Data shows that introduction of iPhones in 2007 is a better explanation for the increase in pedestrian deaths than heavier trucks and SUVs: https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/1ubbfrv/oc... (All the credit for this analysis goes to the reddit user, I’m just summarizing.)
Trucks and SUVs have been getting heavier consistently since 1980 while pedestrian deaths consistently decreased from 1980 to 2009. Truck sizes went up much more from 1980 to 2009 than from 2009 to present. But pedestrian deaths dropped almost in half from 1980 to 2009.
The NYT study on which this article is based acknowledges that pedestrian deaths dropped in half from 1980 to 2009, but then does nothing with this information.
The times article hand-waves away distracted driving by saying that other countries haven't seen a similarly large increase. The problem with that is that vehicle sizes in all other countries have also been increasing, and other countries like Canada and Australia have seen almost identical market shares of those large vehicles without the surge in pedestrian fatalities.
The large factors are phone use (more prevalent among american drivers and there's data to show this), and homelessness - the homeless are dramatically overrepresented in US pedestrian deaths and the population has increased dramatically in the US over the past decade. Even more so though it appears to be attitudes, Americans are twice as likely as Europeans or Canadians to say using a phone while driving is acceptable. Though no single factor is a smoking gun, vehicle size is one of the least convincing. Getting hit by a 4000lb car or an 8000lb truck matters much less than how fast the vehicle's going (let's all remember our high school physics class).
> Getting hit by a 4000lb car or an 8000lb truck matters much less
It's not the weight of the vehicle but that the front of a US truck is a big flat brick wall, whereas vehicles more common in Europe have a lower-shaped hood you fall on which is engineered to dent (some even having an actuator to pop up and increase the distance to the engine) and save the life of the pedestrian (as tested by Euro NCAP)
The times article goes very in depth on this. Yes, it is an issue, but it explains at most 10% of the increase in fatalities.
Getting hit by any vehicle over 20mph is going to be a very bad time, it is going to be somewhat worse if it's a large vehicle with a high bumper.
Americans are twice as likely to think it's fine to use a cell phone while driving than Canadians or Europeans, and while illegal in most places it's effectively unenforced - our cops spend half their shifts driving around messing around on a mounted laptop. If you want to improve outcomes, start holding American drivers to the standards that peer nations do.
Australia has both smart phone and seat belt cameras. These are "portable" (mounted high on a road side trailer) which peep into your cabin from above to detect phone usage.
Being caught using a phone whilst driving imposes a $1,251 fine. In fact, even a phone off, but touching any part of your body (including on lap/leg) will incur this fine.
From the late '70s through 2009 there was a huge drop in the number of people who walked or bicycled, and there was also a significant drop in drunk driving over that time. Those explain most of the pedestrian fatality drop.
As far as truck sizes go, yes they have steadily increased, but the bigger trucks did not have as much effect on pedestrian fatality rates in the '80s or '90s because they were a much smaller percentage of vehicles on the road. In 1980 trucks were only about 1/5 of new vehicle sales. It was up to about 1/3 in 1990. By 2000 it was a little under 50%. By 2010 it was a little over 50%. Sometime around 2017 it was 2/3 trucks, and about 4/5 by 2023. (SUVs are counted as trucks in these numbers).
Remember those are figures for new sales, so changes in the percent of trucks on the road will lag changes in the percent of trucks in new sales.
You can get an idea of whether phones or size was the more responsible factor by comparing injuries to deaths. Phones would increase deaths mostly by increasing the number of accidents. Big trucks/SUVs would increase deaths by making accidents more fatal. In the phone case injuries and fatalities should rise at about the same mount. In the big vehicle case fatalities should rise more than injuries.
Fatalities have in fact risen more than injuries (80% vs 15%), suggesting that size is the much more significant factor.
Weight of SUVs/Trucks isn't really the right metric to use though.
The proportion of them which have a grill height which impairs visibility of the average height pedestrian would be a "better" metric, except it isn't as easy to cleanly define that.
With me driving in my 2000s Ranger, I can at least see adults walking in front of it just fine, even though it is bigger than a 1980 Toyota pickup.
If the issue is distracted drivers, I don’t see how heavier trucks is still not the issue. With lighter vehicles you would likely have a higher chance of surviving.
They can both be factors, just one is much more influential than the other. Alcohol is involved in about half of all pedestrian deaths. So it seems that's the issue, but people would rather talk about vehicle size.
Alcohol is also a factor on the pedestrian side, not just the driver side. This has not been addressed. It is still a relevant factor on both sides. Yes, vehicle size/design is another factor.
> Alcohol is also a factor on the pedestrian side... This has not been addressed.
What is there to address? Unless you enforce that people only drink in private homes there will always be pedestrians who've had a few. Walking is probably the safest mode of transportation when you're impaired.
You could propose serving limits, which would help limit drunk driving, reduce drunk pedestrian deaths, and potentially reduce alcohol related health issues. Or enforce drunk in public laws.
Just as vehicle size and weight will always be a factor, so too will alcohol, drugs, phones, etc.
Yes, but on the whole we got much heavier trucks from 1980 to 2009 while pedestrian deaths went down.
There’s also the issue that heavier vehicles are inevitable due to EVs. Our bz4x won’t get tagged as a “big evil truck,” but it’s about the same weight as a base model Ford F150. And heavier than a Toyota Tacoma double cab.
The article acknowledges that rise in vehicle height is only part of it and might explain 10% of the rise. I'm not sure how exactly they measured things but there's no reason things could've gone down while car height simultaneously slowed down the decline.
Minor quibble: I don't know if 'heavier' is as important as 'taller,' though. I have seen someone hit by an actual sedan, be thrown onto the hood, fall on the ground after the car stops, and survive. Being hit is not the same as being run over, which is much harder to have happen with a car-shaped car.
Why do you focus on the old data and not the new data? It is 2026 and hood height for trucks and crossovers (which didn't exist in 2009) has be getting higher and this is what the research talks about.
It isn't weight, it is hood height and blunt fronts. But the Great Bluntening didn't happen until recently.
Trucks and SUVs have been getting heavier consistently since 1980 while pedestrian deaths consistently decreased from 1980 to 2009. Truck sizes went up much more from 1980 to 2009 than from 2009 to present. But pedestrian deaths dropped almost in half from 1980 to 2009.
The NYT study on which this article is based acknowledges that pedestrian deaths dropped in half from 1980 to 2009, but then does nothing with this information.