A paradigm change in road safety evaluation: from hypothetico-deductive testing to designing safety systems

Abstract

Automobile industry is going through important changes with the rise of connected vehicle paradigm. In this context, traditional performance evaluation procedures are becoming obsolete or insufficient. This is particularly the case for road safety evaluation models since new information and communication technologies engender new types of vulnerabilities. This paper claims that traditional hypothetico-deductive evaluation paradigms are no longer adequate to assess road safety. To complement this traditional approach, we present an alternative perspective based on design theory originating from engineering design field. We illustrate the use of design methods in this context. More generally, we argue that a design based approach to road safety evaluation will allow integrating evaluators early in the process, and to give them a set of new tools coming from design theory in order to design better experiments with indicators of safety are better adapted to changing safety situations.

Keywords

• Road safety; safety assessment; evaluation methods; experiment design, design methods

References

1. Abernathy, W. & Utterback, J., 1978. Patterns of Industrial Innovation. Technology Review, pp. 40-47.
2. euroFOT, 2012. www.eurofot-ip.eu. [Online].
3. FESTA Consortium, 2008. FESTA Handbook, s.l.: FESTA.
4. Hervé, V., Fricheteau, R. (2011). Etat de l’art sur les véhicules électriques et hybrides, Confidential Report, LAB – CEESAR.
5. Fricheteau, R., 2011. Cadrage général pour une évaluation des performances des actions de sécurité routière, s.l.: s.n.
6. Got, C., 2011. http://www.securite-routiere.org/. [Online].
7. Hatchuel, A. & Weil, B., 2002. La théorie C-K : Fondements et usages d’une théorie unifiée de la conception,
8. Kircher,K. (2008) A comprehensive framework of performance indicators and their interaction, FESTA Support Action Field operational test support Action, deliverable D2.1. LAB, 2011. Rapport annuel, s.l.: s.n.

9. Labrousse, M., Hermitte, T., Hervé, V., Bertholon, N., Guillaume, A. (2011) Avolution of front car occupants injuries in frontal impacts considering the improvements of passive safety technologies, 13th European Automotive Congress, EAEC 2011, June 2011, Valencia, Spain.
10. Le Masson, P., Weil, B. & Hatchuel, A., 2006. Les processus d'innovation - Conception innovante et croissance des entreprises. Paris: Hermès.
11. Ledon, C., Roynard, M., Simon, MC., Phan, V. (2011) Les systèmes d’alerte et d’assistance de sorties de voie embarqués sur les véhicules, Projet ROADSENSE.
12. Mock, P., Hülsebusch, D. et al. (2009), Electric vehicles - A model based assessment of future market prospects and environmental impacts, International Electric Vehicle Symposium and Exposition (EVS), Stavanger, Norway.
13. Michigan University, 2012.
14. www.umtri.umich.edu/divisionPage.php?pageID=294. [Online].
15. Paget, 2012. Vers de nouvelles méthodes d'évaluation en accidentologie, s.l.: s.n.
16. Peden, M., Hyder, A., Scurfield, R., Mohan, D., Jarawen, E., Sleet, D. and Mathers, C.,(2004). Rapport mondial sur la prévention des traumatismes dus aux accidents de la circulation, Organisation mondiale de la santé, Genève.
17. Wiener, N., 1948. Cybernetics, or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
18. World Health Organization, 2004. World report on trauma prevention, s.l.: s.n.