Arguments against Vision Zero: A Literature Review

• Despite Vision Zero’s moral appeal and its expansion throughout the world, it has been criticized on different grounds. This chapter is based on an extensive literature search for criticism of Vision Zero, using the bibliographic databases Philosopher’s Index, Web of Science, Science Direct, Scopus, Google Scholar, PubMed, and Phil Papers, and by following the references in the collected documents. Even if the primary emphasis was on Vision Zero in road traffic, our search also included documents criticizing Vision Zero policies in other safety areas, such as public health, the construction and mining industries, and workplaces in general. Based on the findings, we identify and systematically characterize and classify the major arguments that have been put forward against Vision Zero. The most important arguments against Vision Zero can be divided into three major categories: moral arguments, arguments concerning the (goalsetting) rationality of Vision Zero, and arguments aimed at the practical implementation of the goals. We also assess the arguments. Of the thirteen identified main arguments, six were found to be useful for a constructive discussion on safety improvements.

Subject headings

HUMANIORA  -- Filosofi, etik och religion -- Filosofi (hsv//swe)

HUMANITIES  -- Philosophy, Ethics and Religion -- Philosophy (hsv//eng)

Keyword

Vision Zero

Nollvisionen

Criticism

Road Safety

Ethics

Systems thinking

Philosophy

Filosofi

Publication and Content Type

ref (subject category)

kap (subject category)