Uh oh. Does Vision Zero Reinforce White Supremacy in the United States?
Many US cities, including Portland, have adopted Vision Zero strategies as a response to pedestrian and bicyclist traffic safety needs. Vision Zero, a traffic safety approach which originated in Sweden, is a program that aims to ultimately reduce the number of traffic-related-deaths to zero (Vision Zero Network 2018). The program’s approach is multifaceted, using public education, street design, legislation and law enforcement to reach its desired outcomes (Elevbakk 2007, Trujillo 2014). Sounds like a win-win, right? Ah, but let’s not forget our mantra of equity: “who gets what when and why?”. There is often more to the policy than we see at first glance.
Indeed, Vision Zero does have its critics. Critiques of Vision Zero focus on concerns related to equity – including issues related to location of infrastructural improvements, and racially biased enforcement of traffic related laws (Bliss 2016). In cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York, mobility justice groups have raised concerns with city government about the impacts that Vision Zero may have on marginalized communities. This concern is heightened with the knowledge that in many cities, high-crash corridors intersections being targeted by Vision Zero are located in predominantly Black and Latino communities, and will cause increased policing disproportionately to these neighborhoods (Bliss 2016, Trujillo 2014, Greenfield 2017). These mobility justice groups say that though they agree with the initiative’s goal of increasing safety for pedestrians and cyclists, the ease with which some call upon the police to carry out Vision Zero enforcement shows the lack of understanding by many of institutional racism, and shows the blind spot of privilege. They further suggest that this tactic of increased policing in the name of “public safety” reeks of “broken windows” policing, which argues that maintaining order by policing low-level offenses can prevent more serious crimes, but critics say encourages police harassment of minorities (Trujillo 2014).
In light of these concerns, several mobility justice organizations have called for cities to give greater ownership of the Vision Zero planning process to people from low-income communities of color. Activists (and more recently, transportation scholars) say that the Vision Zero process needs to undergo a “transformative restructuring” (Greenfield 2017), acknowledging racial justice as an important component of any recommended policy. In LA, the mobility justice organization Vision Zero Alliance put pressure on Mayor Eric Garcetti to revise his Vision Zero proposal to better incorporate marginalized voices, for the City to meet its Vision Zero goals in an “equitable, community-centered, and transparent manner” (Vision Zero Alliance 2017). In partnership with the City, the Alliance created a policy platform that they will use to periodically evaluate the City on its Vision Zero efforts. In Chicago and New York, activists from groups like Slow Roll Chicago and Progressive City engaged in critical dialogue with city planners and policy makers, calling to halt Vision Zero initiatives until the policy creation process acknowledges and addresses implicit bias, structural racism, and police violence in communities of color.
Why has Vision Zero had success in Sweden, while being met with criticism in the United States? I do not know enough about Swedish history and politics to say for certain, but if I were to speculate, I would say that it is because Sweden has a less diverse population, and does not still struggle with vestiges of slavery and the resulting decades of institutionalized racism and segregation as the United States does. This was perhaps a blind spot for those importing the utopian strategy, but it underscores the importance of understanding the context and climate in which we craft transportation policies, and the need to always be vigilant in our recognition of the past (and current) structural dimensions of racism that still impact communities of color to this day.
