Moving Beyond Vision Zero: Rethinking Road Safety for All
From eliminating traffic deaths to transforming how we design, measure, and envision truly safe, equitable streets for everyone.
Vision Zero has shaped global conversations about traffic fatalities and urban mobility for over two decades, reframing road deaths as preventable—not inevitable. But as cities strive for zero fatalities on their streets, critics and advocates are now asking: Is zero enough? Or is it time to reinterpret how we define, design, and measure safe streets—which means going beyond Vision Zero?
Understanding Vision Zero: Origins, Principles, and Impact
Vision Zero began in Sweden in 1997, rooted in the radical idea that no loss of life is acceptable in the pursuit of mobility. Instead of accepting deaths as the cost of transportation, Vision Zero made protecting human life the explicit foundation of traffic safety policy. The philosophy soon spread internationally—first to New York City in 2014, and now adopted by dozens of cities worldwide.
Key principles behind Vision Zero include:
- Every traffic death is preventable.
- Systems—roads, vehicles, environments—should be designed for human fallibility, so mistakes don’t cost lives.
- A Safe System approach: Responsibility is shared among road designers, policymakers, engineers, drivers, and society—not just individual users.
- Redundancy is essential: Multiple safeguards must work together if one measure fails.
- Proactive intervention: Waiting until after tragedies to act is no longer acceptable.
The Safe System Approach: Core Elements
Central to Vision Zero is the Safe System approach, which acknowledges human error but determines that such errors should never be fatal. The Safe System is built on several foundational layers:
- Safe speeds: Ensure vehicles travel at speeds that, in the event of a crash, don’t exceed the tolerance of the human body.
- Safe road design: Create forgiving streets—better crosswalks, protected bike lanes, traffic calming, and narrower car lanes.
- Safe vehicles: Standardize protective vehicle features, like crash avoidance technology and pedestrian detection.
- Safe behaviors: Encourage and enforce protective behaviors among all road users, including drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians.
- Post-crash response: Provide rapid, effective emergency care to reduce fatalities and serious injuries after a crash.
Table: Layers of the Safe System Approach
| Safe System Layer | Description |
|---|---|
| Safe Roads | Design for all users, error-forgiving, clear signals, protected crossings, slow speeds in urban areas. |
| Safe Speeds | Set limits ensuring crash impacts are survivable. Lower speeds for mixed-use or pedestrian areas. |
| Safe Vehicles | Mandate vehicle safety standards, like pedestrian protection, automatic braking, and crash avoidance systems. |
| Safe Users | Encourage responsible behaviors: sobriety, attention, compliance with traffic rules, education, enforcement as needed. |
| Post-Crash Care | Rapid emergency response, accessible trauma care, and support for crash victims. |
What Vision Zero Changed—and Its Limitations
Vision Zero revolutionized how we discuss road safety. It:
- Shifted policy focus from blaming individuals to redesigning systems.
- Helped cities measure progress with clear targets (zero fatalities).
- Framed deaths as a public health crisis, not an inevitable side effect of urban mobility.
- Empowered communities to demand accountability and transparency for road safety efforts.
What others are reading
Yet, as implementation has advanced, Vision Zero has encountered inherent challenges:
- Plateauing results: In many cities, after initial reductions, traffic fatalities have stagnated or even increased—even where Vision Zero policies are in place.
- Focus on metrics over meaning: The emphasis on numbers can reduce the human impact to statistics, and push policy toward chasing zero as an abstract goal—sometimes at the expense of broader wellbeing or street life.
- Equity blind spots: Vision Zero’s technical, data-driven framework can mask or perpetuate inequalities. Some traffic enforcement measures have disproportionately targeted communities of color or lower-income neighborhoods.
- Joyless safety: Streets that are technically “safe” but sterile or uninviting—empty, overregulated environments—may lack the lively, spontaneous human presence that defines a healthy city.
Beyond Zero: Rethinking What Safety Really Means
As the original Vision Zero paradigm matures, advocates, planners, and designers are pushing for road safety approaches that go beyond zero fatalities. But what lies beyond zero? Several new directions are emerging:
1. Redefining Safety as Holistic Wellbeing
True safety, critics argue, is about more than the absence of death or serious injury. A truly “safe” street is:
- Vibrant and welcoming: People of all ages and backgrounds feel comfortable lingering, playing, walking, and biking.
- Equitable: Resources, infrastructure, and safe access are distributed fairly—prioritizing historically neglected communities.
- Joyful: Street design fosters spontaneous interaction and physical as well as psychological wellness, not just the absence of risk.
- Sustainable: Prioritizes modes like walking, cycling, and public transit that reduce environmental harms.
Moving “beyond zero” means constructing environments that invite healthy, humane activity, not just police risk strictly.
2. Replacing Enforcement with Infrastructure
Traditional Vision Zero strategies often lean heavily on enforcement—tickets, cameras, fines—to manage dangerous behaviors. However, communities are calling for prioritizing infrastructure over enforcement:
- Designing-out excessive speed helps all users, regardless of policing.
- Traffic calming tools such as:
- Narrower lanes
- Raised crosswalks
- Protected bike and bus lanes
- Road diets (reducing vehicle capacity to add space for other users)
- Building streets to the needs of children, the elderly, people with disabilities, and historically marginalized groups.
