATS19.
The other method is post-investigation recording. This is exactly how you would imagine it to be: the police undertake a formal investigation of the collision, looking in-depth at all of the factors, and then assigning likely contributory factors. This may be with the view to go for a criminal prosecution later. This is often done for fatal collisions, and less so for more minor collisions.
But the big challenge is comparability. No two police forces collect the data in the same way, or at least in a manner that enables an effective comparison. In fact, to compare how the contributory factors vary between the two methods, the Department for Transport had to send police forces a dedicated spreadsheet for them to complete.
So, how did the two methods compare? What the results found was that there was variation between the two methods. For instance, in 26.6% of fatal collisions, the driver or rider failed to look properly was observed in STATS19, compared to 21.7% in post-investigation. 9.8% were identified as travelling too fast for the conditions in STATS19, compared to 14.1% for post-investigation. Post-investigation also recorded higher percentages for impairment by drugs (10.% compared to 5.8%) and alcohol (14% compared to 11.2%)
What this appears to show is that in STATS19, factors relating to driver error are reported more frequently, whereas speed and impairment (especially by drugs or alcohol) are more frequently reported post-investigation.
But the really interesting data is how different factors are swapped in and out between STATS19 recording of a collision, and the post-investigation recording of the same collision. The results indicate that 35.5% of collisions recorded in STATS19 have at least one contributory factor removed, the most popular being aggressive driving, driver using a mobile, and driver reckless, careless, or in a hurry.
To go in the reverse, in 40.9% of fatal collisions contributory factors were added in a post-investigation. The most popular being a driver using a mobile phone, a driver or rider impaired by drugs, and aggressive driving.
All of this is interesting methodologically. But does it really matter? Depends on who you ask I guess. Whenever it comes to data collection for transport, there is always a balance to be struck between methodological accuracy, the practical elements of collecting data, and how it will be used.
STATS19 has known methodological issues. But it is practical to collect, and critically it has allowed us to monitor changes and trends in road safety over time.Such as the numbers of people killed or seriously injured, and changes in contributing factors over time using a consistent method. Post-Investigation has allowed us to update those factors in the most severe of collisions, and also enabled the Police to investigate and press prosecutions wherever needed.
There is often an urge to press for the best possible method to use to collect data, without considering whether such data collection is practical or indeed useful. STATS19 could be better, but right now, it is good enough for what we need it for. Even if it can produce variations compared to other methods.
What you can do: STATS19 is one of the most useful data sources out there when it comes to making improvements for road safety. It is worthwhile studying it. Government guidance on it is very useful. So is the raw data. The Cyclestreets Collision Map is a brilliant resource in getting a good overview of this data in your area. Use it well.
đ From academia
The clever clogs at our universities have published the following excellent research. Where you are unable to access the research, email the author - they may give you a copy of the research paper for free.
Using different transport modes: An opportunity to reduce UK passenger transport emissions?
TL:DR - Not driving cars is less polluting, and carbon reductions from modal shift could top 30%.
TL:DR - Researchers are shocked to find that people hate the commute more than they hate work. Clearly they have never commuted.
TL:DR - Disability, life satisfaction, and caring about the environment matter when it comes to whether or not people want to work from home.
Walking and Walkability in Delhi: Dissonance between Environmental Perception and Behavior
TL:DR - There is a strong link between the quality of the environment and poor walking conditions, but that does not translate into behaviour changes.
â Awesome people doing awesome things
The great people at Open Innovations have been hard at work. Among their many transport projects, there is this one on Tax Devolution. It comes up with a simple calculation of how much money could be raised by things such as Workplace Parking Levyâs. Give it a try. Its brilliant.
What you can do: Use it.
đş On the (You)Tube
Tom Scott is soon not going to be doing his weekly videos on random interesting things in the world (đ). So this video on Moonlight Towers may be the last of his great transport-related videos that we see. Its a clearly mad idea for lighting up a city, but its very interesting none-the-less.
đźď¸ Graphic Design
This graphic on the number of airports each country has is fascinating. I can completely get why the USA has the most. I can understand the number in Brazil. But the sheer number in the likes of Indonesia and Paraguay is amazing.
đ Random things
These links are meant to make you think about the things that affect our world in transport, and not just think about transport itself. I hope that you enjoy them.
Trade and trees: How contingent trade agreements can reduce deforestation (CEPR)
Elon is the bakery owner swearing in the street about Yelp critics canceling him (The Register)
Can African smart cities also be inclusive cities? (City Monitor)
Anti-Green Identity Politics (Pedestrian Observations)
Freedom energy: minimising geopolitical risks to reach net zero (Policy@Manchester)
âď¸ Your feedback is essential
I want to make the calls to actions better. To do this, I need your feedback. Just fill in the 3 question survey form by clicking on the below button to provide me with quick feedback, that I can put into action. Thank you so much.