Sources:
Bliss, Laura. 2016 (September 1). Vision Zero’s Troubling Blind Spot. CITYLAB. Accessed https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2016/09/black-lives-matter-and-vision-zero/497495/
Elvebakk, Beate. (2007) Vision Zero: Remaking Road Safety, Mobilities, 2:3, 425-441, DOI: 10.1080/17450100701597426
Greenfield, John. 2017 (September 7). Slow Roll Chicago: Vision Zero Must Address Structural Racism as a Cause of Traffic Violence. Streetsblog. Accessed https://chi.streetsblog.org/2017/09/07/slow-roll-chicago-vision-zero-must-address-structural-racism-as-a-cause-of-traffic-violence/
Los Angeles Vision Zero Alliance. (2017). Policy Platform. Accessed https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/la0/pages/18/attachments/original/1503553156/LA0_policy_platform_FINAL.pdf?1503553156
Trujillo, Josmar. 2014 (December 14). Vision Zero: Racism, Policing, and Rethinking Safety. Progressive City. Accessed https://www.progressivecity.net/single-post/2016/12/14/VISION-ZERO-RACISM-POLICING-AND-RETHINKING-SAFETY
Vision Zero Network. (2018). What is Vision Zero?. Web page. Accessed https://visionzeronetwork.org/about/what-is-vision-zero/
Written by Sachi Arakawa
Edited by Sophie Schmidt
Indeed, Vision Zero does have its critics. Critiques of Vision Zero focus on concerns related to equity – including issues related to location of infrastructural improvements, and racially biased enforcement of traffic related laws (Bliss 2016). In cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York, mobility justice groups have raised concerns with city government about the impacts that Vision Zero may have on marginalized communities. This concern is heightened with the knowledge that in many cities, high-crash corridors intersections being targeted by Vision Zero are located in predominantly Black and Latino communities, and will cause increased policing disproportionately to these neighborhoods (Bliss 2016, Trujillo 2014, Greenfield 2017). These mobility justice groups say that though they agree with the initiative’s goal of increasing safety for pedestrians and cyclists, the ease with which some call upon the police to carry out Vision Zero enforcement shows the lack of understanding by many of institutional racism, and shows the blind spot of privilege. They further suggest that this tactic of increased policing in the name of “public safety” reeks of “broken windows” policing, which argues that maintaining order by policing low-level offenses can prevent more serious crimes, but critics say encourages police harassment of minorities (Trujillo 2014).
In light of these concerns, several mobility justice organizations have called for cities to give greater ownership of the Vision Zero planning process to people from low-income communities of color. Activists (and more recently, transportation scholars) say that the Vision Zero process needs to undergo a “transformative restructuring” (Greenfield 2017), acknowledging racial justice as an important component of any recommended policy. In LA, the mobility justice organization Vision Zero Alliance put pressure on Mayor Eric Garcetti to revise his Vision Zero proposal to better incorporate marginalized voices, for the City to meet its Vision Zero goals in an “equitable, community-centered, and transparent manner” (Vision Zero Alliance 2017). In partnership with the City, the Alliance created a policy platform that they will use to periodically evaluate the City on its Vision Zero efforts. In Chicago and New York, activists from groups like Slow Roll Chicago and Progressive City engaged in critical dialogue with city planners and policy makers, calling to halt Vision Zero initiatives until the policy creation process acknowledges and addresses implicit bias, structural racism, and police violence in communities of color.
Why has Vision Zero had success in Sweden, while being met with criticism in the United States? I do not know enough about Swedish history and politics to say for certain, but if I were to speculate, I would say that it is because Sweden has a less diverse population, and does not still struggle with vestiges of slavery and the resulting decades of institutionalized racism and segregation as the United States does. This was perhaps a blind spot for those importing the utopian strategy, but it underscores the importance of understanding the context and climate in which we craft transportation policies, and the need to always be vigilant in our recognition of the past (and current) structural dimensions of racism that still impact communities of color to this day.
Sources:
Bliss, Laura. 2016 (September 1). Vision Zero’s Troubling Blind Spot. CITYLAB. Accessed https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2016/09/black-lives-matter-and-vision-zero/497495/
Elvebakk, Beate. (2007) Vision Zero: Remaking Road Safety, Mobilities, 2:3, 425-441, DOI: 10.1080/17450100701597426
Greenfield, John. 2017 (September 7). Slow Roll Chicago: Vision Zero Must Address Structural Racism as a Cause of Traffic Violence. Streetsblog. Accessed https://chi.streetsblog.org/2017/09/07/slow-roll-chicago-vision-zero-must-address-structural-racism-as-a-cause-of-traffic-violence/
Los Angeles Vision Zero Alliance. (2017). Policy Platform. Accessed https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/la0/pages/18/attachments/original/1503553156/LA0_policy_platform_FINAL.pdf?1503553156
Trujillo, Josmar. 2014 (December 14). Vision Zero: Racism, Policing, and Rethinking Safety. Progressive City. Accessed https://www.progressivecity.net/single-post/2016/12/14/VISION-ZERO-RACISM-POLICING-AND-RETHINKING-SAFETY
Vision Zero Network. (2018). What is Vision Zero?. Web page. Accessed https://visionzeronetwork.org/about/what-is-vision-zero/
Written by Sachi Arakawa
Edited by Sophie Schmidt
I was very excited about Vision Zero strategies when I learned about them, and due to my privilege blind spot, I didn't consider the heavy impact this could have on POC. PSU hosted a guest speaker, Tameka Butler, who brought this issue into my mind. It seems clear that this could lead to more police harassment of minorities, but I don't think Vision Zero is the problem. The problem is racist policing, and the design of our cities that clumps dangerous arterial roads and low-income people together. It's sad that we have to consider backpedaling policy that serves good purpose because of the side effects that arise due to inequitable social development. More policing in neighborhoods that have a higher population of POC will result in more harassment, but it would also, hopefully result in safer streets for people to walk, drive and roll. I'm curious, what "transformative restructuring" will present as a strategy to reduce traffic deaths?
