2011年10月11日 14:52 作者 弗蘭克·邁金納
Whenever a speed limit change is proposed there is a good deal of public debate. The British government's recent call to allow drivers to do 80 miles per hour (129 kilometres per hour) on some of the country's fastest roads, instead of the current 70mph (113kph), is no different.
汽車(chē)限速規定的改變總能夠引起一陣軒然的討論。英國政府最近宣布的把境內某些公路的最高時(shí)限從70英里每小時(shí)（113公里每小時(shí)）提高到80英里每小時(shí)（129公里每小時(shí)），同樣引起了輿論的關(guān)注。
Should we raise the speed limit to take advantage of the greater capabilities of modern vehicles? Would this increase casualties? How should limits be enforced? These are just a few of the questions that provoke endless debate. Speed is not the only factor in crashes – no one would argue otherwise. However, its importance for public health is that it is easily experimented on. Contrast that with driving while tired, which is less easy to measure and change.
我們是否應該提高時(shí)限讓新型汽車(chē)的能力得以最大化？這么做是否會(huì )增加事故傷亡人數？新時(shí)限應如何施行？這只是無(wú)休無(wú)止的爭辯中的幾個(gè)問(wèn)題。大家都承認——速度不是事故的唯一因素。但是它是容易檢控的因素，因而對公共安全意義重大。相反，像疲勞駕駛這樣的因素則不容易檢控。
There is no doubt that over the past 30 years vehicles have evolved to go faster with consummate ease. Before taking full advantage of this we might consider whether we, the drivers, have evolved much over the same period. Unfortunately our reaction times are not any faster, nor are our bodies any better at withstanding the forces involved in a crash.
毫無(wú)疑問(wèn)，在過(guò)去的30年里汽車(chē)已經(jīng)被改造得更快、更便于操作。在享受這一切之前，我們或許可以反思，作為司機的我們是否也跟著(zhù)改進(jìn)了呢？事實(shí)上我們的反應速度并沒(méi)有提升得更快，我們的身體對事故的耐受力也沒(méi)有增加。
A human who tries really hard can sprint at about 30kph. To reach even that speed, we have to put lots of energy into the system, our heart is pumping, we have the wind in our face and massive experience of movement – in other words, we have overwhelming biological feedback to tell us just how fast we are going.人類(lèi)需要極大的努力才能達到時(shí)速30千米。要達到這樣的速度，我們需要耗費許多的能量來(lái)維持機體運作，我們心跳加速，感受著(zhù)風(fēng)拍打我們的臉和全身的協(xié)動(dòng)——我們全身都接收到生理反饋告訴我們自己有多快。
Velocity blindness
When we drive a car, however, the energy input is the small movement of a large toe. The output, in contrast, is that we can easily travel at more than four times the maximum speed for which we have been designed – and with almost no experience of movement. The feedback to the brain from the legs, heart and lungs when we are driving is effectively that of no movement. Add to that the fact that prolonged exposure to speed reduces perceived velocity and that speed cues such as engine noise are systematically eliminated in modern vehicles, and it is no wonder there are some challenges in obeying limits.
速度盲區
然而，當我們在開(kāi)一輛車(chē)的時(shí)候，我們只需要輕輕動(dòng)一動(dòng)我們的大拇指就可以達到人類(lèi)本身最高時(shí)速的四倍以上，這是我們從未有過(guò)的速度體驗。我們的大腦接收到全身傳來(lái)的信號，我們正在強力行進(jìn)而沒(méi)有任何肢體動(dòng)作。當我們長(cháng)時(shí)間的維持這樣的速度，我們對它的高速也就不那么有知覺(jué)，而其他的信息，例如引擎響聲，也在汽車(chē)改進(jìn)的過(guò)程中被不斷減弱，但想要超速還是會(huì )遇到一些障礙。We have the speedometer, of course, but this hardly provides visceral feedback – and, bizarrely, about half of the dial is devoted to illegal speeds. It is rare for any other product to broadcast its illegal capabilities like this.
我們還有速度儀表，但它極少反饋危險信息——而且，怪異的是，它幾乎有半個(gè)表面都是顯示超速速度。很難想象有什么其他物件如此張揚自己的違法能力。
For years, the general message from governments has been that, for safety reasons, a reduction in speed is good because it reduces casualties. But this has been difficult to get across. Messages such as "at 35mph you are twice as likely to kill someone as at 30mph" may be hard to appreciate if you assume that energy increases linearly with speed – in fact, it rises with the square of the velocity.
近年來(lái)政府一致認為限速有助于安全因為它能夠減少傷亡。但限速的法令并不那么容易通過(guò)。如果你覺(jué)得耗油率和速度是成正比的，那么“把時(shí)速從30英里增加到35英里，你致人死亡的幾率就會(huì )翻倍”這樣的信息根本就是耳邊風(fēng)，事實(shí)上，耗油率是按速度的平方來(lái)增長(cháng)的。
The transfer of that energy to the human body is the problem. The evidence on the relationship between speed and casualties is unambiguous whichever way it is examined. For example, raising the 55mph (89kph) speed limit to 65mph (105kph) in the US was estimated to have increased fatalities by 15 per cent.這樣的能量施加到人的身上就麻煩了。速度和傷亡之間的關(guān)系，無(wú)論我們怎樣測試，都是很明顯的。例如，在美國的一項測試中，把時(shí)速從55英里每小時(shí)（89千米每小時(shí)）提高到65英里每小時(shí)（105千米每小時(shí)），死亡率會(huì )因此而提高15%。
Survival speeds
Different types of road have different functions: access roads, which border residential and shopping areas; distribution roads, which need more entry and exit points; and through roads such as freeways and motorways which are for uninterrupted movement, with limited entry and exit.