The goal is to ensure safe outcomes through design, removing the need for punitive enforcement.
3. Community Ownership and Systemic Change
Authentic engagement with community voices—especially in communities who experience the most danger and disadvantage—can push beyond “zero” metrics to tackle deeper causes of risk and exclusion.
- Collaborative design processes actively include residents and local organizations in decisions affecting their streets.
- Funds and resources flow to neighborhoods most in need, not just the most visible or powerful.
- Metrics expand to reflect lived experience: perceptions of comfort, welcomeness, children walking to school, or seniors’ confidence.
4. Beyond Harms: Toward Positive Road Experiences
As Toronto-based road safety advocate Curbing Traffic notes, “A transportation system that focuses only on eliminating negatives—like death—can miss opportunities to create positives.”
- Streets as social infrastructure, not just conduits for moving vehicles.
- Design aiming for delight, health, and community connection.
- Emphasizing the right to linger and play, rather than just the right to cross safely.
5. Refined Measurement and Accountability
While Vision Zero set an ambitious target—zero deaths—the path to reaching it means clarifying what we measure and value.
- Instead of only tracking fatalities, cities can also:
- Monitor near-misses and unreported close calls
- Track injuries (not just deaths), including psychological harm
- Survey street users’ feelings of safety and belonging
- Public reporting and accountability broadened to include transparency about investments, equity impacts, and community feedback.
Case Examples: How Cities Are Moving Beyond Zero
Several cities and advocates have taken steps to go well beyond the technical frameworks of Vision Zero, embracing more expansive visions of safety:
- London, UK: The Healthy Streets approach prioritizes walking, cycling, and public space alongside traditional safety indicators.
- Portland, Oregon: Focuses on redesigning dangerous arterials, reallocating street space from cars to people, and involving communities in every step.
- Montreal, Canada: De-emphasizes enforcement, focusing instead on permanent traffic calming and prioritizing children and seniors in design.
- Barcelona’s Superblocks: Limits car access in designated zones, turning city streets into hubs of play, culture, and local commerce.
Obstacles to Moving Beyond Zero
Shifting the paradigm from Vision Zero to something more profound and human-centered comes with complex challenges:
- Political resistance: Redesigning streets often means reallocating space away from cars, which can bring intense public and political backlash.
- Institutional inertia: Many transportation agencies and policies are still vehicle-centric.
- Budget constraints: Comprehensive design, genuine engagement, and reallocation of resources are often much more expensive than limited enforcement or signage-only improvements.
- Data limitations: Qualitative measures, such as perceived safety and wellbeing, are harder to quantify and standardize.
Vision Forward: What Does Real Progress Look Like?
Advocates argue that the next generation of safe streets policy must:
- Embrace holistic safety: Redefine success to include joy, connection, and belonging—not just the absence of death.
- Prioritize vulnerable users: Children, the elderly, people with disabilities, and those in historically neglected neighborhoods become central to design and investment.
- Empower communities: Planning and investment processes are co-owned by the people using the streets.
- Focus on design, not policing: Safe infrastructure replaces enforcement as the primary mode of risk reduction.
- Commit to transparency: Clearly report what is done, who benefits, and how outcomes change over time.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Q: What is Vision Zero?
A: Vision Zero is a road safety policy framework originating in Sweden in 1997 that sets a goal of eliminating all traffic deaths and serious injuries. It is based on the principle that no loss of life is acceptable in the pursuit of mobility.
Q: Why are some advocates calling to move beyond Vision Zero?
A: Because while Vision Zero reframed traffic death as preventable, critics argue it can be too focused on numbers and enforcement—overlooking joy, wellbeing, equity, and more inclusive design for all users. True safety, they contend, means more than just zero deaths.
Q: What is the Safe System approach?
A: It means building redundancy into road safety by combining safe design, safe speeds, safe vehicles, safe users, and effective post-crash care—recognizing human error will always occur, but fatalities need not.
Q: How can communities help move beyond Vision Zero?
A: By prioritizing inclusive planning, advocating for infrastructure changes over enforcement, engaging underrepresented communities directly, and demanding accountability in how street investments are made.
Q: What are positive indicators of a safe, vibrant street?
A: Beyond the reduction of deaths, safe and vibrant streets support walking, cycling, local commerce, children playing, neighbors gathering, and a general sense of wellbeing and belonging for all users.
References
- https://www.drcog.org/transportation-planning/planning-future/safety/regional-vision-zero
- https://visionzeronetwork.org/resource/how-does-vision-zero-differ-from-the-traditional-approach-to-traffic-safety/
- https://www.portland.gov/transportation/vision-zero/safe-system
- https://highways.dot.gov/safety/zero-deaths
- https://www.wsp.com/en-us/services/vision-zero
- https://visionzeronetwork.org/about/what-is-vision-zero/
- https://www.cdc.gov/transportation-safety/vision-zero/index.html
- https://www.seattle.gov/transportation/projects-and-programs/safety-first/vision-zero
- https://www.lovelafayette.org/city-hall/city-departments/engineering/transportation/local-road-safety-plan/improving-street-safety
- https://nvcogct.gov/what-we-do/transportation-planning-2/highway-safety-program/
Similar Articles
Read full bio of Sneha Tete