ReplyDeleteThanks for raising the racial equity concerns involved with Vision Zero, Sachi. While I'm supportive of Vision Zero's street redesign efforts, speed reductions, and public awareness campaigns, I agree that the enforcement component is problematic.
ReplyDeleteIn May of this year, the Street Trust published an interesting piece on the connections between of street safety advocacy and the police bureau. Chief Outlaw stated that all PPB enforcement decisions are made using an equity lens, and commented on the need for community policing and implicit bias training. The question remains, how can cities operationalize these programs at a systems level to make meaningful change?
Here's a link to the Street Trust article:
https://bikeportland.org/2018/05/10/the-street-trust-puts-street-safety-issues-on-radar-of-police-chief-danielle-outlaw-280676
Nice post -- to the extent that enforcement/policing is part of a vision zero program, then there's a huge risk for inequitable outcomes and harm for some communities. Separately, vision zero initiatives that target investment/new infrastructure for communities of color (like improving intersections, adding bike lane protections, increasing sidewalk quality/width) can also have problematic impacts, particularly if the community feels like the infrastructure isn't put there for them, and that it's a leading edge of gentrification that will eventually raise neighborhood prices.
ReplyDeleteBack on the enforcement side -- speed cameras can be one of those drivers of inequitable outcomes, particularly since high crash corridors (i.e. roads that often historically lacked investment for safety/accessibility improvements) often correlate with lower income areas and communities of color. To the extent that planners view speed cameras as an option for these corridors, it can be problematic even if the overall objective is neutral and positive (slower speeds). If there's a roadway that consistently has high speeds, the ultimate solution should be to fix the design of the roadway, not enforce what is essentially a regressive charge to try and change driver behavior. I think speed cameras have a role to play, but they should be used thoughtfully and as part of a broader effort.
Josh, I am surprised to read your comment, because I had thought speed cameras were one of the more equitable ways of enforcing speed limits: unlikely traffic patrol officers, they don't have a racial bias, and distribute their judgments equally and objectively.
DeleteCEM -- this is true to the extent that speed cameras don't see race. However, the placement of speed cameras matter. Since high crash corridors are often in places with historic disinvestment -- which often correlates with lower income communities of color -- a disproportionately high users of those roads may be people of color. Which means that a disproportionately high number of people caught by speed cameras will be people of color. There are downstream harmful effects to speed cameras if they're not used thoughtfully.
DeleteThe thing I find frustrating about the Vision Zero failure reports (i.e. the annual traffic death reports) is that it's easier to find information about the people who died than the drivers who survived and, in many cases, were the ones at fault. For purposes of this enforcement conversation, I'd like to at least temporarily shift focus from the race, age, and income level of the victims/their neighborhoods and look at who's actually doing the reckless driving. Sachi, I read one of your sources (the Chicago Streets Blog post) and saw that there was brief mention of rushed and harried drivers from these communities with extra traffic violence, but I would think that through-traffic and drivers with racial or class bias are also part of the problem.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comments CEM. To be clear, I don't consider Vision Zero a failure at reaching its goal (it has, after all only been two years since we adopted it here in Portland), and I agree that getting caught up on the fact that people are still dying on the road is not productive, at least this early in the process. However, my point about enforcement and policing is not related (necessarily) to the count of roads deaths. The point is that Vision Zero's call for an increase in policing in high crash corridors, which are often in neighborhoods with high Black and Latino populations, could increase the chances of racial profiling. If Vision Zero does not address the potential harm that could be done to communities of color by over policing, then it is not truly a vision for zero harm.
DeleteA thoughtful post. This is another reason to focus on designing streets that "self-enforce" (or at least encourage) safer behaviors instead of using traditional selective enforcement. I'm less aware of VZero policies in other cities, but Portland has at least placed equity up front:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/640423
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/657943