保命速度
不同的路有不同的功能：普通公路連接了居民區和商業(yè)區，快捷干道有著(zhù)更多的入口和出口，聯(lián)運路，例如高速干道，要暢通無(wú)阻，因此有著(zhù)很少的進(jìn)出口。
Survivability refers to the body's capacity to tolerate the energy transfer in accidents. Evidence shows that on access roads, where crashes involving pedestrians are likely, a 20mph (30kph) limit is appropriate. On distribution roads, where side impacts are likely – when a car might ram into the side of another that is pulling out of a side road, for instance – the limit should be 30mph (50kph). In situations without pedestrians and where side impacts and head-on collisions are improbable – motorways and freeways – the limit should be 60 to 70mph (100 to 110kph).
生存可能性是指身體在意外事故中承受能量轉移的能力。有跡象表明在很易與行人發(fā)生沖撞的普通公路上，低于時(shí)速20英里（30千米）是很合適的。在容易發(fā)生側面碰撞的快捷干道上，汽車(chē)很容易沖撞到正從岔路口進(jìn)入的車(chē)輛，在這樣的路上時(shí)速應低于30英里（50千米）。在沒(méi)有行人也不可能有正面沖撞的高速干道上，時(shí)速不高于70英里（100千米到110千米）是可行的。
Getting drivers to stick to limits, be they new or old ones, is another thing. Deterrence is an obvious route. Deterrence theory, derived from the work of the 18th-century judicial theorist Cesare Beccaria and the 19th-century philosopher and social reformer Jeremy Bentham, emphasises the certainty, severity and imminence of punishment. The certainty of punishment has the clearest deterrent effect, which is problematic for speed enforcement because it relies on an uncertain police presence.
比這更難的是讓司機們，不論新手還是老司機，遵守限速。普遍的做法就是威懾。威懾理論源于18實(shí)際法理學(xué)家切撒雷·貝卡利亞(Cesara Beccaria) 和19世紀哲學(xué)家、社會(huì )改革家杰里米·邊沁，他們強調了懲罰必須是必行、嚴格和當時(shí)的。必行對制止具有最明顯的效果，但要實(shí)施在超速這個(gè)問(wèn)題上卻是困難重重，因為檢查超速需要恰逢警察在場(chǎng)。
This can be solved by speed cameras, which have themselves stimulated a good deal of media debate. Controversy has focused on whether their goal is safety or revenue generation. Policy-makers can tackle this by emphasising casualty reduction: for instance, they can place cameras at accident locations, allocate fines to road safety, advertise the accident location by highly visible cameras and prior warning signs, and offer education for first-time offenders.
測速相機可以幫助解決這個(gè)問(wèn)題，盡管他們已經(jīng)引起了許多媒體輿論。爭執的焦點(diǎn)集中在設立這些測速相機的目的到底在于確保安全還是為了“創(chuàng )收”。當權者可以展示交通傷亡減少的事實(shí)來(lái)減少質(zhì)疑，例如，在事故多發(fā)地段安置測速相機，對超速車(chē)輛罰款，通過(guò)明顯的測速相機裝置和警示牌來(lái)提示事故多發(fā)點(diǎn)，還有向初犯提供教育。
It may be important for politicians to distinguish between media debate and public concern on this issue. For example, Damian Poulter – a colleague at the University of Reading, UK – and I examined the UK government's British Crime Survey to determine what people are concerned about in their local communities. In comparison with a range of antisocial behaviours such as race attack, drugs, intimidation and noisy neighbours, speeding was the top concern (Accident Analysis and Prevention, DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2006.08.015).
政治家們有必要區分相關(guān)的討論中哪些是媒體輿論，哪些是公眾意見(jiàn)。我和英國雷丁大學(xué)工作者達米安·波爾特(Damian Poulter)一起研究了英國政府發(fā)布的英國犯罪調查，試圖找出什么樣的人最為社區居民所顧忌。通過(guò)一系列的對比我們發(fā)現，和種族抨擊、毒品、威脅和門(mén)旁噪音等不符合社會(huì )行為規范的行為相比，超速駕駛是最為人們所顧忌的。
So the challenge for governments who wish to change limits is complex. This is particularly so for those wishing to raise them, which is a less familiar path. What is clear, given the historical evidence and our biology, is that if they choose to permit faster driving, they must accept their part in the increased casualties that will follow.
由此，政府若想調整時(shí)限將會(huì )困難重重，對于那些不按常理出牌，想要提高時(shí)限的政府來(lái)說(shuō)，更是難上加難。根據歷史經(jīng)驗和我們的生理特征，如果政府要允許一個(gè)更高的時(shí)速，那么他們也得要接受隨之而上升的傷亡率。
Frank McKenna is a psychologist at the University of Reading, UK, and director of Perception and Performance, which provides consultancy on road safety to companies and government departments
弗蘭克·邁金納是英國Reading大學(xué)的心理學(xué)家，是感知與行為項目（Perception and Performance) 的主導人，這個(gè)項目主要為公司和政府部門(mén)提供有關(guān)公路安全方面的意見(jiàn)。
聯(lián)系客服
