Are crash causation studies the best way to understand system failures – Who can we blame?

• Vision Zero is a new approach to traffic safety, initiated in Sweden. • Both the UN, WHO and EU have put traffic safety on the political agenda. • The Vision Zero approach stresses a systems approach where system designers have responsibilities alongside the road users. • About two-thirds of the fatal crashes in Sweden are attributed to everyday road users making everyday mistakes. • Less than 20% of the fatal crashes injuries in Sweden are related to deliberate and severe violations of traffic rules. • A combination of divided roads, sober driver and restrained occupants not speeding is estimated to generate a reduction of fatal crashes of 95%. • The search for an isolated cause of fatalities a result of road traffic crashes has no longer any substantial role in injury prevention. • Modern road safety preventative methods are based on stopping or mitigating a sequence of events in the most effective way. • These modern methods are, to a high degree, disconnected from the more traditional finding of singular crash causes. • It can be seen as counterproductive that the judicial system still concentrates on finding a single cause related to an individual road user. The search for common and serious single causes of road crashes naturally leads to a concentration on the road user. This is supported by a legal framework in the search for the main cause and the suspect for this cause. In prevention, we have for decades been more inclined to look for systematic improvements of all elements of the road transport system, and we direct the recommendations for actions towards system designers, organizations, products and services. In this paper the discussion about causation and prevention is broadened in the light of Vision Zero and its approach to prevention of serious and fatal injuries. We also discuss the Swedish judicial system and why the prevention approach has not been legislated or even generally accepted. Occupational health and safety legislation and road rules are compared, as well as how sustainability practices and reporting are tools to apply prevention where organizations have a natural sphere of influence that could mitigate deaths and serious injuries within value chains. It is recommended that we stop using the term causation as it is only directing actions in one direction. There is a risk that the focus on causation, in particular single causes, will deviate actions away from robust prevention countermeasures such as increased seat belt use, relevant speed limits, and well functioning roundabouts and median barriers. Furthermore, there is also a risk that important preventative actions from organizations are overlooked. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]