Getting a “W” for Safety: Flipping the Script on the Safety “E”s in Search of a Winning Strategy

As we enter the second decade of Vision Zero in the U.S., this paper emphasizes the continuing need to move beyond traditional safety silos and strategies. Historically, transportation safety has relied on the “E”s of safety—engineering, enforcement, education, and emergency services—to react to historic crash patterns, based on crash report data and benefit/cost analysis. The Safe System Approach represents a pivotal shift from those silos toward a system-based, proactive paradigm. While the Safe System Approach has garnered substantial funding and support in the U.S., its implementation can still revert to the traditional and isolated “E”s mindset. This reversion misses the necessary hierarchy of roles and treatments, as well as fundamental inputs to the transportation system. This paper argues that mitigating kinetic energy transfer—the root cause of roadway injuries and deaths—must be central when selecting and prioritizing programs, policies, practices, and partnerships. With a more nuanced and targeted focus on the kinetic energy components, exposure, likelihood, and severity, the Safe System Approach can more effectively mitigate risk. Referencing the Safe Systems Pyramid, this paper explores common limitations of the Safe System Approach through a public health lens, with a hierarchy emphasizing population-scale interventions over individual efforts. In alignment with the pyramid, this paper proposes a new “W”s of Transportation Safety Framework that examines “who, what, when, where, and why” prompts to illuminate the base of the pyramid elements of systemic risk. This comprehensive view unlocks new safety tools and partnerships, highlighting the importance of upstream interventions such as land use planning, multimodal transportation options, and affordable housing. The paper concludes with practical applications of the “W”s framework, illustrating its potential to transform roadway design and safety assessments. By institutionalizing these strategies, transportation practitioners can find a fresh set of tools, and hopefully refreshed motivation, funding, partners, and purpose, in support of Vision Zero 2.0.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board
Published
2025-10-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981251367714
Primary Topic
Occupational Health and Safety Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Getting a “W” for Safety: Flipping the Script on the Safety “E”s in Search of a Winning Strategy

Meghan Mitman, Terence Zhao, Adrian Engel
Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board
Occupational Health and Safety Research
article

Getting a “W” for Safety: Flipping the Script on the Safety “E”s in Search of a Winning Strategy

Meghan Mitman, Terence Zhao, Adrian Engel
article en

Abstract

As we enter the second decade of Vision Zero in the U.S., this paper emphasizes the continuing need to move beyond traditional safety silos and strategies. Historically, transportation safety has relied on the “E”s of safety—engineering, enforcement, education, and emergency services—to react to historic crash patterns, based on crash report data and benefit/cost analysis. The Safe System Approach represents a pivotal shift from those silos toward a system-based, proactive paradigm. While the Safe System Approach has garnered substantial funding and support in the U.S., its implementation can still revert to the traditional and isolated “E”s mindset. This reversion misses the necessary hierarchy of roles and treatments, as well as fundamental inputs to the transportation system. This paper argues that mitigating kinetic energy transfer—the root cause of roadway injuries and deaths—must be central when selecting and prioritizing programs, policies, practices, and partnerships. With a more nuanced and targeted focus on the kinetic energy components, exposure, likelihood, and severity, the Safe System Approach can more effectively mitigate risk. Referencing the Safe Systems Pyramid, this paper explores common limitations of the Safe System Approach through a public health lens, with a hierarchy emphasizing population-scale interventions over individual efforts. In alignment with the pyramid, this paper proposes a new “W”s of Transportation Safety Framework that examines “who, what, when, where, and why” prompts to illuminate the base of the pyramid elements of systemic risk. This comprehensive view unlocks new safety tools and partnerships, highlighting the importance of upstream interventions such as land use planning, multimodal transportation options, and affordable housing. The paper concludes with practical applications of the “W”s framework, illustrating its potential to transform roadway design and safety assessments. By institutionalizing these strategies, transportation practitioners can find a fresh set of tools, and hopefully refreshed motivation, funding, partners, and purpose, in support of Vision Zero 2.0.

Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardVol. 2680(2)
John Muir Health (US), International Academy of Design & Technology (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
Occupational Health and Safety Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.