Who is to blame for crashes? A study by the US’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration suggested the “critical reason” was “the driver”. In 94% of cases this is true, according to the results.
This statistic has been misused by various advocates and enthusiasts of driver assistance, autonomous vehicles and LinkedIn over the years to the point that the NHTSA today goes to great lengths to qualify its findings.
The survey was big: it sampled 5470 crashes between 2005 and 2007. In its results, the NHTSA defined the ‘critical reason’ as ‘the last event in the crash causal chain’.
Ergo driver actions weren’t necessarily the root cause but were the last significant event before impact.
Yet nearly two decades on, people will tell you that if you automate driving or remove ‘human error’, you will prevent more than nine in 10 crashes.
This “would be great, but it’s simply wrong”, said Antonio Avenoso, the European Transport Safety Council’s executive director, back in 2019.
He blamed the continuing recurrence of the claim on a “fundamental misunderstanding” – perhaps rather kindly, because that implies the misunderstanding was accidental, and I suspect most know they’re using the statistic incorrectly but continue to because it furthers their cause.
The truth is that humans are actually the root cause of 100% of all crashes. Even if a wheel falls off of a car, recorded now as mechanical failure, it’s not the wheel’s fault, but either its design or its maintenance, all of which was done by people.
Look hard enough and you will find human error everywhere in life. In my garden as I write, a squirrel and a magpie are having a tense face-off over some spilled bird seeds.
The squirrel is standing firm, but as with all greys, he’s only here because Victorians imported his ancestors – a human error.
He’s only going after bird seeds on the ground because the feeder was poorly designed or I overfilled it – either way, human error.
And the magpie is only in my garden because we’ve reduced his habitat elsewhere. Without humans cocking up, this seemingly naturalistic scrap wouldn’t be happening at all.
Join the debate
Add your comment
Autonomous self-driving cars won't drink and drive, won't look at their phones, won't speed, won't run red lights, won't fall asleep at the wheel, and won't drive on the wrong side of the road because they come from another country. Of course they will be safer.
Automation might not reduce crashes by 90% (or it might) but it will reduce crashes.
This is the dumbest, stupidest, most reactionary piece I've ever read in Autocar.
If we follow Prior, then we should not trust indicators, and instead roll down the windows manually and give hand signals when turning.
If the technology and infrastructure is there then autonomous motoring can and will prevent accidents.
I respect and enjoy Prior's reviews, but this piece is evidently dumb.
I think you may have missed the point.