What is the common thread linking 32 year-old Margaret Oduku and nine members of a Kenyan church choir to 57 people traveling on a bus in Guatemala and a 14-year-old schoolboy waiting for a bus in New Delhi? They were all killed in recent traffic accidents.
Traffic death and injury is a global pandemic in which more than 1.2 million lives are lost annually; another 50 million people suffer debilitating injuries. And most of the victims live in developing countries.
"Traffic accident" is a euphemism for the gross negligence that perpetuates this carnage; far from being unpredictable and unavoidable, most traffic-related injuries could be prevented through simple, cheap safety strategies.
Next week, the UN General Assembly will vote on convening the first ministerial summit on road safety. The stakes could hardly be higher. Traffic injuries in developing countries kill on the scale of malaria or tuberculosis. For children between five and 14, traffic injuries are the biggest single source of death and roads are second only to HIV/AIDS in killing people aged between 15 and 29. In contrast to rich countries, developing countries' casualty lists are dominated by pedestrians, cyclists and passengers in public transport vehicles.
The world's most dangerous roads are in Africa. Britain has a fatality rate of one death per 10,000 vehicles; in Ethiopia and Uganda it tops 190. Traffic deaths are climbing most rapidly in Asia and Latin America, where rising prosperity fuels car sales and investment in roads.
The costs go beyond personal suffering. Lost productivity as a result of traffic injury wipes out 1 percent to 2 percent of output in developing nations. In some countries, more than half of the surgical and trauma beds in hospitals are taken up by road victims. And, for the poor, a traffic injury usually causes greater poverty. When cars hit women farmers in Bangladesh, there is no welfare system to pick up the pieces.
Every country has its own variant of the road injury virus. Dangerous drivers, badly maintained vehicles, poor pedestrian safety design and weak enforcement of standards are common themes. Add to this lethal cocktail lax regulation and government indifference, and you have a perfect equation for loss of life.
There is no better place to get a view of the traffic pandemic than New Delhi.
This is a car crash capital, with more than 2,000 deaths a year.
On the expressway, trucks speed past women carrying firewood. Because the highway slices through communities, children put their lives at risk to cross the road.
Cutting road deaths does not take rocket science. Building road safety into transport infrastructure design and enforcing traffic rules are proven life-savers. Since 2000, Rwanda has cut road deaths by one-third through a cut-speed safety strategy. Thailand and Vietnam have used education and law enforcement to increase helmet use.
Why, then, are governments failing to protect their citizens? Partly because the victims lack a political voice. But often traffic death and injury is viewed as the inevitable collateral damage that comes with economic growth.
Aid donors are part of the problem. Most have yet to grasp the fact that an ethical transport policy has to be part of poverty reduction strategies.
Take the case of sub-Saharan Africa. Two years ago, the G8 pledged US$1.2 billion for road development in the region. Road safety financing amounts to less than 1 percent of the package. Meanwhile, with a US$4 billion transport infrastructure portfolio, the World Bank and regional development banks employ just two full-time road safety specialists among them.
The Global Road Safety Campaign wants the UN summit to agree a US$300 million fund for building road safety capacity in developing countries. It calls on donors to invest 10 percent of road infrastructure budgets on safety. But governments don't have to wait for a summit meeting to act -- and their citizens cannot afford delay. It is time for a 21st-century transport policy that puts human safety at the heart of road management.
Kevin Watkins is senior research fellow at Oxford University's Global Economic Governance Program.
Taiwan’s semiconductor industry gives it a strategic advantage, but that advantage would be threatened as the US seeks to end Taiwan’s monopoly in the industry and as China grows more assertive, analysts said at a security dialogue last week. While the semiconductor industry is Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” its dominance has been seen by some in the US as “a monopoly,” South Korea’s Sungkyunkwan University academic Kwon Seok-joon said at an event held by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In addition, Taiwan lacks sufficient energy sources and is vulnerable to natural disasters and geopolitical threats from China, he said.
After reading the article by Hideki Nagayama [English version on same page] published in the Liberty Times (sister newspaper of the Taipei Times) on Wednesday, I decided to write this article in hopes of ever so slightly easing my depression. In August, I visited the National Museum of Ethnology in Osaka, Japan, to attend a seminar. While there, I had the chance to look at the museum’s collections. I felt extreme annoyance at seeing that the museum had classified Taiwanese indigenous peoples as part of China’s ethnic minorities. I kept thinking about how I could make this known, but after returning
What value does the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) hold in Taiwan? One might say that it is to defend — or at the very least, maintain — truly “blue” qualities. To be truly “blue” — without impurities, rejecting any “red” influence — is to uphold the ideology consistent with that on which the Republic of China (ROC) was established. The KMT would likely not object to this notion. However, if the current generation of KMT political elites do not understand what it means to be “blue” — or even light blue — their knowledge and bravery are far too lacking
Taipei’s population is estimated to drop below 2.5 million by the end of this month — the only city among the nation’s six special municipalities that has more people moving out than moving in this year. A city that is classified as a special municipality can have three deputy mayors if it has a population of more than 2.5 million people, Article 55 of the Local Government Act (地方制度法) states. To counter the capital’s shrinking population, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) held a cross-departmental population policy committee meeting on Wednesday last week to discuss possible solutions. According to Taipei City Government data, Taipei’s